Vertigo (1958) User Reviews (1,069)

Beautifully Twisted

[eveflower1970 · 9/10 · 28 December 2018]

Two years before Hitchcock's legendary horror movie "Psycho" (1960) hit the theaters, our Alfred stunned audiences with another masterpiece. Perhaps not as dark, cruel and shoking as "Psycho" (1960) or "The Birds" (1963), "Vertigo" (1958) still manages to be called a timeless classic.

First of all, Scottie's condition allowed the use of an entirely new camera technique. "The Dolly Zoom" is one of cinematography's most impressive camera tricks. Years before Steven Spielberg used it in "Jaws" (1975), Irmin Roberts was the first cameraman to ever use this technique, in a Hitchcock film.

This movie tells the story of Scottie, a retired cop who's asked to investigate the case of his friend's wife, which seems to be possesed by the spirit of a dead young woman who committed suicide.

As the chilling story goes on, several moments of suspense accompanied by chilling musical scores are happening. If you're not a fan of it, you can still enjoy the superb settings throughout the movie, and as well the beautifuly filmed shots. These elements alone are a pure work of art in my opinion.

Because it's a 50's film, you will encounter extravagant dialogue between the characters, that still manages to look natural. It's not over the top forced as you may see in other films of the era.

Toward the end of the movie, I appreciated the interesting depiction of madness that Alfred creates throughout dreams and illusions that our leading man deals with. The beautiful lighting used in the last half an hour of the movie is also outstanding enough to be mentioned. And, without spoiling anything, I'd like to mention how from my perspective, the leading man portrayed throughout the movie as a tragic hero, becomes an antagonist.

Definetly an unpredictable and stylish classic you don't want to miss.

A valiant, but flawed effort by The Master (Possible Spoilers)

[jwa007 · 7/10 · 15 July 2006]

Vertigo is a good movie by a great director. Viewing Vertigo several times recently, and reading Dan Aulier's brilliant in-depth look at the making of this movie, I am at a loss to explain what I see as a vastly hyperbolic reaction to this movie by many people both in the realm of professional critics and posters on IMDb. This is not Hitchcock at his best, although I do believe it could have been. True, Hitchcock was at his peak in this period, but there are enough flaws in Vertigo to bring this potential masterwork down several notches.

The first problem in Vertigo lies with the story's failure to establish Scottie Ferguson. We first meet Scottie as he fails to make the rooftop leap and is hanging by a gutter of a building several dozen feet from the ground. After this we see him making his decision to retire from police work. The audience is deprived of any referent to the type of person Scottie was before the incident on the rooftop. This failure to establish the character and set a benchmark to measure his return by in the closing minutes of the film deprives the audience of a vital connection to any character. But this problem could have easily been overcome had the third fatal flaw, which I will take up soon, been avoided.

The second problem in Vertigo is a decision by Hitchcock and George Tomasini, the editor, to insert a scene shortly after Scottie meets Judy that reveals all of the secrets the story holds. This throws away the element of suspense that might have had audiences on the edge of their seats during the final part of the movie, unable to relax even at the moment of revelation for Scottie's character as the movie would sweep them up and hurl them through the roller-coaster ride that the climax of the movie should have been. But I think Hitchcock and company made the decision as a direct result of an even earlier and worse mistake.

The third, and most glaring, mistake Hitchcock made with Vertigo was in the casting. Most of the cast does work ranging from passable to outstanding, with one notable exception: Jimmy Stewart. In Aulier's account of the Vertigo project he details how Stewart came to star in this movie, which had a lot more to do with the desires of Lew Wasserman, agent to both Stewart and Hitchcock, than good judgment. Jimmy Stewart was the wrong man for this role, and Aulier recounts that Hitchcock himself blamed Stewart for Vertigo's dismal showing at the box office. Hitchcock concluded that Stewart was too old for the part and refused to cast him in North by Northwest because of this. But I don't think Stewart's age was the real hindrance here, I think Jimmy Stewart tried to step way beyond his range as an actor and falls flat in certain key scenes. Mr. Stewart does a passable job in the first half of the movie, and is quite believable as the ex-detective brought low by his vertigo-inducing acrophobia. The first real hint of trouble comes in the last scene of the first half, Scottie sits in a sanitarium incommunicado and withdrawn as his stalwart friend Midge tries to engage him in conversation. Stewart's playing of this borders on the comedic with a deer-in-the-headlights gaze that calls to mind one of the Warner Brother's toons after being conked on the head rather than a man ravaged by guilt. It drags the scene down so much that Barbara Bel Geddes is left to carry it on her own, and she does make a valiant attempt but her efforts are hindered by Stewart. From this point forward the movie enters its most crucial phase and Stewart's ineffectualness grows more obvious in each successive scene. In the scene where Scottie tries to convince Judy to change her hair color Stewart's phrasing and pitch are semi-comedic. The lack of chemistry between the two leads brings the haunting scene of Judy's emergence from the bathroom to a crashing halt as Stewart is unable to infuse his performance with even a modicum of passion. But a few minutes later Stewart's performance goes completely south as the movie's climatic moments unfold. Scottie is righteously angry as the truth dawns on him, but, unfortunately, Stewart does not play angry well at all. His maniacal and slightly feminine delivery from this point on detracts from what could have been cinematic magic. At a point in the movie where Scottie should have regained his senses and his sense of manhood his tone and pitch shrilly foreshadow the strident tones of Mrs. Bates in Hitchcock's next project.

No doubt my remarks here will be met with disdain by some of the film's more ardent boosters on IMDb. I shall join the ranks of the great unwashed heathens who do not understand great cinema nor Vertigo's rightful placement at the apex of that pyramidal structure. I do appreciate Hitchcock's use of color as subtext in the film (I am particularly fond of the color and lighting shifts in Midge's apartment when she allows Scottie to view her painting). I also appreciate and easily grasp the undertones of Hitchcock's own obsessive behavior with the leading ladies of his work, but wonder if that subtext was intended as dramatic irony or whether Mr. Hitchcock was even aware of the mirror he was peering into. But, the brilliant touches of a master artist are not enough to make up for what this film lacks. Hitchcock was indeed The Master, and his body of work stands above a field of mostly mediocre efforts that his peers were turning out, and even today not one exists who can approach his mastery, but to suggest that Vertigo is the cinematic equivalent of Leonardo's Mona Lisa is ludicrous and undeserved.

