The 1977 comedy film “High Anxiety,” directed by Mel Brooks, serves as a parody of Alfred Hitchcock’s iconic films. This film includes numerous references to Hitchcock’s works that require a deep understanding of cinema to fully appreciate.
Understanding “High Anxiety”
“High Anxiety” cleverly alludes to several Hitchcock classics. The title itself references “Vertigo,” while the film’s asylum setting nods to “Spellbound.” Brooks’ character, Dr. Thorndyke, mirrors elements from Raymond Burr’s character in “Rear Window.” Many visual gags throughout the film play on Hitchcock’s signature style.
Notable References
- The bird attack scene serves as homage to “The Birds,” humorously featuring birds that poop on people.
- A low-angle shot of characters at a coffee table probably references “Rope.”
- Madeline Kahn’s character entering a hotel echoes a moment from “The 39 Steps.”
During the 1970s, parodying Hitchcock’s films posed challenges. At that time, public interest in his works had dwindled. Notably, Roger Ebert criticized Brooks’ attempt in his review. He argued that spoofing a filmmaker known for both suspense and humor could be inherently difficult.
Ebert’s Critique of the Film
Ebert’s central thesis suggested that Brooks’ spoof missed the mark. He articulated that Hitchcock’s films already possess a level of self-awareness, making them challenging targets for satire. He posited that successful satire thrives on self-importance, which was not a characteristic of Hitchcock’s work. Ebert stated, “It’s like putting a hat on a hat,” indicating that Brooks’ humor felt redundant.
Comparison to Other Works
Ebert praised films like “Young Frankenstein” and “Blazing Saddles” for their effective satire. Brooks effectively spoofed genres that invited such treatment due to their earnestness. In contrast, Hitchcock’s sophisticated style made “High Anxiety” resonate less with general audiences, as some viewers may miss the nuances.
Ebert and Brooks’ Divergent Styles
Despite giving “High Anxiety” a rating of two-and-a-half stars, Ebert maintained a complex relationship with Brooks’ filmography. He expressed similar concerns about Brooks’ later work, such as “Spaceballs,” which he viewed as devoid of meaningful commentary. Ebert desired insightful critiques of cultural phenomena, while Brooks preferred playful subversion.
In the world of comedy, subjectivity reigns supreme. While Ebert valued depth and elegance in satire, Brooks leaned towards making audiences laugh through absurdity. That comedic difference underscores both filmmakers’ legacies in cinema.
