A KISS BEFORE DYING: Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo

Throughout most of his life, Alfred Hitchcock was both appreciated and dismissed as a maker of entertaining mystery thrillers. After his first American film Rebecca won the Academy Award, Hitchcock’s critics got wise and considered him first and foremost a genre filmmaker; the best of his movies might get nominated for Sound Design or Art Direction and not much more. At least he got to experience before his death a growing movement, originated in France, that elevated his melodramas by critiquing them through the lens of the auteur. They saw him as an artist and an experimenter. And while we have already borne witness to the director’s love of experimentation – the single set of Lifeboat, the abstract dream sequence of Spellbound, the long single takes of Rope – it is in Vertigo that we find Hitchcock actually setting out to make a pure art film. 

True, he remained concerned even here with how his mystery plot could generate the greatest suspense possible, and it is one of the most singular aspects of Vertigo how Hitchcock gives the game away with an hour left to go. In fact, he actually balked at his own original plan and cut the offending scene, only to have the powers-that-be demand its return. The result, as we shall see, makes for a Hitchcock film like no other until Psycho. It is in the way Hitchcock delivers this story, the slow, dreamlike nearly speechless journey to emotional annihilation, that makes Vertigo, for better or worse, stand out from the rest. As all too often happened with the films he made where he excised the fluff or experimented with visual techniques, upon release Vertigo was seen as another of Hitchcock’s interesting “failures.” That it is now considered one of the greatest films ever made reminds us that the consideration of artistry is a complex, mercurial matter. 

There are multiple ways to connect this film to Rear Window, largely because of the way Hitchcock liked to portray Jimmy Stewart, and The Wrong Man, the film that preceded Vertigo (and happened to be our bonus film, receiving just as little initial love from scholars and critics). But there is also no film like Vertigo in Hitchcock’s canon, and I have to say “Thank God!” I have watched and studied the film many times, revere it for its artistry, have enjoyed teaching the film to classes – but I can’t say it’s an easy film for me to love. It lacks the entertainment factor of Rear Window, a film that I feel contains just as much “dark” Hitchcock as this one. Maybe because Vertigo gives us the deepest, darkest insight into the director that we will ever find, it’s more disturbing. Maybe it’s just . . . kinda slow. For all that, it’s still a brilliant piece of filmmaking and arguably Hitchcock’s most important film. 

The start of Vertigo brings up some surface similarities with Rear Window. John “Scottie” Ferguson (Stewart) is in some ways an extension of L. B. Jeffries: both men have been hurt on the job, and their enforced leisure leads them down a dangerous path, and both are essentially observers whose desire to control the narrative of what they see puts them in the grips of a dark obsession. Many of the early scenes in Vertigo take place in a small San Francisco studio that has the same picture windows and blinds as Jeff’s New York apartment. But this is the home of Midge Wood (Barbara Bel Geddes), a pretty enough blonde (if it wasn’t for the glasses, right? Oh, you Hitchcock!) and the “one that got away” (or the one Scottie ran from in college). For a living, Midge designs the underwear that a fashion model like Lisa Fremont would wear, and it’s striking that there is much discussion and viewing of brassieres in the first scene, and it lacks a single element of sexual tension. 

Vertigo is all about doubles: Scottie/Gavin, Madeleine/Judy, and this self-parody by Midge (Barbara Bel Geddes)

Midge is also an artist and still very much in love with Scottie, but she has taken on the role of friend and surrogate mom, which is the death knell to romance. (At one point, she even calls herself “Mother.”) In a way, she functions like Stella inWindow, bringing practicality to the situation, but she’s too far involved in Scottie’s personal life to stay totally objective. Scottie, meanwhile, is a more genial version of L. B. Jeffries, perhaps to his detriment. He has recently experienced a deeply traumatic event that caused the death of a colleague and the beginning of a paralyzing agoraphobia mixed with vertigo that has cost him his livelihood as a San Francisco police detective. 

Much has been made of Hitchcock’s cinematic relationship with the police. They are usually portrayed as menacing, obtuse, and easily misled, to the detriment of the film’s hero. Here, the hero is the policeman, and it’s interesting how much Scottie, who is, on the surface, more genial and sympathetic than Jeff in Window, actually conforms to Hitchcock’s view of policemen: as Scottie takes on the case of an old school friend, Gavin Elster, and tails Elster’s wife Madeleine to find out if she is, indeed, possessed by the spirit of an old San Francisco character named Carlotta Valdez, he is led down a garden path that is crookeder than Lombard Street and becomes transformed from a savior to a figure of menace. 