Creepy and engaging.

[planktonrules · 9/10 · 31 August 2012]

It's rather strange that this film was a box office flop, as it's one of Alfred Hitchcock's better movies. The only problem with "Vertigo" is that in order to really enjoy it, you need to turn off your brain and just accept the movie. If you think the plot out TOO MUCH, you'll find yourself asking too many questions and not just enjoying the film...like my oldest daughter did.

The film is the story of a somewhat creepy ex-cop (James Stewart). When the film begins, he's emotionally scarred in an accident-an accident that leaves him with a HUGE case of psychologically-based vertigo. He decides to quit the job and is soon approached by an old friend--who wants to hire him to follow his emotionally disturbed wife. What happens next is very weird--and later becomes really creepy. I could say A LOT more but think it's best you just see the film--it has quite a few twists and turns that are bound to catch you by surprise.

Overall, a wonderfully original film. The only deficit, for some, is that although Stewart was a wonderful actor, he was too old for this role. Still, I could look past this and enjoyed it immensely.

Let there be color!

[slabihoud · 10/10 · 26 January 2005]

Since there are already so many real good comments on this film I want to focus on only one aspect.

Vertigo is a great example for what color films really can look like! Not only do I want to praise the quality of the Technicolor dye transfer prints but also more the way Hitchcock used color to create moods. Many directors used light to create moods in black and white movies but only very few ever got so far as to use the much greater palette of colors for the same purpose. One wonders why. Some directors decide for an overall color look, which is often done in the lab, but not on the set.

Vertigo is full of scenes where the colors have been saturated or changed to create a special feeling. Hitchcock even went so far as to openly dye some frames is bright unnatural colors. He played around with colors in all his color films but never as much as in this one. Think for example on James Stewart's nightmare in the middle of the film. There are frames dyed purple and green; the cemetery scenes are red, inserted to the rhythm of the music with normal frames. Kim Novak is often bathed in colored light like in the famous hotel room scene, where she appears like a ghost with all the green light around her.

The shading is also important. In the scene in the bookshop we hear a dark and sad story while at the same time the light dimes down to simulate dusk. In the scene where Judy remembers the real events in the bell tower it starts with an outdoor scene, which we have already seen but it is now much darker than the first time. In the sequence where Stewart follows Novak to the cemetery everything feels unnatural since every scene glows through the use of a filter that creates a blur.

The non-color of Kim Novak's dress as Madeleine is also a very important aspect in the film. She has to color her hair to become Madeleine again at the end of the picture.

The way color is used in this film gives it this dreamlike quality that allows endless interpretations. A true masterpiece!

A Standard Rave

[[e-mail] · 10/10 · 10 July 2002]

Starting in 1958, Alfred Hitchcock directed a remarkable sequence of films in a row, each of them a classic; Vertigo (1958), North by Northwest (1959), Psycho (1960) and The Birds (1963). Never has a director made four such genuinely great movies in such a short space of time, either before or since.

The pick of this high standard bunch is undoubtedly Vertigo. From the opening titles, with their circling spiral imagery, to the dramatic final scene this is a movie that takes you to a different time and place. Specifically, to a San Francisco of the past; full of deserted parks, discrete rooming houses, oddly menacing art galleries and florists where the customers enter and exit through the back door. Through this landscape wanders Jimmy Stewart, towering in the lead roll as a former detective recently retired after a bungled arrest leaves him with chronic vertigo. Plot machinations lead him to the alluring Kim Novak (one of Hitchcock's famous "blondes"), the young wife of a friend who has started behaving rather oddly.

"To reveal more," as Leonard Maltin wrote, "would be unthinkable."

While the performances of Novak and Stewart are memorable, the movie is really set apart by the intelligent script and the stylistic touches provided by the director. Hitchcock is in his very best form creating hypnotic scenes and a general sense of unease and dread in even the most banal of situations. He is aided in this by the wonderful score of Bernard Herrman. A particular favourite of mine is the extended (largely silent) segment where Stewart follows Novak for the first time. Nothing much happens, but the atmosphere of these scenes is enough to keep you on the edge of your seat!

One of the all-time greats. They definitely don't make them like this anymore.

A Classic is a Classic

[yocarlosvarelapr · 10/10 · 14 December 2017]

There are no accidents here. Next year, in a few weeks, Vertigo will be 60 years old and it will celebrate it on top of the list of The Greatest Films Ever Made overtaking Citizen Kane and many other masterpieces. Why? Maybe when a filmmaker of Hitchcock's greatness taps into his own unconscious and reveals himself. By now we know enough about Hitchcock the man to know he was obsessed in finding that woman who'll look and behave just the way he wants and once he find them, they are destroyed to then embark on a quest to replace or duplicate her. Vera Miles was suppose to be the object of James Stewart's obsession and she opted for motherhood instead. Kim Novak replaced her and her coldness and detachment worked beautifully here. Barbara Bel Geddes the real woman who loves him he doesn't even notice, his focus is in the impossible.The magic touch in Vertigo is truly Bernard Herrmann. Try to see Vertigo without the score. No, don't. This classic is a marriage of images and music. A thriller with an uncomfortable truth at its very center. A personal truth from its filmmaker. I don't know if Vertigo will still be the number 1 in the list a hundred years from now, I will never know but I suspect that it will always be among the top.

Distinctive & Unforgettable Masterpiece

[Snow Leopard · 19 June 2001]

One of the many things that made Hitchcock such a great director is that he did not just stick to the same formula time after time; all of his best movies have their own unique feel and characteristics. "Vertigo" is particularly distinctive, both as a complex story filled with suspense, and as a fascinating study in psychological tension. While it lacks the humor of some of Hitchcock's other masterpieces, and sometimes moves rather slowly, it is unforgettable, and a great achievement by the director and his cast.

