Alfred Hitchcock: Cinematic Seducer Frenzy and the Seduction Theory of Film

  • Marcus Stiglegger


In 1971, Alfred Hitchcock returned to England to direct Frenzy, a film that not only evokes several of his characteristic themes, but also shows that Hitchcock was capable of a far more drastic tone than he had previously demonstrated. Frenzy is not only a variation on his well-known theme of the “guiltlessly guilty” man, but also a meta-cinematic reflection of Hitchcock’s own standards as a filmmaker. From the perspective of a cinematic theory of seduction, this article examines how Hitchcock as a filmmaker seduces his audience and how the film exhibits the trademark qualities of Hitchcockian cinema while both subverting them and going beyond them at the same time.

Works Cited

  1. Arnheim, Rudolf. “The Complete Film.” [1933]. Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings. Eds. Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen. New York; Oxford: OUP, 1999. 183–186.Google Scholar
  2. Balázs, Béla. Theory of the Film: Character and Growth of a New Art. Trans. Edith Bone. London: Dennis Dobson, 1952.Google Scholar
  3. Barr, Charles. “Hitchcock and Powell: Two Directions for British Cinema.” Screen 46.1 (2005): 5–13.Google Scholar
  4. Baudrillard, Jean. Seduction. Trans. Brian Singer. New York: St. Martin’s P, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. Brauerhoch, Annette. Die gute und die böse Mutter: Kino zwischen Melodram und Horror. Marburg: Schüren, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo: Some Points of Agreement between the Mental Lives of Savages and Neurotics. [1913] Trans. James Strachey. London: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. Foery, Raymond. Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘Frenzy’: The Last Masterpiece. Lanham: Scarecrow P, 2012.Google Scholar
  8. Fuery, Patrick. New Developments in Film Theory. New York: St. Martin’s P, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. Gras, Pierre. “Hitchcock: Eating and Destruction.” Hitchcock and Art: Fatal Coincidences. Ed. Dominique Païni. Milan: Mazzotta, 2000. 131–136.Google Scholar
  10. Horkheimer, Max, and Theodor W. Adorno. Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. [1947] Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. Hunter, Dianne, ed. Seduction and Theory: Readings of Gender, Representation, and Rhetoric. Champaign: U of Illinois P, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. Kaplan, E. Ann. Women and Film: Both Sides of the Camera. New York: Methuen, 1983.Google Scholar
  13. Lacan, Jacques. “The Direction of the Treatment and the Principles of Its Power.” [1958/61] Écrits. Trans. Bruce Fink. New York: Norton, 2006. 489–542.Google Scholar
  14. Lefebvre, Martin. “Conspicuous Consumption: The Figure of the Serial Killer as Cannibal in the Age of Capitalism.” Theory, Culture and Society 22.3 (2005): 43–62.Google Scholar
  15. Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” [1975] The Gender and Media Reader. Ed. Mary Celeste Kearney. New York: Routledge, 2012. 59–66.Google Scholar
  16. Münsterberg, Hugo. The Photoplay: A Psychological Study. [1916] New York: Dover, 1970.Google Scholar
  17. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. [1943] Trans. Hazel E. Barnes. New York: Philosophical Library, 1970.Google Scholar
  18. Stiglegger, Marcus. Ritual & Verführung: Schaulust, Spektakel und Sinnlichkeit im Film. Berlin: Bertz & Fischer, 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Stiglegger, Marcus. “Die Seduktionstheorie des Films: Verführungsstrategien filmischer Inszenierung.” Methoden der Populärkulturforschung: Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf Film, Fernsehen, Musik, Internet und Computerspiele. Eds. Marcus S. Kleiner and Michael Rappe. Berlin: LIT, 2012. 85–114.Google Scholar
  20. Stromgren, Dick. “‘Now to the Banquet We Press’: Hitchcock’s Gourmet and Gourmand Offerings.” The Material World in American Popular Film. Eds. Paul Loukides and Linda K. Fuller. Bowling Green: Popular P, 1993. 38–50.Google Scholar
  21. Sweet, Matthew. “Hitchcock’s Britain.” 39 Steps to the Genius of Hitchcock. Ed. James Bell. London: BFI, 2012. 22–25.Google Scholar
  22. Wojtko, Nikolaj, ed. Alfred Hitchcock: Der Filmverführer. Un-Schuld im Spannungsfeld von Ethik und Ästhetik. Munich: Kovač, 2005.Google Scholar
  23. Wojtko, Nikolaj. “CrissXCross: Strangers on a Train.” Wojtko 2005, 33–54.Google Scholar
  24. Wood, Robin. Hitchcock’s Films Revisited. New York: Columbia UP, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcus Stiglegger
    • 1
  1. 1.DEKRA Hochschule für MedienBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations