Vertigo (1958) User Reviews

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

Hitchcock's most stunning achievement. A fascinating masterpiece which improves with each year and viewing.

[Infofreak · 15 January 2003]

I get a bit tongue-tied talking about Hitchcock's greatest movies because they are just so remarkable, so astonishing, so entertaining, so multi-levelled, that it's very difficult to put into words what makes them great. Hitchcock made some of the greatest movies ever made, and 'Vertigo', though by no means his most accessible film, is quite possibly his crowning achievement. It is without any doubt a masterpiece, and I cannot fault it in any way. Every time I watch it I am knocked out, and every time I see something new, some nuance or moment that I appreciate more than I did the previous viewing. Jimmy Stewart, one of the most popular movie star in Hollywood history, gives a remarkable performance throughout, one of the best in his career. Stewart had worked with Hitchcock before, and had always been superb, especially in the much copied suspense classic 'Rear Window' a few years prior to this, but he plays against type in 'Vertigo' and is jaw-droppingly good. It's difficult to remember now that 'Vertigo' is regarded as a movie milestone, that it received many bad reviews when it was originally released, and was a relative failure for Hitchcock. A lot of this had to do with Stewart's intense performance I think, and also the difficult subject matter. 'Vertigo' is essentially a tale of sexual obsession, something most people were probably not expecting at the time! Almost as good as Stewart is Kim Novak ('The Man With The Golden Arm') in a role that she will always be remembered for. 'Vertigo' is a virtuoso piece from Hitchcock, and a movie that will no doubt continue to inspire other film makers over the years to come. However the most important thing about it is that it is still wonderful viewing, and a movie experience that you will never forget. In my mind it is one of the three of four greatest American movies. Simply astonishing.

Surreal masterpiece

[Lord_Borrington · 9/10 · 1 August 2017]

Not very popular with critics or audiences when it first came out, probably not what they were expecting form the master director. Certainly a very different movie not in the usual Hitchcock formula. The movie probably needs more than one viewing. I can understand why some people don't like it much, but if you can get into the mood and atmosphere it's a surreal masterpiece. The movie is really about creating a surreal dreamlike world to enter. Set in San Francisco in 1958 it is like nothing before or since. Unforgettable and mesmerizing it is full of great locations, strange characters and stories. We go on a strange uneasy journey with Jimmy Stewart where there is no return and end up somewhere between sanity and insanity. Everything about this movie goes together to create another world which you feel like you have entered, the music, the 1950s grainy film, the dull colours, the incredibly shot locations, the changing light. It is certainly a strange movie hard to put into a box. It is from another time. Amazing. Like a dream... A classic film from the golden age of Hollywood. A Hollywood which doesn't exist anymore. There is just something about this movie, which you can't put your finger on. It's full of secrets.

Among the very best.

[dbdumonteil · 10/10 · 12 August 2001]

In Boileau-Narcejac's French novel "D'Entre les Morts"= from among the Dead"),the revelation only comes in the last pages,but Hitchcock lets the cat out of the bag long before the end. Boileau-Narcejac's novel is a pure detective story,but the Master wanted more:the movie already outdistances the book in a first part visually wonderful,with memorable scenes,wrapped in mystery ,such as the one with the sequoia,symbol of immortality or the one down by the sea,to rival with the best romantic movies of all time.In the second part,Hitchcock explains in the Truffaut's book,we know but Scottie( James Stewart) does not .And he tries to recreate a dead woman,to transform Judy into Madeleine.This folie à deux ends where the first tragedy occurred ,which gives the movie a strength that the book had not.Read it and you'll realize how its end ,speaking in terms of cinema,had to be modified for the screen.That's Hitchcock's genius.

When Boileau/Narcejac learned that Hitchcock wanted to transfer "Celle Qui N'Etait PLus " (=les Diaboliques" )to the screen,they immediately wrote "D'Entre les Morts " on the same pattern for Hitchcock to direct.

Favorite Hitchcock and likely one of the most challenging, harrowing great films ever

[Quinoa1984 · 10/10 · 13 February 2000]

Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo is probably his most discussed film, and I believe that since it is so controversial- and yet living up to such hype by having a level of mystery, daring and true human interest that is open to interpretation- it gets better with every passing year. It deserves more credit than it gets (like most of Hitchcock's films) and though it is well credited with it's intrigue, I think that Psycho (not that it is a bad film) gets more credit than this film should get. There are at least a few reasons for this, arguably of course. One, the acting is spectacular including James Stewart in one of his very best turns as the weary, emotionally perplexed and obsessed cop with a slight fear of heights and a 'thing' for a certain 'dead' woman. Hitchcock's leading lady here Kim Novak, is equally interesting and ambiguous as the leading lady (or ladies).