If you have never seen it, you will enjoy it more if you do not know too much about the plot, although the actual story is somewhat secondary to the ways that the characters are tested and their weaknesses exposed by the various events. Hitchcock uses a complicated story, interesting characters, lavish visual detail, and deliberate pacing, plus a fine musical score by the incomparable Bernard Hermann, to produce a mysterious, almost unearthly, atmosphere. The tension rarely lets up, and the viewer is caught up completely in it, at times almost to the point of discomfort. It's the kind of film that repays careful attention, as almost every moment is filled with significant detail.

There are also some great acting performances. Jimmy Stewart is outstanding in a role far different from his usual screen persona. He enables the viewer to sympathize completely with him, even as we cringe at many of his character's actions and decisions. Kim Novak is completely convincing in a difficult dual role, and the movie would not have been as compelling without her fine performance. The rest of the cast all have much smaller roles, but are all quite good too, especially Barbara Bel Geddes as Scottie's (Stewart's) old friend, who provides important insight into Scottie's character.

"Vertigo" is a classic by any standard. It's a must-see that remains just as impressive with each viewing.

Did everyone notice the second plot twist!!!?????

[Reviewer · 10/10 · 3 December 1999]

Vertigo is the greatest movie ever made. The acting, drama, set design, lighting, plot and script are first class. This movie was robbed of the Oscars in 1958! However I'm not going to describe the movie as it MUST be seen. But for those who have seen it did you notice the second more subtle plot twist? It occurs after the scene when Scottie is in the hospital suffering from a mental breakdown. Notice how Midge does not appear in the movie again! In fact, the second half of the movie after that point, we are actually seeing what is going through Scottie's head and how he copes with his circumstances. Notice also that when the main Jury person is speaking he says that Scottie's previous weakness made the policeman fall to his death. You see Scottie comes to terms with his personal disasters by assuming the role of the person he could not save. What I mean is that it was the policeman who was hanging from the roof in reality but Scottie could not save him because he was looking down at the officer. He later reverses roles with Mrs Madeline Elster after the hospital scene. Now tell me how much of a genius Hitchcock really was!

You're not lost. Mother's here.

[hitchcockthelegend · 10/10 · 19 July 2009]

John "Scottie" Ferguson is a San Francisco cop who decides to quit the service after his acrophobia results in him being unable to save the life of a colleague. Whilst taking it easy he gets a call from an old school friend, Gavin Elster, asking him if he wouldn't mind doing a little bit of detective work for him. The job is simply to tail his wife because she's obsessed with an ancestress who committed suicide, and the wife, Madeline, is showing signs of herself being suicidal. Ferguson tails her diligently and as the tail progresses, Ferguson himself starts to become ever obsessed about the demur blonde Madeline. As the story twists and turns, Ferguson's obsession will have far reaching consequences for both parties...

Vertigo is Alfred Hitchcock's most discussed, dissected and critically reappraised film, based on a novel by Pierre Boileau called D'Entre Les Morts, (also writer of Diabolique), Vertigo was not well liked on its release and unable to be viewed for some time due to copyright, the film was restored from a destroyed negative into a glorious 70mm print, and now in all its glory it can be seen as one of the greatest films to have ever been made. What is most striking about Vertigo, outside of Hitchcock baring his innermost that is, is that its plot on the surface is simplicity personified, but delving deeper, and repeat viewings are a necessity, its apparent that Vertigo is a chilling force of cinema, taking great delight in gnawing away at your perceptions, perhaps even your own capabilities as a human being.

Very much a film of two great halves, Vertigo first seems intent on being an almost ghost story like mystery. Once the prologue has introduced us to Ferguson's fear of heights, we then enter an almost dream like sequence of events as Ferguson tails the troubled Madeline, the suggestion of reincarnation bleakly leading to death hangs heavy as Hitchcock pulls his atmospheric strings. Then the film shifts into dark territory as obsessions and nods to Dante's Inferno and feverish dreams take control, Hitchcock, as we have come to learn over the years, lays out his soul for us the audience to partake in, the uneasy traits sitting side by side with fascination of the story. All of which is leading us to a spine tingling finale that is as hauntingly memorable as it is shocking, the end to our own dizzying journey that Alfred and his team have taken us on.

Technically the film is magnificent, the opening credits from Saul Bass brilliantly prep us for what is about to unfold, while Bernard Herrmann's score is as good as anything he ever did, unnerving one minute, swirlingly romantic the next, a truly incredible score. Hitchcock himself is firing from the top draw, introducing us to the brilliant zoom-forward-track-back camera technique to induce the feeling of Vertigo itself, with that merely a component of two hours of gorgeous texture lined with disturbing little peccadilloes. The two leads are arguably doing their respective career best work, James Stewart as Scottie Ferguson goes real deep to play it out with an edgy believability that decries his aw-shucks trademark of years since past. Kim Novak as Madeline is perhaps the quintessential Hitchcock blonde, perfect with the duality aspects of the role and playing off Stewart's ever creepy descent with seamlessly adroit skill. It however should be noted that Hitchcock and his loyal subjects had to work hard to get Novak right for the role, but the result proves that Novak had ability that sadly wasn't harnessed on too many other occasions.

Vertigo is a film that I myself wasn't too taken with on my first viewing, it's only during revisits that the piece has come to grab me by the soul and refuse to let go, it not only holds up on revisits, it also gets better with each subsequent viewing, it is simply a film that demands to be seen as many times as possible. Not only one of the greatest American films ever made, one of the greatest films ever made...period, so invest your soul in it, just the way that Hitchcock himself so clearly did. 10/10

One of the most surprising films I've seen.

