Skip to main content

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

Vertigo
(1958)

(SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

Judy: Well… you don’t look very much like Jack the Ripper…

Actually, revisiting Vertigo, I was most conscious throughout of how it has informed Brian De Palma’s career, above and beyond any other Hitchcock film. Obsession (1976) is the obvious example, but more than in mere narrative terms, I’m thinking of the manner in which De Palma favoured meticulously designed, extended and wordless suspense sequences (or just plain sequences). You can see the influence of the early tailing of Kim Novak’s Madeleine in a tauter form in the likes of not dissimilar sequences in the Psycho-inspired Dressed to Kill (the art gallery) and Body Double (the panties pursuit).

Scottie: I’ve always said you were wasting your time in the underwear department.

Geoff Andrews in Time Out called VertigoBrilliant but despicably cynical” and “slow but totally compelling”. I think that’s where I diverge. Not with the slowness, which is fine, but the being totally compelled part. It may sound a little facile, but I don’t find myself caring about any of the characters here, barring the very human Midge (Barbara Bel Geddes, later of Dallas). As a consequence, my interest in the story as it unfolds always becomes very detached, clinical. I can only respect Hitchcock’s accomplishment, rather than obsess over it as he would. On the other hand, that’s not to say I remotely relate to Orson Welles’ outspoken criticisms of the film. He didn’t like Rear Window either, it turns out (“Everything is stupid about it” – something you might easily argue of The Other Side of the Wind). But Vertigo, “That’s worse” and “I think he was senile a long time before he died”. Ouch.

Official: But we are not here to pass judgement on Mr Ferguson’s lack of initiative.

One problem with Vertigo is that the murder plot is nonsense, really. Not necessarily an issue with a Hitchcock movie where he keeps up the pace and doesn’t allow you time to reflect (his next picture, for example). Here however, every development invites introspection and interrogation. Even assuming you buy into the train of events planned by Gavin Elster (Tom Helmore) playing out as they do, you’re left with James Stewart’s Scottie as a curiously distancing protagonist.

Scottie: It’s no dream. You’ve been here before.

I mean, obviously, we’re not supposed to be on board with his insanely consumed desire to reincarnate Madeleine as Judy; Kim Novak plays Judy’s increasing disintegration in the face of Scottie’s grim determination convincingly. It’s more that, the more Hitch doubles down on it, the more absurd the scenario becomes (and this isn’t one of his comedies). On one level, he actually made a very wise decision to (very inelegantly) undercut the suspense plot – and the unfolding of the novel – halfway through by revealing that Judy and Madeleine are one and the same person. It means the logistics of the hows are pushed to one side in favour of the ramifications of all this on Scottie’s psyche. But that in turn requires you to be fully engaged with his fixated path, and to believe in his necrotic fixation.

Scottie: And you know something, doctor? I don’t think Mozart’s going to help at all.

I can’t make that leap. Perhaps Hitch was correct to criticise Stewart’s age when the picture fizzled (he considered him too old, which may explain his failure to use him again). Or perhaps he was right that Novak wasn’t quite right. She’s extremely pulchritudinous, but that rather serves to suggest that Scottie’s obsession is, at its root, decidedly un-exotic and rather base in its impulses (notably, when he fishes her out of San Francisco bay, he doesn’t rush to get her medical attention but instead takes her back to his apartment, undresses her and puts her to bed).

Judy: Scottie, what are you doing?
Scottie: I’m trying to buy a suit.

Hitch costumes Novak and photographs her with extraordinary precision, but the result serves to emphasise that the only element between the protagonists – and the director with his female star – is objectification. Which means, even with Scottie projecting on her as part of the plot – albeit, she really does love him, in the kind of development that could only be a movie twistedness twist – we can’t really move beyond there being no spark or chemistry between Stewart and Novak.

Scottie: Judy, please. It can’t matter to you.

Would Vera Miles (who modelled for the painting of Carlotta Valdes and was cast, before her pregnancy nixed plans) have been better? Well, she held her own opposite Henry Fonda in Hitch’s previous film The Wrong Man (1956), so I suspect so. But it would have been a very different picture. The “one-dimensionality” of Scottie’s obsession rather becomes the point with Novak. With Miles, you’d have felt something, so the inevitable bleakness of it all would likely have been less precise, relentless, cruel. But it might also have seemed motivated.

Nun: I heard voices…

There’s so much that dazzles here, though. The trip-tastic opening titles are a masterpiece in themselves (later revisited in Scotty’s fever dream). The opening rooftop chase finds us joining the proceedings mid-plot – later riffed on in the opening of The Matrix (1999) – and is the most action packed the picture gets. Scottie’s character massacre, dealt by Henry Jones’ coroner, is horrifying. The restaurant Scottie visits, first seeing Madeleine there, represents a descent into hell with its infernal décor. Bernard Herrmann’s score is superlative. But overall, I’m cool on Vertigo. It doesn’t make me giddy or reel in a faint.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.

A ship is the finest nursery in the world.

A High Wind in Jamaica (1965) (SPOILERS) An odd one, this, as if Disney were remaking The Swiss Family Robinson for adults. One might perhaps have imagined the Mouse House producing it during their “Dark Disney” phase. But even then, toned down. After all, kids kidnapped by pirates sounds like an evergreen premise for boy’s own adventuring (more girl’s own here). The reality of Alexander Mackendrick’s film is decidedly antithetical to that; there’s a lingering feeling, despite A High Wind in Jamaica ’s pirates largely observing their distance, that things could turn rather nasty (and indeed, if Richard Hughes’ 1929 novel  had been followed to the letter, they would have more explicitly). 

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.