When first released in 1958, Vertigo was not a success. It’s only in recent years that critics and audiences alike have come to recognize its genius as a psychology study of obsession, centered around Scotty (Jimmy Stewart), a detective who retires after witnessing another cop fall to his death in a rooftop chase. The incident has left him with severe psychological trauma and a bad case of vertigo, which makes him incapable of standing heights.
An old friend calls upon his detective skills and asks him to investigate the mysterious actions of his wife, Madeline – while convinced she is not having an affair, he is concerned about her state of mind and wonders if the spirit of a dead woman may be possessing her. Scotty is a skeptical observer to these events, but gets sucked into them when he falls in love with Madeline and becomes determined to save her from her delusions. After she leaps to her death from the top of a bell tower – an incident he is powerless to prevent due to his vertigo – he spirals into a prolonged depression that only ends when he sees a woman on the street who looks exactly like Madeline. Obsessed with her, and unable to let go of his past, Scotty makes over “Judy” into an exact replica of his dead love. (If you have no interest in having the twist spoiled for you, don’t read on.) Along the way, he discovers it has been a nefarious plot by Madeline’s husband to get away with her murder (and her money). Judy has been Madeline all along.
The story is one of unrequited love – of three people incapable of being satisfied within a romantic relationship. Scotty seems unable to be intimate with a woman – held back by his obsession, his need to make her over into an ideal rather than to hold a living girl in his arms; his best friend Midge has been in love with him for many years, but he is always out of her reach; and Judy cannot be loved for herself – first used and abandoned by a man who made her over into his wife for murderous purposes, and then unable to get Scotty to love her for herself, rather than the illusion she wore for him as Madeline.
In many ways, this is the film most closely associated with Alfred Hitchcock’s own psychology; the ‘altering’ and ‘control’ Scotty shows toward Judy/Madeline parallels Hitchcock’s own obsessive desire to make over his leading ladies to fit a certain persona – a pattern he repeated again and again. Here, he wanted Grace Kelly and got Kim Novak instead, but he made her over as much as he could into Grace – giving her a lavender blonde hairstyle and dressing her in a lovely dove gray suit to accent her porcelain skin. He did much the same with Tippi Hedron, whom he cast in Marnie and The Birds; she did not like his attempts to control everything from her hairstyle to her wardrobe—including off the set. Hitchcock fantasized about all his leading ladies as sexual objects, but he kept them at a distance, as Scotty does – unable to hold them, caress them, he contented himself with making them fit a fantasy ideal in his own mind, that of the glamorous blonde who seems just out of reach (a mantra repeated in many of his films, from Doris Day to Tippi Hedron).
Of her part, Kim Novak said this:
“I identify so very completely with the role because it was exactly what Harry Cohn and what Hollywood was trying to do to me, which was to make me over into something I was not. In the beginning, they hire you because of the way you look, obviously, and yet they try to change your lips, your mouth, your hair, every aspect of the way you look and the way you talk and the way you dress. So it was constantly fighting to keep some aspect of yourself, trying to keep some of you. You feel: There must have been something in you that they liked, and yet they wanted to change you.”
The Spokesman Interview
The climactic confrontation between Scotty and Judy makes up the tense final ten minutes of the film, in which he forces her to tell him the truth as he drags them both up the staircase to the bell tower—finally able to overcome his vertigo and erase his demons. Even though Hitchcock blamed Stewart for the failure of this film, it wasn’t his fault – it’s a slow-moving psychological study with a shock ending that leaves everyone, once again, unable to receive love; Judy has fallen to her death, Scotty cannot have either the real girl or the one he made her over into, and Midge is still “second-best,” since he will forever be in love with a ghost. (The ending makes it unclear if Scotty will also jump to his death or not.)