[filipemanuelneto · 10/10 · 14 May 2016]

Scottie Ferguson is a police officer, retired because of fear of heights. His life changes when he accepts to watch a woman at the request of her husband, who suspects that his wife has been visited by a ghost. Directed by Alfred Hitchcock, has script Alec Coppel and Samuel A. Taylor, with the participation of James Stewart and Kim Novak.

This film is considered by experts one of the best films ever made. I never understood why but, nevertheless, is one of Hitchcock's films that I most like to see. The script is very good, mixing love, obsession, loyalty, madness and mystery in an irresistible recipe that takes the seal of quality of one of the most brilliant masters of suspense in cinema. The ending is baffling. Technically impeccable, this film has an excellent picture, sound effects and a soundtrack where the emphasis is given to the opening theme that, in all fairness, became one of the most famous of Bernard Herrmann. The performance of the actors also deserves congratulations. Stewart shows why Hitchcock was so fond of working with him and Novak can perfectly be, at the same time, the damsel in distress and the femme fatale, who leads men to act without thinking.

Essential for all Hitchcock fans, this film is a must-see for any lover of suspense and mystery. It's a film that can be seen by teenage audiences, despite having some more dramatic scenes, and probably will please the majority of audiences.

A fine story that misses the mark

[TimelessFlight · 6/10 · 9 June 2023]

A lowly 6/10? I know that will be seen as sacrilege by those that rate this to be Hitch's 10/10 masterpiece, but as many times as I see this film and as many times as I want to like it, I just cannot get overly enthused.

The premise of the film is a very good one . . . Madeleine (Kim Novak), the wife of a wealthy businessman, is acting very strangely - apparently lost in a past woman's life, mentally troubled and disappearing at times. He asks his friend Scottie (James Stewart) to follow her and work out what she is up to. We follow Scottie following Madeleine, and are invited to work out what is going on in Madeleine's mind.

Madeleine and Scottie's relationship develops (unconvincingly for me) until a key moment in the film that on first viewing might seem like the film's concluding scene. In fact, that dramatic moment is just an excellent twist and the beginning of 'part two' of the movie, a part that further explains who Madeleine is, whether Scottie can come to terms with his own issues and what was happening all along.

So, a potentially fascinating psychological story based on deception, suspense and intrigue with a terrific plot twist, by one of the the world's greatest directors who's films I adore - what's not to love? Well, for me quite a bit.

The early scenes where Scottie follows Madeleine are necessary to the story but really very dull. Slow is fine, but slow and boring isn't. Then there's Kim Novak playing Madeleine - some say she gives the performance of a lifetime, but I found her performance as dull as dishwater; the most memorable part of her performance was the astonishingly distracting false eyebrows. Finally, while the superior 'part two' of the film elevates the movie considerably, the actual ending - as in the last minute or so of the film - just seems too ridiculous.

I respect and understand entirely those who see this as Hitch's psychological masterpiece, and I wish I could join them and get the same pleasure from the film. Sadly there are just too many flat spots, over dramatisations and unbelievable characters for me to get past. At least Hitch has left us with an interesting debate.

Good, not great.

Beyond Amazing

[legend21 · 10/10 · 25 October 2005]

Over the years, this film has been regarded as one of Hitchcock's masterpieces. Its been called the most personal, emotional, and complex of Hitchcock's films. I agree with all of these things except for one, this film IS Hitchcock's masterpiece work. All of the others pale in comparison to this. There are phenomenal performances here by Jimmy Stewart who plays the biggest anti-hero of his career and Kim Novak whose stunning beauty and exceptional personalities shine through this dark film. Barbara Bel Geddes provides great support as well. Everything about this film, the cinematography, the story, the depth, etc. leaves you mystified and transfixed on this dizzying, surreal artwork of a film. It truly is flawless. If you are a Hitchcock fan and haven't seen this you need to get up right now and buy, not rent, this as soon as possible!

Good but overrated.

[benyox2803 · 7/10 · 13 September 2013]

Though I enjoyed this film I think at times it can be overrated by various critics and members of the public. I would recommend it to a friend but only as a solid film and not 'a timeless classic' as it is often called.

The ending of the film is certainly very striking and memorable and was a well done climax after a pretty average build up. The music used really adds to shock value of the ending.

The characters in this film are what let's this film down the most. Most of the acting is wooden and not believable whatsoever. James Stewart is hopeless as the lead character and really drags the film down with a performance that could send anyone to sleep. Other supporting actors are 'ok' but none will leave you amazed and none are memorable bar the one saving grace in the cast Kim Novak; She is fantastic in her dual roles as Madeline and Judy and her performance will grip you and added to the feelings of shock and sadness I felt at the ending.

Hitchcock is superb as Director as always. The way the film is made; from every camera angle to every sound you hear creates suspense and anticipation. The build-up to the climax is done very well and the climax itself executed to a good standard.

Though well-made it is not 'perfect' and the first part of the film probably over did it when trying to create suspense and was in all honestly, a bit boring. If the pacing to the first half was altered slightly and Stewart had put a little more effort in this could have been near perfect.

SPOILERS GALORE! If you've never seen the movie, DON'T READ this review!

[krumski · 5/10 · 17 February 2000]

I suppose this is some kind of masterpiece, what with the absolutely overwhelming photography, powerful score and all - but I must say I just couldn't get into it. We're made to be patient through a looooong exposition (Scottie following her around), which I didn't mind at first because I said, "Hey it's Hitchcock - the payoff will be worth it." Well, it wasn't. Scottie's obsession was inexplicable to me (and, yes, I realize that Kim Novak is hot); maybe the writing was weak in not giving him a strong and clear enough motivation for going over the edge (what were his other romantic attachments like? Why is *this* one in particular so extremely excessive? Knowing these things would help) or maybe it's just that I can't buy Jimmy Stewart in this type of role. He projects too much groundedness, dignity and common sense for him to be convincing as this kind of obsessional basket case (the scene with him in the asylum was particularly embarrassing and unconvincing; he doesn't look "crazy" - he looks like Jimmy Stewart just refusing to say his lines). Maybe an actor a bit more rumpled and on the edge - Robert Mitchum, say - could have brought the part off better (and I'm a *huge* Jimmy Stewart fan, just so you don't get the wrong idea).

