MovieChat Forums > Rear Window (1954) Discussion > Why doesn't ANYONE ever notice Jeff star...

Why doesn't ANYONE ever notice Jeff staring out at them?

posted 11 years ago by PretoriaDZ
15 replies | jump to latest

It's only at the end of the movie that the murderer looks and sees Stewart's character at the window. I don't know about other people but whenever I leave my curtains open, I notice if people are looking in at me.

Also, don't they have any kind of insects in that neighborhood, especially in the summertime? Nobody has any screens on their windows. You'd have flies in the kitchen during the day and mosquitoes at night if you had no screens.

[–] kausix777 11 years ago

I thought the same thing. how come he was not seen by someone?

On the insects, I guess that's how it was in the period of the film.

[–] tisket 10 years ago

I think most of the time he had the lights off and he was stationary due to being in the wheelchair. Back then it was more common for people to look out of windows and watch what was going on in their neighborhood because many didn't watch t.v. like we do today or use electronics like we do today. It is more of a city thing to look out the window and see what is going on with your neighbors. I would also venture to guess that people were more active with their lives back then so they probably didn't notice and Jeff would have been as well if he were not confined to the wheelchair and extremely bored. He didn't have much else to do while his leg was broken...the neighbors were entertainment during his healing. Otherwise, he seemed to be extremely active with work and his travels; he probably would not have noticed his neighbors.

[–] Doghouse-6 10 years ago

One of the points Hitchcock and screenwriter Hayes were making about that modern urban setting was the way in which each of the neighbors was wrapped up in their own lives and problems. That point is given voice by the woman with the dog when she shouts out into the courtyard after her pet's been killed:

"You don't know the meaning of the word 'neighbors.' Neighbors like each other, speak to each other, care if anybody lives or dies! But none of you do!"

And Jeff, as the only one with nothing to do but watch the rest of them, wouldn't be noticed as "staring out at them" unless they were doing the same to him. The most he'd have gotten would be a momentary glance and, from their point of view, he'd be just one figure among others in a sea of windows who happened to be facing in their direction at the moment they noticed him.

Remember also that Thorwald was the only one he was watching through binoculars - and later his long lens - and therefore getting a close look at, and if any of the others happened to catch a glimpse of Jeff while he was using them, it might not be apparent from their distance. And even if it was, it might not have registered, because another point made was that Jeff had spent some of those weeks he was confined taking photos out his window (of the garden, of "leg art" and whatnot). So they might simply have thought, "Oh, it's that guy with the camera again."

So to the OP's question, the idea that none of them would give him any particular notice doesn't strike me as problematic.

Poe! You are...avenged!

[–] silvercometred1 9 years ago

Two things I always wondered about:

1. Jeff's a professional photographer - his camera is an SRL that capable of shooting in available light (no flash). Jeff didn't see the murder but he would have took pictures of the murder's late night comings and goings. Photographers love shooting pics.

2. The neighbors that live to the left and right of Jeff, on Jeff's side of the building - they have the same view that Jeff does - wouldn't they noticed something?

[–] Doghouse-6 9 years ago

To your points:

1) This may indeed seem a weakness in the script's character development; once Jeff's suspicions were aroused, he might very well be expected to begin snapping photos of Thorwald's activities to gather "evidence." But the script gets around this with Doyle's acceptance of Jeff's word for having seen everything he's described, so any proof of those events becomes unnecessary. Doyle believes Jeff saw what he says he saw, but simply doesn't subscribe to his interpretation of what those events mean, so any photographic evidence of them would do nothing to change that.

2) The only neighbors we see who have a view of Thorwald's apartment similar to Jeff's are the honeymooners, who never raise their window shades, and the songwriter, who is shown to be preoccupied with his creative block, his friends and, sometimes, his drinking. All the other neighbors we "meet" - the sculptress, "Miss Torso," "Miss Lonelyhearts" and the couple with the dog - live on the same side of the courtyard as Thorwald, and have no view of his apartment from theirs. And Jeff, of course, is the only one on his side of it who, immobilized, has nothing to do day and night but look out his window.

Poe! You are...avenged!

[–] PretoriaDZ 9 years ago

If Jeff can see Thorwald's apartment, then why wouldn't Thorwald be able to see Jeff's? Line of sight goes both ways. And one of the few times we kind of get a view of the outline of Jeff's windows, when Tom the detective is standing next to them, the windows look very big and open. If Jeff kept his lights off, perhaps they wouldn't see him but with any kind of light I don't see how they could help but see that whoever has that apartment could see into theirs (Thorwald looks directly at Jeff's apartment and sees Jeff when Lisa calls for Jeff's help as Thorwald catches her in his apartment.)

This positively infantile preoccupation with bosoms!Terry-Thomas about US 1963.Hasnt changed much!

[–] Doghouse-6 9 years ago

If Jeff can see Thorwald's apartment, then why wouldn't Thorwald be able to see Jeff's? Line of sight goes both ways.

Of course it does; Thorwald can indeed see into Jeff's apartment when he bothers to look. The question I answered above had to do with neighbor's on Jeff's side of the courtyard.

Among those, the only ones we ever see are the newlyweds and the songwriter, because they're the only ones Jeff sees, which was Hitchcock's way of visually maintaining the narrative's point of view.

Those "very big and open" windows of Jeff's were entirely intentional, evoking the screen in a theater, upon which the "movie" that Jeff sees plays out. Hayes' script even takes the trouble to allude to that metaphor when, lowering the shades, Lisa "brings down the curtain" ("Show's over for tonight") and - tantalizing Jeff with the negligee in her overnight case - announces, "Preview of coming attractions."

Poe! You are...avenged!

[–] liscarkat (19395) a month ago

It's SLR (single-lens reflex), which has nothing to do with the camera's ability to be used in low light. That ability is a function of the aperture, shutter speed, and the ASA speed (light sensitivity) of the film.

[–] TwoThousandOneMark 8 years ago

As the film & others have said in so many words, it really was only confined Jeff who was ever bored enough to notice.
Keep in mind Hitch paints him as a pro photographer with a keen eye always on the look out, & he's stuck in a wheelchair.

Besides, he wasn't constantly looking out & we're too assume others couldn't see him during night time while he could see into their lit worlds from his darkened.

...my essential 50 http://www.imdb.com/list/ls056413299/

[–] einstein (2611) 5 years ago

its the only plothole for me too does not make sense, still a good movie

[–] liscarkat (19395) 4 years ago

If you're in your house or apartment at night with your lights off and the people in the house or apartment across from you have their lights on, they cannot see you inside your place. Whenever Jeff was observing his neighbors, he had his lights off, and theirs were on.

[–] Techto (1388) a year ago

Jeff also made a point, several times, of drawing back from the window and into the shadow of his room so as not to be observed in direct sunlight. Only if Thorwald had looked carefully into his room would Jeff have been visible.

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

Having recently broken my leg and spent weeks inside my apartment dealing with the "no weight bearing" thing, my question is:

Why the hell isn't Jeff getting up and going out on crutches by that point?

[–] doug65oh (205) 3 years ago

Preoccupation would be the simplest answer I would think.

[–] doug65oh (205) 3 years ago

Honestly, if you can find the screenplay by John Michael Hayes (which is available in pdf format at http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/rearwindow.pdf) your question is more or less answered only a few pages in. Think of it like this: When you live in a sardine can, you tend to completely ignore everything your neighbors are doing most of the time. Jeffries can't do that here because of his broken leg. In a very odd way it's simple courtesy.