Kim Novak is brilliant in the dual parts of the dreamy, glamorous Madeline, all glassy-eyed mystique and romanticism, and in the brass “showgirl” Judy, who struggles against her own self-preservation instinct, torn between her need to escape and her enormous desire to reconnect to a man she genuinely loves. Her mounting terror, as Judy slowly realizes Scotty intends to make her play her old role once again, is palpable; she tries desperately to steer him away from it, to let her be her “own self” (“Can’t you love me for myself?”), but gives in and surrenders, out of a desperate need to possess his love and approval. In her own way, she had greater power as her false self, as the cool, confident, and sophisticated Madeline, than she has as the love-hungry Judy. She defies him in her own small ways, but always gives in at the end of an argument—perhaps a hint of subtle wish-fulfillment on the part of the director, a desire to mold his leading ladies to suit his inner vision for their exact appearance.
Seeing this through modern eyes, Vertigo is disturbing not only for the psychosis of its leading characters, but also for the willingness of its heroine to be ‘made over’ into someone else, just to receive the love she craves. She is now free of her façade, but doesn’t get to live to see whether it has redeemed her in Scotty’s eyes. Love it or hate it, you will never forget it, and that’s what makes it so great.
Let me tell you, I have been on a journey of discovery here! 🙂 First, your “Sacred in the Secular” title caught my attention when Katie (I Am Charles Baker Harris) included you in the Favorite Fandoms tag. I made a mental note to check you out, but never followed through. Then, I was chatting with Eva-Joy (The Caffeinated Fangirl), and she mentioned she and Bob Wallace from White Christmas shared the same personality type, and I was like, “How in the world do you know what type Bob Wallace is???” She linked me to your Funky MBTI, which is one of the coolest sites I’ve ever seen! After falling down the rabbit hole a few times, I finally looked for a way to comment, which led me to Charity’s Place and then back to The Sacred in the Secular! I was so delighted to come full circle and realize it’s all you. 🙂
I love to geek out about personality typing. Of all the characters you profiled, Eloise from Last Night in Soho is the only one with my exact type (down to the stack). I’ve never seen the movie (and after reading about it now, I doubt I ever will – horror’s definitely not my thing), but based on your description of her – wow! What a freakishly accurate match! I feel a little vulnerable saying that you, because it’s like…You’ve pegged me – and now you know it. 😉
And in scrolling through your recent posts here, I stopped on this one because I recently watched Vertigo for the first time.
**Going into spoilers here.**
In regard to the ending, my first instinct was that, given how Scottie was standing, he may actually jump, too – and, as morbid as this sounds, I almost wished he did. But when chatting about it with Ari, The Classic Movie Muse (the host of this blogathon, who was the reason I watched this film in the first place), she asked if I thought Scottie was truly cured from his vertigo. In looking at the ending again, I decided yes – because he doesn’t turn away and nearly faint when he looks down at Judy, the way he did when looking at the cop and at Madeline. I wonder if that means he’s finally ready to really face his issues, which is an idea I like much better than him committing suicide. 🙂
The one who puzzles me is Midge. If SHE’S the one who broke off their engagement, why did she stick around? Do you think it was because she knew Scottie didn’t really love her, but she didn’t want to cut ties in case he had a change of heart? (And then, when she actually leaves – at a terrible time to do so, if you ask me – it’s because she finally decided he never would?)
**End of spoilers.**
Thanks to a childhood incident, I’ve had what I call Hitchcock-phobia for YEARS – and have only recently begun to venture out of it, largely thanks to The Classic Movie Muse. But I find that I don’t truly ENJOY his work (or what little I’ve seen so far), because something about it bothers my soul. It’s just so very dark, void of any true virtue or light at all. Even his humor seems to come from a totally bleak, “back comedy” place. And I can’t help but wonder: is this merely a “trauma response” on my part (which sounds terribly overdramatic, but may very well be true), or did he choose to work from such a dark place on purpose – as a means of satire or making a point about human nature, OR is this feeling I get a sign that he was actually a deeply disturbed individual? (If he was, he certainly wouldn’t be the only one in Hollywood – just one who sets my sensors off from some reason.) What do you think? The vibe that he and his work give off bothers me so much, it ultimately stops me from really delving in to him and forming my own conclusion, so I’m especially curious to get your viewpoint.