My biggest problem, however, is with the final third of the movie. Excuse me, but I just don't think it was a good idea to reveal the murder plot and its actual machinations two-thirds of the way into the film. Not knowing for certain up until the very end whether "Judy" was really "Madeleine" or whether Scottie was indeed just imagining things would have been much MUCH more effective. It would have pulled the viewer in, kept him guessing and psychologically on edge all the way through. Once you know that Scottie is "correct" in his assumption, not only is the tension gone and you're no longer immediately connected to the story, also you can't truly buy his craziness or obsession as a thematic point since, after all, he's "right." I believe this to be one of the all-time biggest scripting mistakes in the history of cinema.

Hitchcock has said, though, that suspense is not what he was primarily after in this movie. He wanted to reveal the murder plot early so it wouldn't get in the way of the attention paid to Scottie's disintegration. But without the suspense, Scottie's disintegration just looks stupid. It's like the end of the movie has already come and gone, and yet the director is still forcing us to sit through a drawn-out and pointless epilogue that just takes foreeeeeever. . .

And the ending - what's with that?! She sees a nun and so she jumps off the roof? It's absolutely RIDICULOUS - so abrupt and nonsensical, as if the editor suddenly told Hitchcock that he had to end the film RIGHT NOW, and he had to think of something fast. Clearly, the best ending (if the film had to go this long) would have been for her to slip off the edge, and then have Scottie try but fail to save her - thus mirroring his failure to save the cop at the beginning of the movie from falling, giving the whole thing a neat little symmetry. That Hitchcock failed to see the absolute rightness of this conclusion makes me wonder about his status as a cinematic genius.

Well, ok, I won't go that far - Hitch's reputation is safe. But Vertigo's isn't; this is no masterpiece, and far from the director's greatest work. Instead, this is the one film where he deserted his "popcorn" approach to creating thrills and opted for a more pensive and "mature" style, thinking this would prove him the artist so many denied that he was. It does just the opposite - by playing down what he did best (building and sustaining suspense), Hitchcock is left rudderless, and his attempt at "adult" themes just look embarrassing.

It's beautiful to look at, of course - one of the most sumptuous visual experiences in the entire history of movies. The redwoods scene, and the Golden Gate Bridge - fantastic! The scenes in the museum, too - absolutely ravishing. But, alas, great photography does not make a great movie. If only Vertigo were a coffee table book, then it might truly deserve the classic status it has been accorded.

I don't know, I guess if you're a fan of the technical aspects of cinema, and love Hitchcock for his visual bravura and like to analyze his technique, there's probably a lot here for you to enjoy (and is no doubt why it's so loved by other directors). But if you're like me, and enjoy Hitchcock films for their pure ability to keep you tense and on the edge of your seat, Vertigo is not the film to watch.

Mesmerizing.

[AaronCapenBanner · 9/10 · 13 October 2013]

Alfred Hitchcock directed this mesmerizing film that stars Jimmy Stewart as John 'Scottie' Ferguson, a retired San Francisco policeman who is approached by old college friend Gavin Elster(played by Tom Helmore) who wants him to follow his wife Madeline(played by Kim Novak) who has been acting strangely. Scottie does follow her, and becomes obsessed by her beauty and behavior, eventually falling in love with her, with devastating consequences. Though that is only the start of the mystery... Barbara Bel Geddes costars as Scottie's friend Midge, still in love with him, despite jilting him years before. Superbly directed and acted film has an ingenious story and stunning imagery, making this an unforgettable romantic mystery, with a stunning ending...though if you have the DVD, watch the extra feature on the lost extended ending, which is fascinating, and changes the tone of the film as a result!

Classic Hitchcock and Stewart

[XRANDY · 2 August 2001]

An interesting psychological piece that richly displays Hitchcock's talents. It is unfair to compare this film to the suspense thrillers of today which are subjected to more realism in sex and violence. Hitchcock had to be more subtle in 1958, where I'm sure a work like this, that seems tame by today's standards, appeared bizarre and risqué. Also the acting here seems histrionic; not that people actually spoke like that in the 50s but the audiences liked such dictionally refined dialogue back then as opposed to the lines of modern-day scripts that more accurately portray the way individuals speak.

James Stewart and Kim Novak are appealing on numerous levels, the former mainly because he doesn't wander far from the amiable joe we have come to expect (even though he does weird-out near the conclusion) and the latter because she maintains a veneer of vulnerability that we can relate to.

This is not a film I especially like (I couldn't watch it again and again) but I respect for its strong filmmaking.

Detective Obsessed

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 3 December 2005]

Although it got at best mixed reviews when first released, Vertigo is now considered one of Alfred Hitchcock's classic films. A tribute to the players, the director, and the composer of that haunting musical score that will stay with you forever.

The music is probably more important here than in most films, let alone most Hitchcock films. Because for most of the first half of the film and a great deal of the second half, it is without dialogue. In fact Kim Novak does not have a spoken line until about 48 minutes into the little more than 2 hour feature. She's under James Stewart's surveillance and the whole story of his growing obsession with her is told through his facial expressions and through Bernard Herrmann's music.

Stewart is a cop retired on disability who is hired by an old college friend Tom Helmore to follow his wife. Helmore tells Stewart a tale about his wife falling under the spirit of her dead great grandmother who committed suicide. The wife he's following is played by Kim Novak. Novak in fact makes a suicide attempt and by jumping into San Francisco bay and Stewart jumps in and saves her.

In a brief prologue the reason for Stewart's disability is told. While on the police force, he lost a man while pursuing the suspect in a rooftop chase. Another cop was killed trying to save Stewart who had slipped and was hanging on to a roof gutter for his dear life. After that Stewart acquired an understandable fear of heights with accompanying dizziness, vertigo.

