0
Despite being the #1 on the 2012 Sight & Sound poll, Vertigo doesn't even seem to be a very favourable choice (at least relative to it's current position) of avid cinephiles. Sometimes I think its appraised according to standards that the film seems to elude. Thematically its far more complex than what most people think of it to be - some sort of creepy obsession. But the manner in which obsession is presented simply cannot be summarised into a generic "whodunnit" theme, neither can its aesthetics be reduced to a narrative-driven structure. The questions that can be posed of Vertigo's reception are as follows. Did those who rate it less favourably do so because they couldn't understand the film? Conversely, did those who rate it highly do so precisely because they also do NOT understand the film? If its allure is what attracts/repels past and future film fans, then perhaps its the way in which Vertigo operates as a meta-level commentary about not just those who suffer from the medical condition but everyone who can't be guided by anything other than their hidden drives and impulses. In other words, the film is a metaphysical treatise about the nature of desire, one which comes the furthest in my esteem to tracing the intricacies of desire. I shall wait for next year's edition of the Sight & Sound poll, closely monitoring the film's effect on cinema.