Leopold-Loeb Murder In Alfred Hitchcock's Movie Rope

Jackie Henke
Hour 6
Movie: Rope

"Rope" is an Alfred Hitchcock movie loosely based off of the Leopold-Loeb murder in the 1920's. Hitchcock's tale differs from the event noticeably, but along with its differences, there are many similarities.

First, the movie talks about the perfect crime, one only a superior individual could commit without remorse. In real life Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb believed that they needed to prove their ability to commit such a crime without fear. While the movie portrays the 2 murderers as young to middle-aged men, in real life Leopold was 19 and Loeb was 18. In the beginning of the movie we see the victim being strangled. Again the movie portrays the victim as much older, while in real life the victim was Bobby Franks, a 14-year-old boy. The setting of the movie is based in an upscale apartment, and throughout the entirety of
the plot it remains in this location. Through the uses of many different characters, Hitchcock communicates to the audience all key events.

A key factor in the story is the actual murder though.
The title of the movie is Rope, but Hitchcock does not give us a reason why. The importance of the word had to do with the actually murder. The symbolism of the rope was so that both men would kill their victim, each would hold an end of the rope, and each would be equally guilty. While the representation of the importance of the rope could have been better portrayed, other aspects shown through better. The theme of the murder was to show superiority by having no fear of being apprehended. Hitchcock takes the subject to an extreme. Not only do his character's kill, but also they hide the body in a chest during a fancy dinner. The risks are quite high due to the fact that they know that the party guests will be worried when their dear friend doesn't appear. Despite all the risks, Brandon, one of the murderers insists that hosting the party around the body will seal the deal and put the finishing touches on the crime. The second murderer, Philip is remorseful. While this is not evident with either Leopold or Loeb, it adds depth to the
characters.

Other differences in the story are more or less surface details. Because the film is only inspired by the murder, not a reenactment, these details are expected to be different. First, the Leopold and Loeb murder happens in Chicago, but in the movie it happens in New York. Second, the confessions of Leopold and Loeb occur after hours of interrogation, while in the movie, the two murderers confide in an old professor who gives them up to the police. Third, the Leopold and Loeb murder had nothing to do with a dinner party. In fact, Leopold and Loeb dumped Bobby Franks' body under railroad tracks and waited for ransom money.

The movie by any means can't be considered factual, due to the fact that it doesn't attempt to recreate the situation in which the actual murder happened, but it can be considered a dramatic interpretation. Personally, I thought the movie lacked some aspects to be one of my favorites. While the setting is a New York apartment, the only thing interesting about it is the different rooms. The entire movie is one continuous scene shot in one setting, which gets rather boring and doesn't give any help to the plot line. The director uses a lot of foreshadowing which is effective in adding the element of suspense. Taken as a whole, the film has many inconsistencies. In one part of the movie Philip, filled with anxiety breaks a glass in his hand. Later, a lady who is reading his palm examines his hand, but any sign of the bandage and cut have vanished. I wasn't too fond of the dialogue in the movie, but I have to admit, it held my attention, wondering if they would get away with it or not.