The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)

Much like how Cecil B. DeMille had remade “The Ten Commandments” in 1956, Alfred Hitchcock did exactly that the same year with “The Man Who Knew Too Much.” My guess would be that his original was never seen before by American audiences, so he wanted to make an American version for his fans in the States. Or he felt like modernizing it, even though it was only 20 years since he made the original. Whatever the case might be, this film is still amazing, and possibly even better than the original, since this one actually keeps you on the edge of your seat with its suspense.

The story this time revolves around an American family vacationing in Marrakesh, Morocco, when out of nowhere, a Frenchman, played by Daniel Gélin, is killed right before their very eyes. Before he dies, the Frenchman, who also happens to be a doctor, whispers a message in the man’s ear. This is how he becomes to be known as the man who knew too much.

Next thing you know, their son is kidnapped by a British couple who were acting as the American couple’s friends. This is where the suspense builds up with the couple flying over to London chasing after the people who kidnapped their son. Only reason why their son is being held captive is so that the man who had the message whispered to him doesn’t reveal anything to anyone.

I wouldn’t even want to spoil the movie for you, because you have to see it for yourself in order to know what happens. Much like how it was in the original, there is a plot to assassinate the prime minister in Albert Hall. On top of that, I wouldn’t want to tell you how much the man knows as he continues to find his son. Bosley Crowther of the New York Times wrote in his review of the film, “Suffice it to say that Mr. Hitchcock spins a fast tale that sweeps incongruously through a taxidermist's shop, a cultist chapel, a foreign embassy and the crowded concert hall.” All of this put together would make you want to watch the film.

Did I mention that this film is fast-paced? It should be since, according to Crowther, “for the story that John Michael Hayes has revamped from the original script of Charles Bennett and D. B. Wyndham-Lewis is quite absurd, and it would be death to leave the audience a moment to stop and think.” Logic and credibility were never Hitchcock’s forte, unfortunately. He depends more on heroic tricks, which you will see in this film.

James Stewart puts on a performance that is top notch compared to “Rear Window,” since he is the man who knows too much and Doris Day is very active as the mother who is scared completely to the point of Goosebumps since she has her son kidnapped. She also calls for her son in the climactic scene of her singing the famous “Que Sera, Sera (Whatever will be, will be)” song. Bernard Miles and Brenda de Banzie as the British couple who steal Stewart and Day’s son can have chills running down your spine. Christopher Olsen as the boy who plays Stewart and Day’s son is believable in his role. Crowther states that “Reggie Nalder merits a shriek as the man with the gun.”

Final verdict: if you haven’t seen this film yet, what are you waiting for? Go out and watch it for crying out loud, this film really makes you scared to a point that you want to know if Stewart and Day get their son back. It’s a joy to watch, and definitely creepy enough to see around the time of Halloween. As I stated yesterday, this is another one of my favorite films, since I prefer this over the original version, but I do acknowledge the original is a classic as well. However, I just find this to be the superior film.

Stay tuned tomorrow when I finish off my “Hitchcock/Stewart-a-thon” with a film that people might consider Hitchcock’s best work. I can see why they would think that, but seriously, I still think “Rope” is far superior.