Wow! Such a good movie.

Boring

Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

exploitation of controversies. inspired performance. and a large cage. the fundamental error of film is its status of ice floe. not shore, not links, only a bizarre portrait of a great director. a gossip subject who remains only a confuse episode for two biographies and who has not the right script/director for say a real good story.important virtue - Sienna Miller is one of Hitchcock blonds and her splendid acting makes the movie be more than a full of good intentions work. but the verdict is the same - something missing. and it is not the result of TV movie status or a error of HBO. only not the best manner to put a story in its context. so, only a draft. or an ice floe.

This TV movie looks at Alfred Hitchcock's obsession with Tippi Hedren during the making of the Birds.This is quite fascinating compared to the film "Hitchcock" starring Anthony Hopkins. It shows Hitchcock's obsession with his leading ladies in a more predatory abusive nature than the Hopkins movie. Wonder which is closer to the truth? Sienna Miller doesn't look much like Tippi - she has a harder look but she does a good job. Toby looks more like Hitch than Anthony Hopkins.Watch "The Birds" first and then watch this. The peek a the behind the scenes creative process is fascinating for Hitchcock fans.

I knew I wanted to see The Girl as Alfred Hitchcock is my favourite director. It also had a very interesting subject that would have been even more so if done right. But when seeing it around Christmas, I found myself very disappointed overall, of all the programmes aired in the festive season The Girl gets my vote for being the biggest let down. It is not entirely bad though. The costumes and sets do look beautiful, the make up for Hitchcock is really outstanding and those birds are scary(sadly for them the scenes they featured in had no impact otherwise). But the best asset was easily Toby Jones' Hitchcock, an eerily brilliant performance- much much than a impersonation as I feared it would be- that gives an emotional complexity to a role that is written anything but here. Even the voice is spot on. In short, a very good example of a performance that was much better than the film(or TV film in The Girl's case) itself.Unfortunately for Jones, he is the only actor who is good. Imelda Staunton and Penelope Wilton do try hard but are criminally underused in very clichéd roles, while everybody else underacts embarrassingly. And I will say the same for Sienna Miller here too. She looks lovely but aside from that she only seems to be able to act terrified and act wooden. I know that Tippi Hedren is not considered among the best of actresses, I happen to think despite the lack of experience that she was better than given credit for, but Miller looks as though she was told to "look beautiful but don't try to act, other than in the scenes with the birds, as Hedren wasn't a good actress".The acting is not actually the worst thing about The Girl, the script and story were the main culprits. The script is a real clunker, often overwrought, very stilted and worst of all frustratingly one-sided. Here Hedren seems to be the victim sort of character, and throughout the only kind of sympathy shown for Hitchcock is that of self-pity, other than that he is little more than a lewd sadist. Okay I am not denying that Hedren was treated poorly by Hitchcock when filming The Birds, but Hitchcock's treatment of her in The Girl seems to be hysterically overboard here. You are wondering a lot how much truth is there here? The story feels very sluggishly paced, with the reenactment of the iconic telephone box scene tedious instead of frightening, despite the birds, the dream sequences are really hackneyed and the how Hedren was treated by Hitchcock is dealt with in The Girl in a repetitive and very episodic fashion.Julian Jarrold's direction is routine and does nothing to make the story or characters come to life. There is an over-reliance on close-ups, I don't mind close-ups as long as they are not used too much and are not overly-obvious, in both cases with The Girl they were overused and too obvious. We don't care for any of the characters, despite the actors. With Hedren and Hitchcock they are one-sided, that with how Hitchcock is written we cannot identify with him at all and Miller's performance is too bland to make Hedren's plight register with us. The rest of the characters are underwritten clichés, which is a big part of the underacting. I found little memorable about the music as well, only the use of Wagner's Tristan Und Isolde prelude stuck in my head and that's because it is one of my favourites and used quite nicely actually in the film.Overall though, considering the subject matter and the talent The Girl was a severe disappointment. 4/10 Bethany Cox

EDIT: I'm reviewing this on its own merit as a drama, not based on whether it is true or not, seeing as this is a film review/discussion site.It's never a good idea to judge biopics on the basis of truth. I have no idea whether Hitchcock was really the sexually repressed obsessive that he is in this film but it doesn't really matter. At the end of the day, it's all about the film and what we get is a well-made heartbreaking story about Hitchcock forming an obsession with his lead actress that mirrors the nature of art.Toby Jones gives a brilliant performance as Alfred Hitchcock. Initially it's played very much as dirty old man Hitchcock but Jones adds many layers in, eventually creating a filmmaker who does not have the luxury of being attractive and despite complete confidence in filmmaking, completely lacks self-confidence. Sexual obsession becomes unrequited love- Tippi represents the physical beauty that Hitchcock will never have.The film does not suggest that Hitchcock's work was bad- far from it. It's an exploration of how a filmmaker gets to be a genius and whether it's worth putting your actress at emotional/physical risk if it gets the right effect. We leave the film thinking that Hitchcock had a great instinct for film.Sienna Miller strikes the right note as Tippi Hedren. The character is not meant to be a great actress. Hitchcock does not choose her on the basis of acting ability but on his ability to mould her into the victim. He constantly tells her to look expressionless. Tippi realises that this is how she has been used but is powerless to do anything.The supporting cast are also great, particularly Imelda Staunton as Hitchcock's long-suffering wife, forced almost to act like a pimp. Cinematography is pretty good for a TV movie.How does this compare to the film Hitchcock? Well, I haven't seen that film but from the looks of the trailer, it's very different- a lighthearted film about the making of Psycho. Hopefully the film has more point than the trailer- does anyone really want to watch a hagiography? Hitchcock didn't make cuddly films about jolly people- he made dark thrillers. So why not have a biopic about him that reflects that? The film weaves in parallels between the backstage action and The Birds and Marnie very nicely.The only dodgy bit is the portrayal of the material as being 'the hidden story'. But if you put that aside, this is a bold and interesting film that's not afraid to be controversial.