Madeleine with Carlotta at the Palace of the Legion of Honor

Scottie’s tailing of Madeleine through the streets and sights of San Francisco is one aspect of the film that divides audiences. Some reviewers criticized the film as slow and repetitive, while some scholars credit Hitchcock with emerging us physically into the slow descent into obsession Scottie develops over his client’s wife. Like Jeff, another man suffering from enforced leisure, Scottie needs something to focus his abilities on; unlike Jeff, who tries to reject the perfect girl for him by focusing on the unhappy relationships of everyone around him, Scottie conceives out of nowhere the idea that Madeleine is the perfect girl for him. And while Jeff’s clandestine snooping leads inexorably to . . . more clandestine snooping (along with some breaking and entering), Scottie’s voyeurism, although perfectly legal in terms of his having been hired to do it, leads him to adultery with a side of alcohol dependence. 

Hitchcock puts everyone in a state of semi-inebriation as we inhabit Scottie’s car and travel down, down, down (never up) the steep hills of the city, then wind around the coastline to Muir Woods and San Juan Batista. You will have to forgive us native San Franciscans, who view Vertigo as a different sort of dream that takes us back in time to memories of Ernie’s steakhouse, Ransohoff’s (where my grandmother would shop for dresses), and Podesta Baldocchi’s florist shop. In one sense, this movie is a valentine to one of Hitchcock’s favorite cities, even as the romance engendered here proves deadly false. 

There’s something about green dresses in Hitchcock

I had the good fortune to watch the film this time on Turner Classic Movies during a summer festival honoring actress Kim Novak. Novak is a star whose qualities have sometimes eluded me, but I haven’t seen many of her films. She’s certainly beautiful here and in Picnic, and she exudes just the right amount of camp in The Mirror Crack’d. She was famously not Hitchcock’s first choice to play Madeleine, but it’s important to note that Vera Miles, who had to back out due to pregnancy, became available before shooting started, and yet Hitchcock decided to go with Novak anyway. In an introduction to the film on TCM, Alicia Malone makes a strong point in Novak’s favor that I believe originated with Francois Truffaut (if I’m mistaken, someone tell me where): it is in Novak’s lack of experience and relative stiffness that much of the most powerful ambiguity regarding Madeleine/Judy originates, and an arguably stronger actress like Vera Miles might have disrupted this by creating two more distinctly different characters. 

Judy transformed: and no, the dress is gray

It’s a matter of opinion, but I believe that purely as an object of a Hitchcock hero’s desire, Novak works better, particularly since she is given next to no dialogue. For forty minutes we watch her through Scottie’s eyes, and as we have discussed, James Stewart specialized in showcasing powerful emotions through his eyes. Curiosity gives way to something more until, with a leap into the bay, Scottie makes his true feelings clear. Curiosity is replaced by tenderness and something more . . . intense. Lust? Love? Obsession? Even in the early scenes, the ambiguity of this question plagues us, causes us to worry about Scottie, and keeps us far from the typical romantic drama Hitchcock usually provides. 

Even someone who complains that the film is slow might be taken aback by how quickly Scottie and Madeleine declare their feelings for each other, first with looks and then with a powerful kiss set against the backdrop of the sea’s roaring spray. Sure, the image is romantic as hell – but there’s something hellish about it, too, mostly in the way Novak/Madeleine seems torn between responding and giving way to the power Carlotta holds over her. Their “relationship” develops quickly after that, and before you know it, they’re in the monastery at San Juan Batista, where after another passionate exchange in the old stable, Madeleine runs into the church, up the winding stairs to the bell tower, and plunges to her death. Scottie, attacked by a spell of vertigo, is powerless to save her, endures the open contempt of the coroner, and ends up in a mental hospital with a complete breakdown. End part one.

