Talk:Alfred Hitchcock filmography

Public Domain

The article is extremely misleading -- how can Vertigo and Psycho be in the Public Domain? US Copyright reassertion for almost all of Hitchcock's British Films can be found here. I've removed PD "*"s for all films were there is evidence that the film is not in the Public Domain. Davepattern (talk) 06:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• I marked public domain into these movies:

1. Screen shots are available in Wikimedia Commons.
2. Quotes are available in Wikiquote.
3. Movie is available in Internet Archive.

• If copyright is till available, these are illegal. Are these wrong? Mikomaid (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

If the transfers used in the Internet Archive are unlicensed, then they probably shouldn't be there. Before the US restored copyright on non-US works that were deemed to the in the Public Domain in the US, it may have been permissible to add them to the Internet Archive. However, they should have been removed after US rights were restored in 1997. Ultimately it's up to the rights holders to pursue breaches of copyright, but Wikipedia should not state that films are in the US Public Domain when there is evidence that they are not. Davepattern (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

now released episode of "Alfred Hitchcock Presents"

Alfred Hitchcock Presents: "The Scorcerer's Apprentice" (1961), see Diana Dors, not released for decades but now available on DVD. Reference from DD - Keeping the British End Up: Four Decades of Saucy Cinema by Simon Sheridan (Reynolds & Hearn Books) (third edition) 2007. Also listed at List of Alfred Hitchcock Presents episodes. SmithBlue (talk) 09:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Spellbound

The film certainly isn't in the "Public Domain" -- the rights are currently owned by Disney/Buena Vista. The Criterion DVD was officially licensed from Disney/Buena Vista, but they then withdrew the license as MGM wanted to include the title in a planned box set (hence the Criterion suddenly went "out of print" and became a collector's item). The MGM box set was shelved when Sony acquired the company. Davepattern (talk) 09:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ooops!! What's vary of DVD packages here[1].Mikomaid (talk) 01:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

All of the Hitchcock/Selznick film DVDs I've seen are specifically licensed either from Disney/Buena Vista or ABC Motion Pictures (the ABC back catalogue is owned by Disney). Disney are extremely protective of their property rights, so I doubt anyone would risk releasing an unlicensed DVD. Davepattern (talk) 09:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

films from the 1940s

Some of the rights holder entries for the 1940 films look incorrect (or incomplete) -- I'm pretty sure Disney/Beuna Vista own the US rights to the 4 Selznick films (via their aquisition of ABC catalogue, which had previously aquired many of the Selznick films). Davepattern (talk) 10:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find any information about this matter. Do you have some? Caiaffa (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I found Shadow of a Doubt and Stage Fright in Internet Archive. What are these?Mikomaid (talk) 01:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This site confirms the public domain of Stage Fright with Creative Commons license but Shadow of a Doubt article doesn't mentions nothing about ©. The site is a public site that everyone can contribute, the information may came from here (Wiki). It will be better a more "oficial" information. Caiaffa (talk) 04:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I found here. In Region-2-PAL(Europe), Rebecca, Foreign Correspondent, Mr & Mrs Smith, Suspicion, Spellbound, Notorious, etc. are issued by multi DVD publishers in a region. If not public domain, what are these? Mikomaid (talk) 12:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The staff at Internet Archive don't actively check the copyright of material uploaded to their site (instead, copyright holders have to request that material is removed) and so their site cannot be regarded as an authoritative source for correct copyright information -- I can only suggest that you contact Warner Brothers and Universal to confirm that they are the rights holders to "Stage Fright" and "Shadow of a Doubt" respectively. All of the films you mention have indeed been released by several different companies (especially in Europe), but all of them have used transfers licensed from the respective rights holder. The European rights are more complex than in the US, due to historic distribution deals in different countries. If you would like examples of DVD packaging scans to confirm this, please let me know (I am an avid collector of Hitchcock films on DVD and I buy most of the releases from around the world). The only area of the world that reguarly releases unlicensed US Hitchcock films is China, where enforcement of copyright is poor (there is an ongoing dispute between the US and China about copyright enforcement). Davepattern (talk) 09:19, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Masterpiece collection

Is this an encyclopedia or classified ad space? The article is about the filmography of Alfred Hitchcock, those quotes from reviews on that dvd collection have no place here. They're opinions, not facts.

