#John Farley

[badmovieihave]

Bad movie I have Eight Crazy Nights 2002

[acecroft]

ROPE (1948) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

[classicfilmblr]

John Dall and Farley Granger ROPE (1948) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

[wardengrill]

Rope (1948)

[no1britpopfan]

need to see them stand trial NOW!!!!!

(template by sweepswoop_ on twitter)

[gjesse]

me when homicidal homosexuals

[antonivs]

[golyadkin]

1948 went crazy

[luckypluckychair]

Rope | 1948

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Set decorator: Howard Bristol and Emile Kuri

[veryvexing]

i drew brandon and phillip:)

[oliviascully]

There are so many moments in Rope (1948) where Phillip is leaning against Brandon or closer to Brandon or into Brandon and it’s like damn dude we know you want your boyfriend to hold you so bad but the Hays code said he can’t

[danmeiljie]

Hitch's Gays

[haveyouseenthismovie-poll]

[trebo]

the methods of promotional posters for rope 1948 and how its queer identity affects it

you know i see a lot of people in the rope 1948 community analyzing every aspect of the film and stage play and the entire thing in general, but i haven’t seen anyone yet touch on the film posters. which is what i’m gonna do right now, i have something to say about the posters.

(one of) the most prominent patterns found within old hollywood posters— and this doesn’t take a long time of studying to find— is that almost all of them always feature a man and woman, which happen to be the love interests of the said film in question. romance is SO common in nearly EVERY classic movie, regardless of how it is presented or depicted or alluded to. but this of course applies to your heterosexual relationship, heteronormative ideas of cinema at that time. so what happens when you make a movie about queer romance and queer characters? well, if you were a poster designer in 1948, you probably wouldn’t be bold enough to simply plaster two men onto that poster the same way you’d plaster a heterosexual relationship, embracing each other, looking each other in the eyes, etc etc etc… which is why, in the case of rope, it’s always jimmy stewart as the focal point, and him alone. phillip and brandon are in the background, despite them being the protagonists of the film. and in some cases, we get a glimpse of one of the female characters with brandon (as demonstrated below). but of course, we know that they aren’t love interests. but to a passerby who’s just been introduced to the film DURING that year, it wouldn’t be illogical to assume that some people could think that they are. i think this is just another way of hiding the queer theme of the movie through their promotional materials. more subtlety and cleverness rather than having your poster immediately scream “HEY!! HEY!!! THIS MOVIE’S CHARACTERS ARE GAY AND YOU SHOULD TOTALLY CHECK IT OUT!!! BRO!!!!!!!!” to newcomers.

one more thing is i want to analyze a part of this poster specifically, because there was something here that caught my eye. it’s the captions. “in one man’s hands, rope is a deadly weapon… in one man’s arms, love is a shameful thing!” i want to you ask yourself, what love are they referring too??? obviously not heterosexual romance. what other love is most apparent in the film? it’s the gays!!! i thought it was really interesting to say love is a shameful thing, because WE know that it’s probably talking about the relationship between brandon and phillip. but to your average movie-goer in 1948, they might’ve thought it was just referring to another man loving a woman.

but in today’s world, assuming that the only movies you’re gonna watch are about heterosexual couples might ALSO be just a little shameful too.

thanks for coming to my ted talk. what yall think?

[no1britpopfan]

who want my rope playlist?? ur getting it anyways AYYYEEE https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1EkCCKr2AX4X5fMyHIzmbN?si=w7lAUdchQIWIfzUau2W-iA&pi=u-3_rIr99QQ8WZ

[esqueletosgays]

ROPE (1948)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock Cinematography: William V. Skall and Joseph Valentine