Part two constitutes a nightmare version of Pygmalion, as Scottie runs into Judy Barton (Novak) an almost identical physical replica of Madeleine, woos her and then goes all Dr. Frankenstein on her, transforming her bit by bit into Madeleine’s double. (Every time he robotically intones, “It can’t matter that much to you, Judy,” I shiver.) Soon after we meet Judy, however, the audience is let in on the truth: Judy is Madeleine, or at least she was the “Madeleine” whom Scottie followed and fell in love with, all part of Gavin Elster’s plan to murder his wife. Faced with the option of running away or trying to regain what she had lost with Scottie before Mrs. Elster’s death – for yes! Judy fell in love with Scottie, too!! – Judy makes, for her, the wrong choice. This is not a situation where love and marriage will solve everyone’s problems. Even though Judy was, as she puts it, a “tool” for the real murderer, she can’t be let off the hook. She makes a slip, Scottie realizes how he has been duped, and he manages to bring her to the scene of the crime, overcome his vertigo and face her down.  

What interests me watching the film this time around is the new (for me) discovery of two facts. First, Hitchcock decided before releasing the film that filling in the audience on the truth about Madeleine’s death so early in the film was a mistake. Imagine discovering that Judy was Madeleine and Elster was guilty along with Scottie at the moment that he fastens Carlotta’s necklace around her throat. It might have been a powerful shock and only necessitated a few extra lines of explication near the end. However, it would have made this a far simpler film told explicitly only from Scottie’s point of view. The way the movie now stands – for the studio refused to allow Hitchcock to make this cut – at the halfway point, this becomes, in many ways, Judy’s film, and it is fascinating to see the situation reversed here, with the woman dreaming of how life could be with Mr. Right only to discover that she has fastened herself onto just another version of Gavin Elster. (The motif of doubles is especially strong here: Scottie ends up repeating Elster’s process of refashioning Judy in his wife’s image for nefarious purposes.) 

It’s also easier to deal with the monster that Scottie becomes here by seeing it through Judy’s helpless experience. She wants the impossible, a happily-ever-after between a deranged PI and an accessory before-the-fact, but in an odd way we want that for her, too, because it’s Elster who should really suffer the consequences here, and he’s out of the picture for good. Instead, it is Judy who must bear the brunt of Madeleine’s murder. Even if one interprets their last kiss as a softening of Scottie’s feelings toward Judy, Hitchcock gives us a deus ex machina in the form of a nun, whose very presence shatters Judy’s hope for absolution and causes her to fall to her death. The vision at the end of Scottie standing on the sill, arms outstretched, as he looks down at his dead love – again!! – is the director’s most devastating final image. 

Which brings me to the second fact: evidently, the movie system balked at the idea of Gavin Elster getting away with murder, and the studio forced Hitchcock to film another final scene set in Midge’s apartment: Midge listens to a newscaster describing the manhunt for Elster and then greets a subdued Scottie with a drink. They drink together in silence. Film over.

Hitchcock filmed it, hated it and managed to excise it. (You can watch the alternate ending on YouTube). I hate to think that it might have made audiences of the time feel better and thus like the movie more because it is awful, especially since we have all lived with the brilliantly downbeat original ending for much of our lives. I guess most audience members don’t like to suffer, and evidently Hitchcock sympathized enough with their feelings to bring back the fluff (and Cary Grant) the following year, lulling them into a false sense of security given the horrors he would inflict on them in the 1960’s. 

*     *     *     *     *

The Wrong Man, the Hitchcock film released just before Vertigo, is another experiment. Hitchcock was no stranger to film noir, but he had never worked within the docudrama format or, for that matter, dramatized a true event. The return to black and white, the unusually large amount of location shooting, the muted, nearly washed-out performances, the attention to procedural detail, all work well in telling the story of Christopher Emmanuel Balestrero, “Manny” to his family and friends, who in 1953 was arrested for robbery and assault when four witnesses incorrectly identified him as the man who had twice robbed his own insurance company and several liquor stores. Balestrero was arrested, put on trial, endured a mistrial when one of the jurors stood up in court and said something that presumed his guilt, and was awaiting a re-trial when the real criminal was apprehended trying to rob a deli. 

Manny sued the city of New York for $500,000 but ended up accepting $7,000. The real tragedy here is that the case mentally broke his wife Rose who remained in a mental institution for two years. Although upon her release Manny moved his family to Florida, she never fully recovered from the ordeal. Hitchcock paid Manny $22,000 for the rights to his story, but all of it was eaten up by the costs of Rose’s medical care. 

