"The Girl" is a recent British television film about the difficult relationship between Alfred Hitchcock and Tippi Hedren, who starred in two of his films in the 1960s. In 1963 Hedren, then aged 33, was a relatively obscure model with little acting experience, when Hitchcock spotted her in a television commercial and asked her to star in his next film "The Birds". The director, famous of his preference for blonde actresses, had been struck by Hedren's looks, and felt that she could be the next Ingrid Bergman or Grace Kelly, two actresses who had each appeared in three Hitchcock films.
The film, based upon Hedren's own recollections, alleges that Hitchcock became obsessed with his leading lady, and that when she rejected his sexual advances he took his revenge by subjecting her to various traumatic and humiliating experiences during the filming of both "The Birds" and "Marnie". After completing this second film, Hedren refused to work with him again, but because she was still under contract to him, a contract from which he refused to release her, she was unable to work elsewhere in Hollywood. Hedren has said that his treatment of her effectively ruined her career.
Biopics of famous actresses from the past, especially of those who were noted for their beauty, often suffer from difficulties with casting, as it is not always possible to find a modern actress who bears the necessary resemblance to the woman she is playing, even with the creative use of make-up. (Does anyone, for example, really think that Lindsay Lohan looks much like Liz Taylor?) Sienna Miller may not be an exact Tippi Hedren look-alike, but at least there is sufficient resemblance to make her casting plausible, and Miller is able to capture the grace and elegance which was such an important part of Hedren's on- screen presence. Toby Jones captures Hitchcock's distinctive voice and mannerisms, and, with the assistance of prosthetic makeup and a fatsuit, manages to look reasonably like him, although suffers from the disadvantage that he is around twenty years younger than Hitch would have been at this period in his life. We are always aware that we are looking at a younger man made up as an older one.
The treatment of Hitchcock in the film has been a controversial one. Some reviewers on this board have taken exception to its portrayal of him as a sexual predator, and some figures from the film industry who knew him and worked with him have come forward to defend him. These include Kim Novak, the star of his "Vertigo", even though her own working relationship with him was said to be a difficult one. (She never made another film with him, even though she fitted the "Hitchcock blonde" template perfectly). Certainly, some of the details shown in the film do not quite ring true. Would Hitchcock, for example, really have tried to include a clause in Hedren's contract that she must make herself sexually available to him whenever he demands? He would have known full well that such a clause would have been legally null and void, and any attempt to put such a demand in writing would only have increased the risk of his being exposed in a public scandal.
Moreover, Hitchcock's refusal to release Hedren from her contract does not seem to have damaged her career quite as much as she alleges. Her third film, "Run for Your Life", was made only a year after "Marnie", and since then she has gone on to appear in over forty films and TV movies. Admittedly, some of these have been rather obscure, but I doubt if she would have had more success had she continued working for Hitchcock. (His next film after "Marnie" was the dull spy thriller "Torn Curtain", which didn't do much for its leading lady Julie Andrews).
And yet Tippi Hedren is in a better position than anyone else to know what happened between Hitchcock and herself, so I would not dismiss the film on the grounds that the events it describes never took place. Because the truth or otherwise of Hedren's allegations can never definitively be established- and I can see no reason why she might be lying- trying to judge it on the basis of its supposed historical accuracy, or lack of accuracy seems pointless. It needs to be judged not as a historical record of fact, but as a work of speculative fiction, albeit one which takes real individuals for its leading characters.
Seen in that light, "The Girl" is quite a good film. The story told here is essentially that of every leering employer who cannot keep his hands off the girls in the typing pool and has no qualms about abusing his power over them for his sexual gratification. Regardless of whether the events shown are, or are not, literally true, it contains a good deal of emotional and psychological truth in its portrait of a flawed genius obsessively pursuing a much younger woman, and of a frightened young woman determined to uphold her honour and her dignity when she realises that her dreams of stardom have made her the target of a elderly sex pest. 7/10
The film, based upon Hedren's own recollections, alleges that Hitchcock became obsessed with his leading lady, and that when she rejected his sexual advances he took his revenge by subjecting her to various traumatic and humiliating experiences during the filming of both "The Birds" and "Marnie". After completing this second film, Hedren refused to work with him again, but because she was still under contract to him, a contract from which he refused to release her, she was unable to work elsewhere in Hollywood. Hedren has said that his treatment of her effectively ruined her career.
Biopics of famous actresses from the past, especially of those who were noted for their beauty, often suffer from difficulties with casting, as it is not always possible to find a modern actress who bears the necessary resemblance to the woman she is playing, even with the creative use of make-up. (Does anyone, for example, really think that Lindsay Lohan looks much like Liz Taylor?) Sienna Miller may not be an exact Tippi Hedren look-alike, but at least there is sufficient resemblance to make her casting plausible, and Miller is able to capture the grace and elegance which was such an important part of Hedren's on- screen presence. Toby Jones captures Hitchcock's distinctive voice and mannerisms, and, with the assistance of prosthetic makeup and a fatsuit, manages to look reasonably like him, although suffers from the disadvantage that he is around twenty years younger than Hitch would have been at this period in his life. We are always aware that we are looking at a younger man made up as an older one.
The treatment of Hitchcock in the film has been a controversial one. Some reviewers on this board have taken exception to its portrayal of him as a sexual predator, and some figures from the film industry who knew him and worked with him have come forward to defend him. These include Kim Novak, the star of his "Vertigo", even though her own working relationship with him was said to be a difficult one. (She never made another film with him, even though she fitted the "Hitchcock blonde" template perfectly). Certainly, some of the details shown in the film do not quite ring true. Would Hitchcock, for example, really have tried to include a clause in Hedren's contract that she must make herself sexually available to him whenever he demands? He would have known full well that such a clause would have been legally null and void, and any attempt to put such a demand in writing would only have increased the risk of his being exposed in a public scandal.
Moreover, Hitchcock's refusal to release Hedren from her contract does not seem to have damaged her career quite as much as she alleges. Her third film, "Run for Your Life", was made only a year after "Marnie", and since then she has gone on to appear in over forty films and TV movies. Admittedly, some of these have been rather obscure, but I doubt if she would have had more success had she continued working for Hitchcock. (His next film after "Marnie" was the dull spy thriller "Torn Curtain", which didn't do much for its leading lady Julie Andrews).
And yet Tippi Hedren is in a better position than anyone else to know what happened between Hitchcock and herself, so I would not dismiss the film on the grounds that the events it describes never took place. Because the truth or otherwise of Hedren's allegations can never definitively be established- and I can see no reason why she might be lying- trying to judge it on the basis of its supposed historical accuracy, or lack of accuracy seems pointless. It needs to be judged not as a historical record of fact, but as a work of speculative fiction, albeit one which takes real individuals for its leading characters.
Seen in that light, "The Girl" is quite a good film. The story told here is essentially that of every leering employer who cannot keep his hands off the girls in the typing pool and has no qualms about abusing his power over them for his sexual gratification. Regardless of whether the events shown are, or are not, literally true, it contains a good deal of emotional and psychological truth in its portrait of a flawed genius obsessively pursuing a much younger woman, and of a frightened young woman determined to uphold her honour and her dignity when she realises that her dreams of stardom have made her the target of a elderly sex pest. 7/10