Two, the atmosphere Hicthcock invokes in this film is just right for the psychological tailspin that Stewart gets into, with the usage of lighting, real San Fransisco locations, and particularly the color green all to perfect, eerie effect. And three, there's Bernard Herrmann's score, on par with the Psycho score though maybe even better as a straight piece of classical music in the guise of tense, haunting movie music. It's also the kind of picture that is a MUST if you've already seen it, or even if not, and it comes around town on the big screen as all the images and dark scenes come into great view. Not one of the more outright 'fun' Hitchcock films, with the few chuckles plain comic relief, and maybe his best serious work. A++

A thriller of undeniable complexity, and impeccably acted and directed-Hitchcock's masterpiece!

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 24 November 2009]

I am a massive Hitchcock fan; this great director ain't called the Master of Suspense for nothing. Anyway, Vertigo is one of the truly great Hitchcocks. It is a thriller of undeniable complexity not only in plot but also in characterisation. It is implausible too i give you that. I will admit the first time I saw this, I didn't understand this, then again this is the sort of film that you need to see more than once. In all departments, this movie is a masterpiece and my all time favourite Hitchcock. For those who say this is the worst movie ever, you would beg to differ if you saw genuine crapfests like Disaster Movie, Home Alone 4, NeverEnding Story 3 and Superbabies:Baby Geniuses 2. They are a trillion times worse than this without a shadow of a doubt.

What makes this movie great? When I re watched this, I got goosebumps. It is quite chilling, suspenseful and extremely haunting. The complex plot tells of a retired cop with a terror of heights who is hired by Gavin Elster to follow his suicidal wife. In the end, he falls in love with her but can't stop her falling to her death. Months later he sees a woman bearing strong resemblance to her, and is drawn into a web of deceit and obsession. There are so many strong moments here, especially Scotty following Madeline up the tower only to witness her falling to her death, but also of the San Francissco locations giving a dreamlike quality to an already dark and complex movie. The screenplay is sophisticated and sharp as well. And I have to mention Bernard Hermann's score, it was phenomenal, along with Miklos Rosza's score for Spellbound and Hermann's for Psycho this is the most memorable score in any Hitchcock film, and is guaranteed to have your hairs standing up on the back of your necks.

The direction from Hitchcock is simply masterly. The cinematography isn't dated at all. It is stylish and full of contrasts of dark and bright colours, and is also very brooding and intense. I had very little problem with the film's pace and length; in fact let me rephrase that I had no problem with it. I felt actually that Torn Curtain had a much slower pace, and for me that film while good is one of my least favourite Hitchcock movies. The acting I thought was exceptional. Kim Novak starts off a little wooden, but she is certainly very beautiful and enigmatic. In the duel role of the suicidal wife and the woman bearing resemblance to her, she does an in general excellent job, considering both are extremely demanding roles. About James Stewart, whether he was a racist I don't know, but simply I don't care. Whether you are racist or not, it shouldn't matter when it comes to acting and films. What matters is that Stewart was a great actor who rarely gave a bad performance. In this film, he gives one of his best performances, shattering his Mister-Nice-Guy persona with a dark, brooding and truly complex characterisation. Barbara Bel Geddes also gives a terrific performance as Midge.

All in all, a superb film, that deserves recognition as one of Hitchcock's best films. Seriously, it is one of the most effective depictions of romantic fatalism in all of cinema. An unforgettable masterpiece, 10/10 Bethany Cox

The Dizzy Heights of Excellence

[rbrb · 10/10 · 29 April 2004]

Retired detective, who is scared of heights, is hired to follow another mans wife and there follows intrigue, mystery and suspense. A super melodrama! The acting,directing, sets, costumes, script, music, etc are all excellent. And near the start of the film there is one brilliant 10 minute period when there is no dialogue but the action is controlled only by the music. A sensational analysis of the movie is by Roger Ebert: see external reviews. This picture is worthy of maximum marks.

Greatly overrated, definitely not Hitchcock's masterpiece

[mts43 · 7/10 · 15 September 2021]

The film was a failure with both critics and audiences when it opened, and I think they were still correct -- I have never understood how it eventually became considered a "masterpiece". The plot is just too convoluted and unbelievable. Novak's Judy Barton portrayal is grotesque. But most of all, the pace of the film is much too slow, as if it was necessary to fill two hours of screen time, and frequently boring. The various innovative camera techniques are interesting, and the best thing of all about the film is the striking cinematography of 1957 San Francisco and the Bay Area.