Vertigo

I caught Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo the other day. I highly recommend it. The only other Hitchcock I've seen is North X Northwest, and Rear Window. I can't say that I like Vertigo better than any of them, but it's still very good. I didn't know that they made films like this 40 years ago.

Some comments / questions.. (SPOILERS

-The Midge character dissapears in the second half after John is done with the hospital, is that commenting on how obsessed John is with this new girl, or is she just gone?

-At the end, how could an approaching nun cause her to jump? It's not exactly a shocking sight.

-Was there any truth to the supernatural aspect of the film? I'm only asking, because when John goes into the hotel, the woman completely dissapears out of sight, and even her car is gone.

-Also, I had this same problem with North X Northwest. The 'twist' is revealed too early. In North X Northwest, it's revealed that Cary Grant's character is chasing an 'invisible agent' early in the film. Why not wait and reveal that towards the end. In this one, I found it even worst. As soon as John finds the new girl, it's revealed that she's the actual woman that he 'fell in love with.' Why not wait until the end Church tower to reveal? I think if the audience feels that John is molding a stranger into his 'deceased lover', they would feel less sympathy for him. With the knowledge that she actually is the 'deceased lover,' I don't think there's much sympathy.

{end of spoilers}

What do you guys think of Vertigo? If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it. Don't let its age turn you off, it's very watchable.

With the major exception of Psycho, Hitchcock's style wasn't about plot twists at the end. That just isn't how he felt suspense should be derived. Only a taste thing, but that's Hitchcock for you.

As for what I think of Vertigo, it is one of my least favorites in Hitch's canon, and I think his most overrated (with his re-make of his own The Man Who Knew Too Much right behind it).


If you're interested, take a look at THIS thread where some of us ranked our favorite Hitch flicks, THIS where we talked about "Hitchcockian" movies, and in THIS one a few of us eventually get into their likes/dislikes of Vertigo specifically. Happy reading!

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

First, I think you have to put yourself into that characters contexted & Situation also it freaked me out and sended shivers down my spin. It looked like as if it was the Grim Reaper coming out of the darkness to swallow her up. And that image has stayed with me since I first saw it.
Nope, that was just made up for scottie to get involved with what's happening to his friends so called wife.

I feel like your some what missing the point. it's not like that twist (or those twists) (were)was the most important aspects of the film. Yes, it was big, but there were other factors that come into play. Scottie undressing her stripping her down to her old self his knowledge of this and the fact that he wanted her to go threw it. Plus the final scene (Twist) is "THE END" it's the final twist of fate. Scottie with his Vertigo taking her up the flights of stairs breaking his fear but at the loss of losing his love forever.

As for North By Northwest you have to understand Hitchcock's themes. he made N by N as an innocent man(Everyday Man) on the run trying to prove something Innocents/Spy and what have you. I also beileve that there are more important things than just a macguffin/decoy to move the story along because that's basically what it was. I find the love relationship and the house scene at the end to be 10 time more vidal to the films involvment and enjoyment.

You make it sound like these twists were most important to the film and that the simple placement of them hurt or detracted from the film which I totally disagree with. If anything they added suspence to the story and depth to the characters.

{end of spoilers}

Yeah, but early in the film, Scotty sees the girl in the hotel, and when he goes inside, she's gone, and the woman at the desk says that no one came in.

Well 2 things could have happened off the top of my head ONE The Lady at the desk could have missed her and than when they went up to her supposed room she came out of another room and went out. Or TWO did you ever think that the lady at the desk might have been payed off.

SPOILERS

I rewatched this Hitchcock classic a while back with my girlfriend, it was one of our first dates so i associate this film with good memories. I remember we were having a laugh at how bad Kim Novak's acting was as Matalan. Taking the twist into account though I suppose Kim Novak was deliberately acting fake and over the top. The techno colours in this film add to the hypnotic surrealism that Alfred Hitchcock was going for. Jimmy Stewart plays a private detective called Scotty and is hired to spy on Matalan who is supposedly possessed by a spirit of a woman long dead. After Scotty saves her life he falls in love with the idea of being responsible for her, and develops a saviour complex for Matalan. To him she is a lost cause who needs saving from herself, which I think adds to the infatuation he has for her, as he feels lost as well.

The reality is though that Scotty knows nothing about Matalan and is in love with the idea of her rather than who she actually is. After Matalan's 'Death' he find a woman identical to Matalan in every way. The only difference is she does not need saving and she is independent. Scotty's lack of control over Matalan's so-called double ganga, leads him to frustration and in his frustration he begins to wear her down, having her dress like the original Matalan.

One of the things I took away from Vertigo is that many people confuse love with possession, but the two couldn't be more opposite. Out of all the Alfred Hitchcock movies Vertigo is my favorite.

My rating...10 out of 10

My review of the film:


https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/...5-vertigo.html

@TheVanillaGorilla Vertigo was one of the movie nominations in the 25th Hall of Fame. All the members of that HoF watched Vertigo and wrote reviews of what they thought of it. You might be interested in seeing how other MoFos reacted to watching Vertigo.
25th Hall of Fame
On the 1st post from that link is all the reviews for Vertigo, they are linked so just click on them to read the reviews.

I think you meant to say "Madeleine". I agree with your rating, and believe that Vertigo is one of the greatest of all time movies.

There's been oodles of discussion over this film from every possible angle. Two of my favorite interesting scenes that are never resolved are:

1. When Scottie is precariously hanging off the gutter of the tall building in the opening scene, the officer offering to help falls to his death, and Scottie is left hanging. The next scene Scottie is at his girlfriend Midge's apartment discussing his future. How did he get out of the deathly trap? We don't know.

2. When Scottie follows Madeleine to the McKittrick Hotel, he sees her in a second floor window. But upon investigation she's not there, and the landlady hasn't seen her come in. What happened to Madeleine?