Later on at an old mission which has significance for Novak's family, Novak runs up to the top of the bell tower and Stewart because of his Vertigo can't pursue her to prevent her from jumping off and taking her life.

Later on he spots Kim Novak again with a different color hair and this time essentially stalks her until they meet. By now he's totally obsessed with the dead Novak who he fell in love with.

Alfred Hitchcock is plumbing some depths of the human psyche in Vertigo. Certainly good old all American Jimmy Stewart would not be one you would think of casting as a voyeur and a stalker. But he pulls off the performance in probably the film with the least dialogue Alfred Hitchcock ever made since sound came in.

Kim Novak is hauntingly beautiful in Vertigo, she has to be or the whole plot would make no sense. Barbara Bel Geddes is in this also as Stewart's girl friend who finds herself losing him to an obsession with a ghost. She also serves as a sounding board for Stewart as he expresses some of his feelings to her.

This was the first of two films Stewart and Novak made together. Ironically enough the second one, Bell Book and Candle, is about a witch played by Novak who actually uses witchcraft to ensnare Stewart. Given Stewart's obsession with Novak in Vertigo, if Hitchcock had thrown in witchcraft into the plot, the audience would certainly have believed it.

Of course this is an Alfred Hitchcock film and therefore not all is as it seems. I can't sat any more, but there are no happy endings for anyone in this haunting film.

One final thing I have to do... and then I'll be free of the past.

[lastliberal · 9/10 · 7 February 2008]

Oscar ignored this fantastic film by Hitchcock starring James Stewart. It gave nomination for Art and Set decoration and Sound. Small acknowledgment of an outstanding film.

James Stewart was outstanding as a detective that was duped by his "friend (Tom Helmore)." We were all led on an adventure that made absolutely no sense until we were shown the result. This film really had me going! Kim Novak was also excellent in her role as the wife. She was so good that I had no idea that she was anything more than object of Stewart's obsession. Hitchcock had me going her also.

This was an excellent movie and should have had more recognition.

Hypnotic

[The_Sun_Toucher · 10/10 · 6 July 2000]

The Cinema is often referred to as an Art form, although only a handful of films actually live up to that ideal. most films, even great ones, are extremely forgettable to all but the most die hard movie buffs. Which is why Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo" is such a breath of fresh air. Here is a subtle, suspensful, mezmerising tale told with the patience and sure handedness of a true artist. At it's heart Vertigo is a tale of deception and obsession. After the brilliantly exciting opening sequence (which has been ripped off countless times, like much of Al's catalogue) the movie slows down to a steady, almost frustrating pace. It's main theme develops only gradually, allowing the viewer to soak in every tiny detail of character development. I fear, however, that this film may be too subtle and cerebral for most of today's action obsessed movie buffs, but for those viewers with a little bit of patience and just a drop of thoughtfulness, "Vertigo" will prove a very rewarding experience.

This film takes repeated viewings to really appreciate it...

[AlsExGal · 10/10 · 21 November 2009]

... and perhaps that is why it bombed upon initial release.

When Vertigo was first released in 1957, it was not that popular in theaters and was pretty much universally panned by critics. In 1992, when the British Film Institute performed a survey of the world film critics to compile an all-time ten-best list that comes out every decade, Vertigo came in at fourth place. It didn't even make that list in 1962 or 1972. Part of the reason for the delayed popularity of the film could be that it requires repeated viewings to really gain an appreciation of it. Such repeated viewings were not possible for most viewers until the advent of home video systems and cable around 1980.

It is unusual to see a director produce his best work after the age of 50, but that is exactly what Alfred Hitchcock did. Starting in 1948 with "Rope" and ending with "The Birds" in 1963, this was the era of his most inspired films. "Vertigo", in my opinion, is the best film of his entire body of work.

As for the film itself, it is a brilliantly twisted movie infused with touches of genius and madness that focuses on the interconnected nature of love and obsession. Interwoven with this main theme is a crime mystery that is revealed to and solved for the audience but not the protagonist, James Stewart's character, for the last 45 minutes of the film.

Alongside these themes is the issue of lost opportunities - how we grieve over them, and whether or not what we perceive as lost opportunities were ever "real" opportunities in the first place. This issue is raised not only for Scotty (James Stewart), but for just about everybody else in the cast too. This includes Scotty's college girlfriend (Barbara Bel Geddes) who has remained his friend through the years and obviously still harbors thoughts of what might have been if only she had accepted Scotty's marriage proposal years before.

Besides the excellent acting and superb plot, the score is outstanding as is the cinematography, especially the visual darkness of the mission San Juan Bautista versus the angelic beauty of Madeleine which belies what is really going on. I highly recommend this film to anyone who has the time to watch it more than once. Just one viewing won't do it justice.

Hitchcock's once-overlooked masterpiece

[Goodbye_Ruby_Tuesday · 10/10 · 21 December 2006]

John "Scottie" Ferguson (Jimmy Stewart, never better) is a retired detective with a severe fear of heights after a botched chase to capture a criminal. Due to his newly acquired acrophobia, he retires and wanders around the beautiful streets of San Francisco. Out of the blue, an old college friend Gavin Elster asks him to follow his wife Madeleine, as he believes that Madeleine may be possessed by the spirit of her great-grandmother, drifting in and out of reality and into trance-like states of mind. So Scottie agrees to follow the mysterious blonde (Kim Novak) as Hitchock guides us throughout San Francisco and into his strange and dark mind. Little by little, Scottie begins to become infatuated with Madeleine, and after he saves her from suicide (she jumped into San Francisco Bay) and decides to help her, he falls madly in love with her. In finding pieces of the puzzle to Madeleine's mystery, their journey takes them to the San Juan Bautista where Madeleine meets her end by tumbling off the bell tower, presumably by suicide. Scottie tried to save his love but his fear of heights stopped him. For the next year Scottie falls into a deep depression, feeling guilty for his impotency to save his love. His depression is halted when he sees Judy Barton (Novak again). Judy isn't like Madeleine--she's plain, in touch with reality and even vulgar when compared. But her face looks so much like Madeleine. Scottie begins to court Judy first for herself but eventually he tries to mold her into the beauty he lost prematurely, unaware that Judy has a big secret up her sleeve.