You can see why Hitchcock would view Manny’s story as a perfect fit: the tale of an innocent man wrongly accused and persecuted by a stupid police force; the motif of doubles so prevalent in his films, literally rendered here by a look-alike villain; the support Manny gets from a matrimonially viable woman who, in this case, already is his wife – plus help from his mother and in-laws, showing the value Hitchcock places on family; the dangerously inaccurate way we humans tend to view each other; the power of religious faith. It’s a crash course on Hitchcock brought to (true) life.

The docudrama format provides Hitchcock with a chance to try something new. There’s no real director cameo here, just a vision at the opening of the director’s shadow informing us that what we are about to see is true. When Manny is arrested, it feels like we are watching an extended version of the story Hitchcock liked to tell about the time his father sent him to the police with a note instructing them to throw him in a cell in order to remind him what happens to bad little boys. This apocryphal tale is meant to explain Hitchcock’s lifelong discomfort and mistrust with police, and that is exercised to the hilt here. Manny’s arrest and booking take up a significant amount of screen time. This being Hitchcock, the camera is kept up close and personal to Manny, and Henry Fonda does a fine job portraying the numbness and loneliness of a man trapped in this situation. 

We still find plenty of Hitchcockian visual moments throughout, beginning with the opening scene where Manny is finishing a set as the bassist in the Stork Club combo. He says goodnight and walks out of the club, just as two patrolmen pass by. The camera captures Manny walking tightly between the cops, foreshadowing the nightmare to come. When he is left in jail overnight, Manny has a crisis of confidence that Hitchcock portrays with an interesting shot of Manny as the camera circles around and around. We will see this in spades the following year in Vertigo, where the image of spirals is used repeatedly to showcase Scottie’s mental and emotional deterioration. We get the requisite use of eyeglasses, as one of the two female witnesses from the insurance company – the smugly certain one – is wearing a pair of spectacles. (The other witness is played by Doreen Lang, who appeared in several Hitchcock movies, most notably as another frenzied false witness in The Birds.) And there’s a beautiful climactic moment that honors Hitchcock’s own strong Catholic faith, when Manny prays to God for strength rather than help (instructed by his mother in one of the only positive maternal relationships the director ever gave us) and the camera cross fades from Manny to the real criminal.

Vera Miles didn’t get much critical love as Rose when the film came out, but she is quite moving in her descent to madness. The ending, where Manny comes to the institution to tell her the charges have been dismissed and the nightmare is over, and she responds, “That’s fine for you,” is heartbreaking. I don’t see her as Madeleine in Vertigo or, indeed, as the proclaimed successor to Grace Kelly in the director’s mind, but that seems to have been the plan. 

There are moments of The Wrong Man that I truly love, like the climax where the false witnesses finally identify the right man and then have to walk past Manny at the police station. But I do get the criticism that the film is a little slow and understated. Still, it earns a certain poignancy when you realize that the Hitchcock Hero exists in real life – a scary prospect indeed for all of us. 

Next week, the Hitchcock movie to end all Hitchcock movies . . . which is exactly how the screenwriter intended it. See you then. 

28 thoughts on “A KISS BEFORE DYING: Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo

  1. I recall reading that Hitchcock blamed Vertigo’s poor performance on Stewart’s age and Novak’s inexperience. If true, that was incredibly dishonest. They’re both crucial attributes to the characters. We disagree about the audience’s perception (I suppose intended perception) of Scottie. You think his behavior is easier to take because we see it through Judy’s eyes. I felt the opposite. Once we know diverge from his POV, I think he becomes pathetic. It’s understandable given what he’s gone through, but still. Anyway, it doesn’t matter about disagreements. Surely, this is a rich film that invites numerous interpretations. Somewhere on facebook, I’ve got an “analysis” (the quotes are heavy) of the red room scene when he’s first tailing Madelaine. It’s my favorite scene in the movie and nothing happens. Oh, and I’m embarrassed to admit I still haven’t seen The Wrong Man.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It wasn’t even an analysis it was a comment. Oh well — The camera starts on Stewart and then immediately separates from him to an entirely new position. When the camera returns to him it has passed the 180 degree line which (combined with the red walls of the room and the mirror) naturally disorients us. The lack of a clear entrance and exit and the dramatic changes in lighting suggest we can’t trust Stewart’s perception. This is a director who knows what he’s doing with every second of his film. Vertigo is beautiful, suspenseful, achingly romantic and nihilistic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Beac86mN8XM