Hitchcock oftentimes is more interested in setting up a scene and how it relates to the story, as he is in resolving the scene. He's stated that he thinks that isn't important.

My first viewing of this has been possibly my favorite movie experience of all time. I want to view it again, but I'm almost scared to, because I don't want to experience anything less than what I did the first time.

strange how neither hitchcock or stewart lived to see this be considered a classic.

I've been thinking about what Citizen Kane, Vertigo and Jeanne Dielman have in common which makes them 3 of the most radical films of the 20th century. We say they're "far ahead" of their times, but what times are we alluding to? The times where linearity was the fabric of filmic reality, and discontinuity was only tolerated insofar as 1) its a product of the subjective ("flawed") human mind and 2) serve to preserve the flow of universal time, which is independent of experience. Citizen Kane was the first to show that not only the past is itself discontinuous, but that the present makes no sense without the past (ie. the present is empty). Vertigo shows that so-called "universal" time does not exist outside of the person, that even "subjective" experience of time is secondary rather than fundamental and that time revolves around desire. In fact, time can be bent, contorted, and made to conform to the person's object of desire. Finally in Jeanne Dielman, time emerges out of disruption (we cant speak about what time is in itself as much as to be out-of-time) ; our awareness of time is a rupture from unconscious habit, which forms 99% of our perceptive life. Each of the 3 films deconstruct time in different ways and reveal/uncover aspects more fundamental to reality.

Limite 1931 Brazil Mário Peixoto

In a small boat adrift, two women and a man (both unnamed) remember their recent past. They no longer have the strength or desire to live and have reached the limit of their existence.

A man and two women are lost at sea in a rowboat. Their pasts are conveyed in flashbacks throughout the film, clearly denoted by changes in music. One woman has escaped from prison; another has left an oppressive and unhappy marriage; the man is in love with someone else's wife.

Did you just copy and paste the synopsis? But yes, it's an obscure film which was inaccessible for most of the 20th century, and only relatively available and appreciated. I would argue that Limite doesn't have time (or even the psychology of its two characters) as its concern but all about the filmmaker showcasing its technical feats and innovative cinematography. Great film nonetheless.

No, I didn't just copy and paste the synopsis, I identified a film I had watched which was earlier than those you referenced and which had non sequential time, and then I copy and pasted the synopsis.
No need to be so negative.

Ok I could also just slap lists upon lists without explicating the concepts and ideas of listed films. I'm less interested in an "objective" ranking for which I don't even know the use of doing so but to show why I selected those 3 films as exemplars which have clearly resonated with a wide enough audience to be consistently talked about. Sure, there have been films that employ non sequential time (I could add A Page of Madness as one of the earlier films) but do not generate enough attention and it wouldn't make sense for me to begin a discussion without first starting it off with 3 of the most renowned films. But do let me know your thoughts on what makes Vertigo stand out.

I don't think Vertigo stands out. I think it's an OK film that's much over rated.

I'm also getting vibes that you are a film snob, although unlike some posters on here with an education in film, I've not read anything from you that I've found either particularly interesting or insightful.

You seem like someone who is interested solely in sorting films into either a good or bad category, and coming up with arbitrary lists that have some of pretense towards objectivity, but who are you to fool but yourself? The lack of any thought about what makes a film stand out or not (apart from extreme approval or disapproval) indicates that you simply are not interested in evaluating a film fairly but operating like a robot that is programmed to perform binary decisions (masterpiece or not, worth watching or not, etc.). I've seen all those ridiculous posts of yours dismissing filmmakers and their craft without providing any reflection. So are you just a robot, Mr. Robert?

Not at all Tyler. Not at all.

I did a few reviews on here, but nobody was interested.
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...ad.php?t=71447

I have had quite a lot of positive responses though when I've reviewed a film on the last film you watched thread.

I do believe I have been objective, yes. I have no angle, no axe to grind, I simply wanted to find the best films. I don't particularly like any Bergman films, but I gave them a chance. I didn't go into Persona thinking, whatever this film is I'm not going to rate it because it's Bergman. I wanted to enjoy it just as I did any other film I started. And in fact I did appreciate that one, just not as much as most people do.

I do dismiss films that's a fair comment, in fact there have been many films that I haven't finished. Some I will give up within half an hour, because I know 100% that this is not going to be one of my favourite films or one of the films which I consider to be one of the greatest. But I don't feel the need to provide my reasoning, I just didn't appreciate it. In many cases it's simply that it didn't engage me. I'd rather talk about the ones that I do appreciate!

I can not commit the time of 1000s or 10s of 1000s of hours or whatever it has been to viewing films as a hobby, and tailor the use of that time to be in a way which will please others. I have to make the use of that time that I will most value myself.

And by identifying the films which I regard as the best films in movie history that I can find - which is actually what I set out to do - I feel that that is what I've done. I would rather have been doing something that earned me money, but in the absence of that I am pleased with the outcome of my research, which is my list of greatest films.

I don't know as much as some of you on here, and I can't express myself in a way which reflects a deep technical or literary knowledge, as I don't have it, but I have learned through my viewings how film techniques have developed and gained an appreciation of various aspects of film making, and I'm pleased with what I've watched and with the films that I've identified as being those worthy of the highest accolades. I feel that I now have some knowledge and understanding of the history of film, which I did not have 3 years ago. Now when I see a conversation about film history and the films that people take to be the greatest, it is no longer a meaningless conversation to me. And if someone wants some recommendations for films to watch, I'm confident that I can help them out.

Anyway, I'm probably making too big a deal of it, and it's going completely off topic!
I'm just pleased to be able to take part in these conversations, which would have been meaningless to me a while back.
Cheers.