When it was first released, Vertigo didn't get good reviews and it didn't make money at the box office. People didn't understand the bizarre dream sequences that were so ahead of their time, they didn't feel sympathy for the characters (at the end, even Scottie is unlikable), and the BIG TWIST is given away in the middle of the movie instead of at the end, a la Psycho. Even I had my complaints about that last one, yet after a second viewing I realized that this movie wasn't even about what really happened to what really happened to Madeleine; it's about men's psychological--and sexual--desire for the perfect woman, even if she's out of touch with reality. This movie is considered Hitchcock's most personal film, as he could be domineering with his actresses, trying to mold them into his own dream. After the "failure" of Vertigo, Hitchcock never worked with Jimmy Stewart again, unfairly blaming him for not being able to draw a crowd on account of his age. Luckily for everyone, Vertigo has gotten better with age and is no longer forgotten. In the late 80s Vertigo started popping up on Top 10 Films of All Time lists, and today it's considered Hitchock's best film, and most definitely one of the best ever made.

The biggest reason for Vertigo's late success is because it is Hitchcock's most analyzed film and because it works on a psychological level; The film points out that men would rather have an unavailable, beautiful woman who is out of touch with reality than a woman who understands her surroundings and is utterly available. This is pointed out twice, once with Midge, an ex-fiancée and good friend of Scottie and later with Judy, who tries to make Scottie love her for who she is and not because she reminds Scottie of Madeleine. The first hour is drawn out very slowly, and while it's not as fast-paced as other Hitchcock's films, he uses it wisely. He starts by first gaining--later testing--our sympathy for Scottie; when he's hanging for his dear life in the opening scene, we pray for him (even though we know that there would be no movie if Jimmy Stewart dies in the first 3 minutes). When he's chasing Madeleine up the bell tower, we hope that he can get there in time and kiss his lover. And when the romance turns dark in the second outing to the bell tower, you feel just as caught in the middle as Scottie does in that moment. Hitchcock blurred the lines between victim and villain, and he earns our creative respect for him.

The key element to why Vertigo works so well in the end is because of the actors. It's practically impossible to think of anyone other than James Stewart, who embodied the everyman, and for that reason is so convincing in testing our sympathies. It's all in the minimalistic ways he does it, with the slightest crinkle in the forehead or the movement in the eyes doing evoking more emotion than most actors do screaming and crying. This is his best performance next to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. And Kim Novak is ravishing and haunting both as Madeleine and Judy, utterly convincing in both roles. With my respects to Grace Kelly, Novak just may be the most mysterious and convincing Hitchcock blonde to grace the screen. Their chemistry together, despite their age difference is explosive and natural.

Buy--don't rent--this DVD and you'll find yourself falling for every detail of this brilliant film.

I'm running in circles trying to like this film.

[Sethtro · 7/10 · 7 September 2020]

Personal Rating: 7/10

To cut to the chase, this movie didn't live up to my expectations. Coming off the back of 'Dial M for Murder' which I adored, I was excited to watch what critics argue to be the best film of Hitchcock's 'Vertigo', and I'm left feeling disappointed.

Why? Why am I not madly in love with the thing the whole world has touted as a masterpiece? The answer lies in the movie's name and one of its many motifs. Vertigo and spirals. This movie gives the viewer a sense of vertigo, packing many many spirals into its 2hr+ runtime so that by the end... are you truly any further than you were at the beginning? Example: Scottie chases "Madeline" around town following her, he then receives a piece of information, deepening the plot, and it starts up the next day, following her around. She falls, gets rescued (one of the most talked-about scenes: sexual tension, desire, lust, giving in, disillusionment, the whole shebang) and the following happens again the next day, with yet another piece of information to deepen the plot. Scottie becomes infatuated with "Madeline" and we think little of it, just like his going to Ernies and driving down a row of trees but when all of that happens exactly again later in the film more information has been revealed, the stakes are higher. This whole film is a spiral tightening in on itself. I mean the action the movie ends on is the exact action that occurred during the "climax" (middle) of the film. Talk about running in circles.

The fun thing about circles, is they're great to talk about, just read some of the reviews for this film, essays they really are. People project themselves onto this movie, some apply 21st-century values on this 1958 film, others attempt to see things from Hitchcock's perspective, everything. I'm not saying that's wrong, everyone's entitled to share how they interpret something! But I haven't found someone that just asks, were you satisfied at the end?

Perhaps I'm daft, not a true cinema buff, but for a movie to become a personal favourite for me I have to love the story, not just question it.

To conclude though, this film in all its other ways is spectacular. The score, beautiful. There's a point where 20 minutes pass with only a few words of dialogue, all you have is the score and it's magnificent. James Stewart and Kim Novak were incredible in their performances, and the cinematography, well, almost hurts how beautiful it is. Jaws eat your heart out, Hitchcock perfected the dolly zoom. And the use of colours (Green & Red), genius.

There's no doubt in my mind I will watch this movie again. There are plenty of things done very well, it just is not an enjoyable movie as a whole for myself. Whether you agree or disagree, thanks for reading my review.

One is a wanderer; Two together are always going somewhere.

My favorite movie of alltime!

[CGarcia-2 · 10/10 · 25 August 1999]

I have seen ALOT of movies in my life, but none have moved me the way Vertigo has...It's simply brilliant...the more times one views it, the more one picks up from it...a true masterpiece from the master himself...When I think Vertigo, I think the colors red and green...when I think Vertigo I think obsession with love, and the film itself...This movie is so deep that you could write a thesis on it and keep adding to it from time to time...Hitchcock really gave his all in this picture...it's about the ultimate love...wanting to achieve the ultimate love, and, as happens in life, never having love turn out to be the way we want it to be...all star performances by Stewart, Novak and Bel Geddes make this visually stunning masterpiece a true film classic...Newly restored, the DVD version simply blows you out of the water....I have seen the movie about 20 times now, and everytime I love it more...Vertigo is the ultimate cult film for me, as I keep going back to it more and more...considering it's dark storyline, it must be a glut for punishment, but Hitch only keeps me wanting more....10 stars...only because I can't give it 100 stars!