My blog is called The Classic Film Connection, and I’d love for you to check it out! 🙂 My post from back in October, titled “Psycho, Bernard Herrmann, and Me” – in which I reveal the source of my Hitchcock-phobia – may be of particular interest to you. I hope you can visit soon! 🙂
Hello, Jillian! It’s lovely to “meet” you! I always enjoy meeting and talking to new people, particularly those with quite a bit to say (since I can be verbose myself… ahem, #ENFP Problems).
Eloise is a great character and I was thrilled to find her, because she was such a good example of the withdrawn “dreamer” INFP 9w1. I think all NFPs are tempted to withdraw from the real world and live in a fantasy, or be overly attached to the past, but I loved getting to see an actual 9 being ‘absorbed’ into her dreams and then breaking free of them. The movie is pretty intense in the second half, so I wouldn’t blame you for not watching it. I’m sure another sp/sx 9w1 INFP will show up sooner or later!
On to Vertigo… I never thought about it, but you’re right, him being able to look at her dead body without fainting (that would kill him!) does mean he has ‘overcome’ his vertigo. There was an ending scene cut from the film in which he’s once again hanging out with his friend Midge, which informs the audience that he didn’t jump (the censors wanted it, apparently), but I think it works better to leave it on a cliffhanger and abruptly cut away. Regarding Midge… I think she still loves him and wants him, and hopes that maybe in time he will come to see her ‘in that way.’ There’s plenty of girls who ‘wait around’ a long time for a man, hoping he will finally ‘see’ them.
If you want my opinion from a typological perspective, I think as a 9w1 idealist, you might not like the very Enneagram 5 nature of Hitchcock’s material. He was a 5w6, and 5s can be bleak nihilistic folks, who see the bad in humanity and dive into bleak ideas. 5 is a theme in all of his stories—they are all about the outside world not being safe, about psychological manipulation, about voyeurism (watching people from a distance, making them over like in Vertigo, even being a “peeping Tom” with Rear Window), and about remaining distant from the subject – 5s like to observe life without participating, and that’s largely what he was doing through his art/films. Exploring dark themes without moral judgment, just general curiosity. I think he saw the world as a scary place and knew, because of what scared him, how to scare his audience. As a child, his father had a local police officer lock him up in a cell for an hour after he stole something from the local store, and he carried that ‘trauma’ and fear of the authorities with him all his life. Sort of like you, being exposed to Psycho too young!
Many 9w1s want a moral to the story or for the good guys to win; and while he does have his good guys win most of the time, there’s nothing especially virtuous or ‘light’ about his work—it’s all a little ‘mean’ and focuses a lot on implications, psychology, etc. Which is why I love it so much (the psychology of fear – as another head type, a 6 who loves ‘thinking’ about dark or psychological things), but I can see why it would be off-putting to a lot of 9s, who don’t like the discomfort it causes them while watching it. I enjoy being a little disturbed, but to a 9, that isn’t a pleasant experience!
I’m happy to talk more about this, or anything else you’d like to discuss!
It’s lovely to meet you, too! 🙂
Oooo…I’d love to see that cut scene, just out of curiosity. But I agree it would’ve diminished the film’s overall impact, so I’m glad it wasn’t included.
And I’m glad Midge just left, too. There are indeed plenty of girls who wait around, and in most movies, waiting like that gets you what you want. Judy Garland is and always has been my favorite actress of all time, but I saw too many movies at far too impressionable an age where she played the nice girl who waited for her guy to come around and he came running in the end (usually with a “how could I have been so blind?” line to boot!). I grew up thinking that sort of patience was always rewarded and wasted plenty of time on a particular guy myself. That’s actually rather progressive to have Midge finally say “Forget it!” and walk away for good – even though it’s a slightly different scenario, since she’s clearly the assigned “third wheel” / “other woman”. Regardless, she had her own life to lead! 🙂 Someone should’ve shown me Midge years ago to counteract all the Judy influence. 😉
I read your comment before I could respond (a terrible headache forced me away from screens for a bit), but I’m glad it worked out this way, because it’s given me a chance to really mull over your helpful insights. I’ve discussed the disconcerting vibe I get from Hitchcock’s films with Ari and someone else, and only now do I think I’ve figured it out and know what I’m really trying to say. (How 9 is THAT???)