      • The “red room” scene? You mean Ernie’s? You have GOT to get to San Francisco . . . except it needs to be SF of the ‘50’s. Also, I must’ve expressed myself very poorly because I think we absolutely agree on how pathetic Scottie becomes. What was new to me was the fact that Hitchcock wanted to cut Judy’s reveal in the middle of the movie, and that would have given the film only one perspective: Scottie’s. By switching to Judy, however, Hitchcock creates something more complex, more like a spiral!, than can be believed. The victim becomes the accessory, the accessory becomes the heroine, and the original hero has been transformed into the villain. It is freaking brilliant . . . and Hitchcock almost ruined it with that cut.


        • One of the reasons why that first closeup of Novak at Ernie’s eally pops out is also because it had to be done with a much longer lens as it was a re-shoot and most of the set had been struck and all they had was some of the wallpaper. If you want to see the original shot, in which Novak looks directly into the camera, it’s in the original trailer (at 1:24): “https://youtu.be/UHhsEYDg8GI”

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Years ago, I was watching Vertigo with my mom on a very stormy night in Omaha, Nebraska (thunder, lightning, winds – a storm in the midwest of the U.S. is not for the faint of heart). At the exact moment that the movie reached the climactic scene in the tower with Stewart & Novak, there was a lightning strike that blew a transformer with a loud boom and the house was plunged into total darkness. It scared me so much that I screamed like a character from a teen horror film.

    Power was out for several hours before I got to see that last few minutes of the movie the next day. By then, my terror had subsided.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I love this story! The next time we get to sit face to face, remind me to tell you about the time I went to see THE EXORCIST. Sometimes it’s all about atmosphere!


  3. VERTIGO is my favourite Hitchcock and probably will remain so for its enigmatic and oneiric qualities (you could argue that the story ends with Scottie insane, the second half a delusional fantasy in which he tries to understand what happened and lighten the load on his psyche). Hitchcock did create a beautiful cinema moment with the letter scene but it’s easy to see why he and others had doubts about it before the release. It presents a massive breach of style as we go through the fourth wall (literally), weakens our protagonist with a cruel POV shift and makes it far less commercial by having the reveal so early. These are legitimate concerns and he was right in that sense as it did make a lot less money than REAR WINDOW (which of course has an equivalent scene when only we see Thorwald seemingly head off with his wife). But it is what makes it a great film today. That and the incredible Bernard Herrmann score of course. But it did take me several viewings to really appreciate the film. The crazy but fun original novel provides a really interesting reason for why the husband suddenly exits the narrative. I can live with the epilogue that was never used – I prefer it not to be there but it’s brief, silent and elegant do you can just blame the censors and ignore it as with so many tacked on endings from that era.


    • Bernard Herman brilliantly did for Hitchcock what the best film composers are supposed to do: let their score serve the needs of the story. And he could be such a chameleon, as a comparison between VERTIGO and PSYCHO demonstrates. I still get chills every time I watch the sequence where Judy returns from the salon. The way the music builds to her emergence in the hall and then that stunning crescendo as she comes out of the bathroom . . . it’s truly swoon-worthy! Compare it to the shock value of the PSYCHO score . . . well, we’ll do that in two weeks.

      It’s a shame that the same lushness bombed when Herman scored ENDLESS NIGHT – must be the material. 😜


      • The score is so important in those Hitchcock movies. The Wagnerian approach in VERTIGO is perfect – dubbed by some as “Gotterdammerungdetective” 😁. I like ENDLESS NIGHT, book and film (even the Miss Marple short story version is OK) and really like the Blake setting Herrmann wrote for ENDLESS NIGHT actually. Great that he was still experimenting so late into his career (with the early Moog synthesizer). And his penultimate score, a clever return to VERTIGO for De Palma and Schrader, OBSESSION, is just sublime.


        • Speaking of De Palma:

          In our class last night about North by Northwest (yes, Santosh, next week’s film), we got into a jovial tiff about our bonus film, Stanley Donen’s Charade. I’ve watched it many times and it’s certainly enjoyable, but comparing it to Hitchcock, especially when you’re doing a deep wallow, is specious. Cary Grant, conspiracies, artful murders, nice music . . . what do you say? This happened to me with Mirage a few weeks ago (a much lesser film, in-house, and it was placed beside Spellbound!), and I told Elliot if he wants to compare directors, when we get to Psycho, he should assign Dressed to Kill. As I suspected, Elliot is a huge de Palma fan, so one day maybe we’ll get a class on The Men Hitchcock Influenced. (Happily, though, our next class is on 50’s noir!)


