Who's Harry Crumb (1989) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

More from Dario Argento! Age is not slowing him down much.

A young university student named Giulio has been a voyeur since he was a child. He often watches a beautiful young woman named Sasha who lives in the apartment across the street. Sometimes he sees a little flesh, and at other times he sees arguments between the girl and her mother. He becomes sufficiently obsessed with the girl to follow her around town, where he sees her renting Hitchcock movies and apparently scheming with another attractive young woman, a blonde.

When the girl's shrewish mother turns up dead and the girl inherits a great deal of money, Giulio is intrigued. He is a film student and he has noticed that the girl and her attractive new friend are both interested in the film Strangers on a Train. He imagines that the two women have decided to commit two murders based on the premise of the Hitchcock film - an exchange of murders tit-for-tat between strangers, with each having an ironclad alibi for the victim they know. Giulio figures that the blonde has already killed Sasha's mother while Sasha had an alibi, and that Sasha must now reciprocate. He becomes determined to study the blonde's life to determine the identity of Sasha's potential victim.

Needless to say, Giulio's completely normal girlfriend is not at all amused by his obsession with the two foxy women, his voyeurism, or his ridiculous theories about murders inspired by obscure films. But are the concepts really so ridiculous, or has he stumbled upon a real plot? Are the women truly murderers? Are they aware of his theories and that fact that he has been watching them? If so, and if they really are murderers, isn't his own life in danger?

The main Hitchcock template for this film is not Strangers on a Train, but Rear Window, a film that is frequently referenced here right down to some small details like Giulio's broken leg, which confines him to his apartment with his binoculars. Oh, yeah, and there is a very strong element of Dial M For Murder as well, although I can't discuss that without spoiling a late plot development. While he was at it, director Dario Argento also referenced two Brian de Palma films, Dressed to Kill and Body Double. And those are only the obvious references that I noticed. If you're a Hitchcock scholar, you may spot sly references to several other films as well, and all within a reasonably coherent plot. (The plot does have one immense flaw in its logic, but it is in a secondary matter, not in the main murder mystery.)

Do You Like Hitchcock? is not particularly bloody by classic Argento standards, and the individual scenes are not as taut and suspenseful as they might have been. The whole film just seems to be a playful homage on Dario's part, the result being a film which is neither typically flamboyant Argento nor typically controlled Hitchcock, and which is really too light in tone to be the work of either. Given the obvious references, the Pino Donaggio score, Dario's inherent competence, and nudity from four attractive women, it is not an unpleasant way for a film geek to pass 90 minutes, especially since the English dubbing is far better than usual. In general, I thought it was good fun, although I didn't really care about the solution to the mystery. On the other hand, if you are not already a fan of De Palma, Hitchcock, and Argento, this film is not likely to provide your epiphany.



  • One very brief "behind the scenes" featurette
  • widescreen anamorphic transfer, but generally too dark


  • Chiara Conti - breasts in a fairly well-lit indoor scene

  • Elisabetta Rochetti - very distant full frontal and rear nudity (viewed from across the street). Close ups of buns and breasts, but no face visible in these shots.

  • Cristina Brondo - breasts in a dark sex scene

  • Anonymous woman in the closing minute - great breast-shot in good light, then buns in a thong

The Critics Vote ...

  • No major print reviews. (Italian TV movie)

The People Vote ...

  • There are no box office results because this film was created especially for Italian TV.
The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

Our own guideline:

  • A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre.
  • B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. In order to rate at least a B-, a film should be both a critical and commercial success. Exceptions: (1) We will occasionally rate a film B- with good popular acceptance and bad reviews, if we believe the critics have severely underrated a film. (2) We may also assign a B- or better to a well-reviewed film which did not do well at the box office if we feel that the fault lay in the marketing of the film, and that the film might have been a hit if people had known about it. (Like, for example, The Waterdance.)
  • C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by people who enjoy this kind of movie. If this is your kind of movie, a C+ and an A are indistinguishable to you.
  • C means it is competent, but uninspired genre fare. People who like this kind of movie will think it satisfactory. Others probably will not.
  • C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie, but genre addicts find it watchable. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film, but films with this rating should be approached with caution by mainstream audiences, who may find them incompetent or repulsive or both. If this is NOT your kind of movie, a C- and an E are indistinguishable to you.
  • D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-. Films rated below C- generally have both bad reviews and poor popular acceptance.
  • E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre.
  • F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.


Based on this description, this film is a C. It's a fairly entertaining if watered-down giallo. Or maybe it's a gored-up Hitchcock. Either way, it is not a bad watch, but the DVD is not recommended because it is too damned dark, and has only one short "behind the scenes" featurette. If you want to see the movie, don't own it, just rent it.

Return to the Movie House home page