Clunky, that was the impression I was left with after seeing Vertigo again after 40 years. Yes, production then was horse-and-buggy against today's space
probe, but many other films from that period and before stand up better in that respect. Wordy was another impression. About half way through, it began to feel like a novel adaptation (which in a sense it was) with all the flaws of that technique -- mainly, intellect gets priority over gut. Tame, too. Where did Hitchcock get his reputation for being 'a master of terror and suspense'? Vertigo is certainly mysterious and intriguing, but scarcely
terrifying. And any suspense is brusquely diluted by those repetitive scenes of James Stewart behind the wheel of a car with the back-projection, bad as it is, stealing every one of those scenes. Stiff? What poor acting! The blame may be largely Hitchcock's, with his
notorious disdain for the craft, but also to blame are the casting director (if there was one) and certainly Stewart and an embarrassingly inept Kim Novak.
Gosh, what a let-down. And this is Hitchcock's 'masterpiece'?
probe, but many other films from that period and before stand up better in that respect. Wordy was another impression. About half way through, it began to feel like a novel adaptation (which in a sense it was) with all the flaws of that technique -- mainly, intellect gets priority over gut. Tame, too. Where did Hitchcock get his reputation for being 'a master of terror and suspense'? Vertigo is certainly mysterious and intriguing, but scarcely
terrifying. And any suspense is brusquely diluted by those repetitive scenes of James Stewart behind the wheel of a car with the back-projection, bad as it is, stealing every one of those scenes. Stiff? What poor acting! The blame may be largely Hitchcock's, with his
notorious disdain for the craft, but also to blame are the casting director (if there was one) and certainly Stewart and an embarrassingly inept Kim Novak.
Gosh, what a let-down. And this is Hitchcock's 'masterpiece'?