Not Hitchcock's best

[DanLawson146 · 6/10 · 22 May 2020]

POSITIVES:

1) James Stewart is fantastically cool as always in the lead role, at least for the first half of the film 2) I was genuinely shocked when Madeleine 'killed herself' and then shocked again by the twist that it had been a body double the entire time 3) The mystery is certainly intriguing, but that element of the film falls away in the second half 4) It's refreshing to see the way classic films were shot with lots of long takes and barely any editing

NEGATIVES:

1) The film is far too long. It should only be 90 minutes. The pacing is so incredibly slow and really drags on. Doesn't keep you engaged anywhere near as much as the better and more refined Hitchcock films such as Rear Window 2) I'm not sure at what point we're meant to think that James Stewart realises that Judy is actually Madeleine, but the fact that he forces Judy to change her hair and her clothes so that she looks like Madeleine and even says to her "your appearance can't matter to you" is so creepy 3) None of the romantic dialogue works for me. It's so cringey and old fashioned it honestly reminded me of the Anakin and Padme romance dialogue from the Star Wars prequels 4) Madeleine / Judy dies by being scared by a nun and dramatically falling backwards off the top of the church tower for no apparent reason??

Not a masterpiece

[keith-moyes · 3/10 · 18 June 2008]

Vertigo divides audiences more than any other Hitchcock film.

For one critic it is "one of the four or five most profound and beautiful films the cinema has yet given us." A poll of 150 international critics has three times voted it the second greatest movie ever made (after Citizen Kane). However, many viewers find it a crashing bore.

I have sympathy for both camps.

Vertigo is the film in which Hitchcock comes closest to dealing directly with his own personal demons. The surface story makes no sense by itself and only works if you respond to the powerful undercurrents in its subtext. But Hitchcock still has to get the surface story right. It must fully embody the subtext and engage with its audience. For many people, it doesn't quite do either.

The prologue leaves Scottie hanging over an abyss. By not showing his rescue, Hitchcock effectively leaves him hanging there for the rest of the movie and his vertigo becomes a metaphor for his spiritual condition; he is poised between a longing for life and a longing for death. In rejecting the (real) life-affirming Midge and in his infatuation with the (illusory) death-obsessed Madeleine, he makes his fateful choice.

However, the prologue also supports a literal interpretation of his vertigo and the next scene doesn't really establish that Scottie's problems go deeper than his understandable fear of heights. We learn that he and Midge were once lovers but there is no follow through that explains why he broke off the relationship or why he becomes besotted with what we later learn is just a fantasy women.

The next scene, with Elster, is even more unfortunate and its defects reverberate throughout the movie. Elster could have been depicted as a sort of Mephistopheles, who sees Scottie's weakness and tempts him to his doom. In fact, he is thinly-sketched and is just a device for kicking off the story.

More crucially, he tells Scottie too much about Madeleine's obsession with Carlotta. This virtually forces Scottie into being the level-headed sceptic and makes his subsequent neurotic behaviour even more arbitrary and difficult to believe. It also undermines the ten-minute wordless sequence of Scottie trailing Madeleine around San Francisco.

If Elster has simply asked Scottie to investigate his wife's aimless wandering, we would have started out expecting something mundane (like an affair) only to be drawn into the much more intriguing mystery of her identification with Carlotta and her apparent sleepwalk towards suicide. As it is, the sequence merely confirms what Elster has already told us and often tries the patience of the audience. For many, the picture never recovers.

Moreover, because Scottie's character is under-developed (and Stewart's performance is unable to realise what the story implies) the rest of the movie can be viewed as the tale of an ordinary man who becomes infatuated with an attractive, troubled, woman whose life he has saved. The shadow of Carlotta then becomes an incidental detail and we get only a weak sense that Scottie's love is an unhealthy obsession. His eventual break-down is then under-motivated and seems imposed on the picture rather than being integral to its structure (a feeling reinforced by Hitchcock's decision to present it in an abstract, symbolic way).

I don't view Vertigo in this way, but I can sympathise with those that do.

With Scottie's breakdown, the picture reaches a second turning point. When Midge walks down the hospital corridor and the screen fades to black, it feels as if the movie is over. Of course it isn't and what happens next is crucial. Nothing up to that point makes any sense without it. But a second structural flaw immediately emerges. We are three-quarters of the way through the movie but only half-way through the story. Just when Vertigo needs time to re-engage our interest after the false ending it suddenly accelerates.

We get a montage that establishes Scottie's continuing obsession with Madeleine, then he spots Judy, follows her home and we are immediately plunged into a flashback that 'explains' the plot. This meeting needed much better preparation and the subsequent relationship needed more time to develop.

By revealing the plot twist so early, Hitchcock is inviting us to see how self-defeating Scottie's neurotic behaviour really is: in recreating Madeleine he is inevitably destroying his own illusions. But he rushes through this process. We have no time to get to know the real Judy before we are confronted with Scottie's bizarre plan to transform her. Then, at the very moment the transformation is complete, Scottie immediately spots the deception so the picture gallops to its climax and then slams to a halt.

As a good professional, Hitchcock was wary about letting any of his pictures run over two hours, but if he wanted to impose this discipline on himself, then he should have been more ruthless in pruning the first half of the story. In fact, he should have just accepted that this story couldn't be told effectively in two hours and have let it run on longer.

We rightly admire Hitchcock's movies for their great set pieces, but tend to overlook their fragile story sense and relatively weak dramatic structure. Mostly, that didn't matter, but in an ambitious picture like Vertigo it is a fatal flaw.

There is much more to Vertigo than its detractors acknowledge, but it is far from being the near-perfect masterpiece that its most fervent admirers would have us believe.