"The Dallas Morning News called the set 'only a masterpiece of DVD sizzle over steak'", christ you gotta be kidding me. Sounds like some bored studio suit at Universal or where ever decided to have some fun and try to get more of his dvds sold for the holidays.

more info

Not sure if anyone wants to incorporate this into the main article, but the US copyright for "The Pleasure Garden" and "Jamaica Inn" were both claimed by the Estate of Raymond Rohauer in the early 1990s (see here and here). For reasons that aren't particularly clear, Warner Bros appear to have had the US copyright for "The Farmer's Wife" in the early 1990s (see here). Davepattern (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Films missing from the filmography

Excluding some additional television production and appearances, these films aren't currently included in his filmography:

An Elastic Affair (1930) (lost) Lord Camber's Ladies (1932) (producer) Target for Tonight (1941) (US version) (uncredited) Men of the Lightship (1940) (US version) (uncredited) The Fighting Generation (1944) (uncredited) Watchtower Over Tomorrow (1945) (uncredited)

Relatively little has been written about them. Шизомби (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Also missing is a terrific 1937 film The Woman Alone, which has many Hitchcockian themes (espionage, suspense, threat of murder within a marriage). I caught a piece of it on television and came to wikipedia to find more. Surprisingly, it was missing from the list. May I leave it to a clever whippersnapper to add it? From a contemporary NYT review: "THE SCREEN; The Roxy Presents 'The Woman Alone,' a New Melodrama by Alfred Hitchcock...

By FRANK S. NUGENT Published: February 27, 1937…" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acrutchfield (talk • contribs) 11:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

It's here. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Missing film listing

I was amazed to see that Under Capricorn was missing. I will check for the possibility that other films are missing. Invertzoo (talk) 17:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I added in Always Tell Your Wife, which was missing. Invertzoo (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Artificial division between British Films and American films?

It is unconventional to say the least to disrupt the chronological order by putting Stage Fright and Frenzy into the list of British films. I understand they were set in Britain and mostly filmed there, but wouldn't it be better to have one chronological list and then a notation or a little colored flag to say which films were set in Britain, the US, etc, and which were made in Britain, which in the US...? Also note that, The Paradine Case is set in Britain and contains genuine footage of the Lake District, so why should it be simply listed as an American film (even though most of it was filmed on sound stages in the US)? Rebecca is of course also set in Britain, although none of it filmed there. Waltzes from Vienna is set in Vienna. Under Capricorn is set in Australia. I would much prefer a standard list by chronology. Failing that, one must explain clearly what is meant in this context by a "British film" and an "American film". Any comments? Invertzoo (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alfred Hitchcock filmography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/78315%7C0/Rope.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:05, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

propaganda

Shouldn't the propaganda films be in a separate section? like other films or something? Johnnyboytoy (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Johnnyboytoy: They are still films that he was involved in making so are part of his filmography so should be included under films. Only three of them so don't need to be separated out. Cowlibob (talk) 19:29, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. In this case, shouldn't they be included on the list in chronological order, like the rest of the motion pictures? Because they are sort of apart from the list after all the movies, I suppose that's what I don't necessarily like, they were just included there, at the end, not in a separate section or really included chronologically, like all the other feature films. Johnnyboytoy (talk) 01:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alfred Hitchcock filmography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6bq1XbkCW?url=http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/78315%7C0/Rope.html to http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/78315%7C0/Rope.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.paleycenter.org/collection/item/?q=alfred%20hitchcock%20presents&p=2&item=T%3A48666

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)