Vertigo

Film Studies

Pascal DiBetta

Film: Vertigo

Disclaimer

After today's discussion, I have gone back and changed several things.

I have the issue of separating the artist from the art. I will give an example of Louis C.K., an artist who has now been singled out by society for his sexual misconduct. C.k. had a movie coming out a week after the allegations began to spread. The disturbing thing about the film is that it seemed almost an outlet for Louis. Most of his comedy routines talked about how his messed up sexual preferences, in particular, jacking off. In his movie, I love you, daddy, he has a scene where a guy masturbates in front of someone else. When we show something, it becomes acceptable and glorified. That is why the Greeks never showed violence, merely should the effects that it had. And I think I should be more specific about that statement.When we show something in a story, we are explaining what will happen if you take that course of action that is displayed. Vertigo could be said to be a film about a film, yet I had a hard time seeing past it being an outlet for “self-expression.” If the girl at the end had pushed Scotty off the roof, by God, the film would have been fantastic. It would have been Hitchcock killing something which represented Masculine suppression. But it is, in the end, the Masculine suppression which wins. This means that audience has just watched a film which tells them that this is how the world works. A good movie teaches us a lesson, and I can say Vertigo has no substantive message in it. Yes, the plot is amazingly well crafted, and the viewer will have a different experience of the film in each viewing. Adding to what we talked about in Monday's class, I think what can't be overlooked is the brilliance of Hitchcock. Yet I think we live a day in age where we must re-interpret everything, from Euripides all the way to Hitchcock. It is the time that the old structures be thrown out and new ones put in place. Just because a film is excellent to doesn't mean that we must keep it in the Canon. I honestly believe this movie is one of those in Canon that must go.

The world which Hitchcock creates is dull and utterly hopeless. The saturation on almost all of the film is bland and gives a feeling of restriction. I think it is interesting that Hitchcock chose to use color. What this does it lets the reality of life seep further into the psyche. By adding another dimension, the restriction becomes greater.To compare it to traditional folklore and fairytales, it has the setting and feeling of the grim stories. Dark and dingy and hopeless. The idea of hopelessness is a fascinating concept. The idea that there is nothing but us beyond us. That is what desperation is, isn't it? A hopeless situation is one where things stay the same, where you are left with nothing. But I must say that is a somewhat subjective statement. The film does take on the American Idea of hopelessness. The one you love dies and you have been living under a lie which dictated your life (The bases of Libertarianism). Yet let's actually look at what Scotties got. He is healthy, he most likely has family and has a women who, if he really tried, would love him again (That is Midge by the way). I met a man in Guatemala, his family had passed away due to sickness. So he and his brother where the only ones left. Yet unfortunately, a year before I got the chance to meet him, his brother had been swimming in a lake and while diving off the cliff had hit his head. He died on the stop, sinking to the bottom of the lake. His job was and most likely still building brick walls, where he must go collect the rocks by hand and then work with acidic materials to make walls that will only last 5 years. In my opinion that is a tragedy, not some white rich guy who loses “everything he has” in first world country. I remembered standing on the cliff in Guatemala looking over San Marcos, one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen. I whispered to the man next to me, a local who had gone hiking with me. 

"My god, its Paradies."

"Yes, for you. For those who come to this third world country to do yoga retreats and tourist. For some, this place is a living hell." Said the man. It made me realize that hell and hopelessness do not always come on rain days, it can happen in a place that could be called heaven on earth.

As stated before, the disaster of the movie is the mentality which is represented by the White man. This idea of Masculinity, and having to be manly enough, the tragedy of Hitchcock himself.

The film is a tragedy and perhaps the reason that I had such a robust repulsive reaction to it. To me, it seems that there are two tragedies. First of there is the tragedy of the story and there is the tragedy of the man behind the story. If we do assume what we have heard of Hitchcock's sexual abuse is true, then it is sad. Yes, I think the alternative ending sucks since it takes away from something much more important, drawing the intention away from what is actually going on. Scotty always seems to be violating peoples space. Midge never comes and disturbs Scotty, yet Scotty is always coming into her space. At the end of the alternitive ending, we have Scotty raming back into her life, even though no one wants him.