You are 100% right in that I don’t enjoy discomfort. 😮 I’ve never liked watching people suffer on film (particularly physically). I’ve thought I may have super-powered empathy, but I bet it’s just that I don’t like feeling uncomfortable. (Which…darn. Super-powered empathy sounds better.) I particularly draw the line at “scary” or realistically graphic content – which is one reason I’m drawn to classic films, as they’re a little more removed from reality. (I’m sure even Hitchcock is tame by today’s standards.) But the truth is, I can feel just as, for lack of better word, “icky” WITHOUT the visual content, and in some cases, watching suffering doesn’t even affect me. That must mean I’m actually more sensitive to feeling disturbed – which goes back to being uncomfortable with feeling uncomfortable. However, two of my favorite movies are They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (which is the best film I’ve ever seen, and I highly recommend it since you like to think about dark, psychological things) and A Streetcar Named Desire, both of which have only complex, morally gray characters and most certainly do not have happy endings. Yet they don’t leave a disturbing impression on me.
I think the distinguishing factor here is what I perceive as “noble intent” (a totally subjective and possibly not at all accurate idea, of course). While both of these films are dark and even depressing, they feel like they’re trying to SAY something specific, rather than just observe (so, I don’t need an outright “the moral of the story is”, but I do value an implied statement of some kind), and they leave me thinking about higher ideals, rather than just trying to scare me, or disturb me, or be perverse. (In fact, discussing Vertigo and landing on what I feel it’s trying to say has helped me appreciate its story more and more.) Although, I must say, I’m not sure I’ve ever given much thought to “the psychology of fear”. That’s certainly an interesting concept – I’m just not sure I want to sit through scare tactics, manipulation, voyeurism, and perversity long enough to explore it. 😉 But this info definitely gives me a better understanding of Hitchcock’s perspective and outlook, which of course would influence his style and films (including statements, or lack thereof).
Thanks for giving me so much to think about! 🙂 It’s been very enlightening! ❤
Excellent article Charity! I love Kim Novak’s quote you included. Very revealing of what it was like in Hollywood at the time. Vertigo is a film I learned to appreciate more and more with time, Kim Novak’s performance included. It still think it’s a bit too cold for my own taste, but in a way I understand perfectly how it fits her character.
I suspect modern actresses are afforded more agency, but there’s still a lot of pressure to conform to what society considers to be desirable, beautiful, etc. And they put their bodies through a lot in the movies — not just acting for long hours, but also frying their hair by dying it back and forth. So it’s still a hard trade, largely with men in charge of it.
I didn’t like Vertigo my first time through, because it’s so morbid / unsettling, but it does sort of grow on you over time — assisted in part by Kim’s gorgeous performance. She’s very good at playing dual roles and making both women believable.
My all-time favorite movie, so it goes without saying that I enjoyed reading your review very much! As for Novak, she is absolutely brilliant. Even better after you know the twist — she nailed a difficult role(s).
Yes! These are awesome points. Looks like Vertigo went deeper than even Hitchcock intended.
I like what you said about how Kim Novak lets us feel Judy’s mounting terror as Scottie begins the transformation and yet she still shows her desperation and need for his love. Also that Judy had more control as her false self. I never thought of it that way, but it’s so true! Such complex emotions brilliantly acted by the leads in this film.
Thank you for contributing this thoughtful post to my blogathon, Charity!
A very telling quote from Kim Novak, about Hollywood seeing something in you & hiring you, then spending all these resources to change you. It would’ve been a fight to retain something of yourself.
I think she struggled with that a lot — in a way, being so alluring and glamorous probably made a lot of studio people want to shape her into someone else, but I think she did all right in standing her ground. Good for her.