          • Well, come on CHARADE was very much seen as being in the Hitchcock mode so it makes sense to look at a contemporary release. But I know what you mean. It’s great fun but stylistically is really different. Even a comparison with TO CATCH A THIEF doesn’t really work well. I like MIRAGE quite a bit actually (but yeah, Greg does not have the light touch) as an example of neo noir and I’m a real sucker for amnesia stories. I love the sound of a course devoted to Hitchcock acolytes like De Palma, Chabrol, Franklin, et al, capped by HIGH ANXIETY of course 😆). But 50’s Noir is pretty damn amazing!

            Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I have always noticed that! Even better is that Ellen Corby and Henry Jones are in the film. I love them both. Watching these films this time around, I am really paying attention to the character actors who appeared in Hitchcock, some of them over and over, like Doreen Lang who often received no screen credit for a fairly significant small role. I’m not sure I get how that worked in the studio system.


  4. Some interesting wardrobe tests with Miles as Madeleine are around on the interweb – for instance: “https://images.ctfassets.net/23wh7e5ryr18/photo-15721/384332ec709e3d1b419f21992aacbb5b/15721-17.jpg?fm=jpg&fl=progressive&w=900&q=50” and then standing in for Janet Leigh in the specially-shot trailer for PSYCHO: “https://www.complete-hitchcock.com/web_images/vera_miles_psycho_trailer.jpg”

    Liked by 1 person

      • Novak was certainly a lesser thespian and is often very “unrelaxed” in the film in either role but that is also part of the film’s dream-like feel, no question. But, Miles is really good in a dual role in her Twilight Zine episode, Mirror Image, so it could have worked. They are physically very alike … but would have given a more grounded, more naturalistic performance. Which is hard to imagine now …


        • I hate to think that it comes down to beauty, but that’s what got Scottie. He never really knows her, in either incarnation. There’s nothing she ever says to indicate he might like her for her wit and brains. Miles might have projected too much intelligence for the role. She had shown her ability to play blankness and that odd sense of being possessed in both “Revenge” and The Wrong Man. We’re meant to think that Scottie is drawn to Madeleine because of the mystery surrounding her odd behavior, but in the end, would he have fallen for her if she wasn’t “hot”? There’s nothing about him to suggest that he’s a better man than that.


      • I think Grace Kelly could have played Madeline. However, she could not have played Judy. Kim Novak was marvelous. I agree with you Brad, on her wonderful understated but campy performance in The Mirror Cracked.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Further to your last comment Brad, I think Scottie fell in lust with her beauty, but in love with her vulnerability. I think he sensed that she needed him; he was weak but she was weaker. I think that appealed to him more than anything. I believe he would have fallen for her, eventually, even had she been just “girl next door” pretty like Miles (who by the way, could be filmed from any angle and who, imho grew to be a marvelous actress. I particularly loved her as the cosmetic queen in Columbo. She was, by contrast a bit hammy along with Van Johnson, in 23 Paces (another great late night mystery)

          I also thought Scottie light and Scottie dark were marvelously portrayed. Stewart was a master of under-acting, but was one of the most powerful eye/facial actors who ever lived.

          Liked by 2 people

          • I feel stupid not having thought of that angle! The vertigo is doubly significant because 1) it fits in with Gavin’s plan to murder Madeleine in a place where he knows Scottie can’t save her, but also 2) it has rendered Scottie useless and feeling not at all a man, so Madeleine provides him with his only chance to play hero again . . . as long as she remains at or below sea level.

            Incidentally, as a San Franciscan myself, I’ve always wondered why the incredible steepness of some of the hills he drives down doesn’t give Scottie vertigo. Maybe, in a way, it does.

            Liked by 1 person

  5. About the slowness and lack of initial commercial success … I think many Hitchcock movies can be (and are) enjoyed by teenagers and viewers going for thrills. This includes Rear Window. Appreciating Vertigo’s strengths requires more lived experienced and emotional maturity, I believe.


Leave a Reply to marblex Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s