McGilligan, Patrick. . Alfred Hitchcock : a life in darkness and light / Patrick McGilligan. 1st ed. 006039322X series New York : Regan Books, c2003.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1998.3.H58 M38 2003

    In Part 5 (Paramount: The Glory Years) chapter 15, the author describes the process by which Hitchcock decided on the actors that he chose to star in the film. Originally, James Stewart had be slated for the role of Thornhill, but due to the poor performance of Vertigo in the box office it was unclear whether Hitchcock and the studio could justifiably use him instead of Cary Grant. Stewart was an immensely popular actor, but not considered sexy enough for the role. By using Grant who appeared younger, the studios were happy because there would be a greater draw for women to see the film and Hitchcock was happy because he signed a lead actor whom the audience would have more emotion invested in. Hitchcock next arrived at the task of picking the female lead. He rejected the studio's suggestions and chose Eva Marie Saint, a well regarded actress but not regarded as exceptionally sexy or mysterious. Hitchcock hoped to mold her and give her a specific role. James Mason comments on this, accusing Hitchcock of using his actors as "animated props".

    The choice of actors in a film a critical first step towards creating the desired output. Despite Hitchcock's often firm hand in micromanaging the details of each shot, the actor has a great deal of responsibility and artistic license in the way they portray their character in the film. Hitchcock made his decisions based on the overall effect upon the audience. Thus, careful selection of each actor was an important prerequisite for achieving his desired outcome in each shot. The decisions made however led to great success. The strength of the movie rests on the audience's concern for Thornhill's successful resolution of the dangerous challenge he was forced into, and also of Eve's safety as she plays the role of secret agent to the enemy spy. While casting the correct actor into a role is critically important, it can also be argued that massaging that actor into the desired character during filming is of equal importance. If the character is not playing the part as envisioned, the director essentially loses control over his tool he uses to manipulate the emotions of the audience.  Hitchcock not only carefully screened his actors, but was also known for his adept manipulation of their skills into the finished product he himself desired.

Hitchcock, Alfred. Interview with Bryan Forbes. BFI. 1967. 8 Apr. 2008 http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/interviews/hitchcock.html.

    This interview begins with thoughtful questions asked by another director who is clearly a fan of Hitchcock's work. Through thoughtful questions, Hitchcock is encouraged to discuss his script-writing process. For example, we learn that Hitchcock planned the Mount Rushmore scene fifteen years prior to North by Northwest, and simply waited for an opportunity to insert the scene. He also speaks of his fan of the montage technique, and how greater emotions are brought forth by the audience's emotional attachment to the actors. Using humor and wordplay, Hitchcock adeptly keeps the interest of the audience as he discusses his thought processes and motivations behind the stylistic elements he is famous for using.  Much of the interview is devoted to specific stylistic decisions in his films, but even these can be viewed as representative of Hitchcock's overall strategy as a director.

    It is clear from this interview that Hitchcock operates in a very casual manner, and despite the widespread belief that he adamantly enforces his own view of the film it appears he is sometimes willing to make concessions. Also, here Hitchcock gives interesting evidence about why he often picks big celebrities to act in his films. Because his beliefs closely resemble the founder of the montage Eisenstein in that the key goal of a montage is to create emotion, Hitchcock insists on using actors that the audience will have an emotional attachment to. He believes that an actor such as Cary Grant will receive greater sympathy from the audience, and thus the heightened emotion will ultimately lead to greater suspense and enjoyment of the moviegoers. It is through this interview that one is offered a rare glimpse into the thoughts of Hitchcock. As is the case with any director, certain parts of his style can be analyzed simply by viewing the films he has created. It is through this, for example, that we are aware of Hitchcock's use of visual impact rather dialogue to drive the plot forward. However, to truly understand him one must venture beyond the work he has produced and instead take a more direct approach to deciphering his beliefs and motivations.

Cavell, Stanley. "North by Northwest." Critical Inquiry 7 (1981): 761-776.

    This article carefully examines many plot elements within the story which are thought to be similar in many ways to other Hitchcock thrillers. The first and most obvious is the casting of Cary Grant into the lead role. The two have worked together several times and Grant had gained stardom in part due to these movies. Hitchcock makes light of his stardom in several occasions, first when Grant is leaving a phone booth and gets stares from a young female, and later when he is walking through a woman's hospital room and she tries to persuade him to stay in a seductive tone. Also, the script does not deny that Grant is an actor. Vandamn frequently comments on Thornhill's acting and even the professor asks him to "play the part". Other plot elements mentioned are Hitchcock's insistence on using ordinary situations and ordinary people for the more suspenseful situations.  This is no doubt a hallmark of Hitchcock's work and imitated wildly in the following decades.

    What is not adequately addressed in this article is that Grant must play the role of the victim. He was thrust into the situation against his will, due to mistaken identity. Unlike his last role with Hitchcock in "To Catch a Thief", Grant's character is that of a law-abiding citizen. A ‘mama's boy', he is thrown into a world totally unfamiliar and being pressured on both sides to perform as any super-agent would. He succeeds in the task, and is ultimately the hero stopping state secrets from reaching the Soviets. Thus, while Grant's character is similar to others he performs for Hitchcock's camera in many respects, ultimately this is a fundamentally different character because he is one everyone in the audience can empathize with.  Because of this, Grant is able to command a stronger control over the viewer.

Hollywood : critical concepts in media and cultural studies / edited by Thomas Schatz. 0415281318 (set) series London ; New York : Routledge, 2004.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1993.5.U6 H556 2004

    In chapter 34 of this book, Andrew Sarris attempts to classify and find themes in the works of Alfred Hitchcock. Using frequent references to specific scenes and elements of the films, Sarris argues that Hitchcock is unusually adept at rousing interest from his audience. Furthermore, Sarris believes that Hitchcock never received the visual analysis he deserved, presumably because of the mass appeal of his films. The style is said to be uniting of the divergent classical traditions of Murnau (notably the camera angles) and of Eisenstein (use of montage). The thrillers Hitchcock has produced all require a situation of normality. Hitchcock would never allow a murder to occur in a dark alley, simply because the audience expects that is where a murder should occur. Rather, a situation of normality would be the best place for a murder. Sarris uses the example a clean hotel bathroom in Psycho, but this argument could be applied to the murder at the United Nations, or the fight scene on the faces at Mount Rushmore.

    What Sarris is alluding to, but not declaring outright, is that a thriller must engage its viewer at a visceral level. Any murder that occurs expectedly due to the scenery would not adequately arouse the emotions of the viewer. This is one of the key elements of classic Hitchcock style. Hitchcock refuses to allow plot twists to occur formulaically; he insists on keeping the audience guessing. While this has no doubt added to his popular appeal and the frequency of imitation his works see, it is a concrete example at the ingenuity of the director and why he deserves a prominent place in cinematic history. His refusal to accept the obvious and his thirst for innovative and unexpected events keeps the viewers emotionally engaged in the film, and is thus one of the greatest cognitive tools at his disposal.