Gavin was born in 1904. Scottie, 1908.Gavin may have been delayed by WW!(rumor is he served in the German Army, and was discharged for crimes against Humanity) So he and Scottie most likely attended college(back East?) sometime between
1925-30) Midge was born in 1922.Scotty's engagement to the 6 year old prodigy would enrage any sociopath. I'm glad she broke it off.
Interesting speculation mteahan. One of the problems with this film is trying to figure out who the main characters are really supposed to be. Scotty is described by MIdge as "the bright young lawyer who wanted to be chief of police...", but he seems anything but bright or energetic in the film. What age are they supposed to be in the film, and what years did Midge and Scotty go to college together, and what was her major (industrial design)? Why did she breakoff the engagement and why are they still even friends ? Why did Gavin Elster "...drop out of sight and go back east during the war.." (to evade the draft maybe) ? Why does he want to kill his wife when he has it made as the shipyard owner,and can have girlfriends like Judy Barton on the side, because "his wife lived in the country and rarely came to town". All mysteries left unresolved...thoughts anyone..?
RSGRE
Why does he want to kill his wife when he has it made as the shipyard owner,and can have girlfriends like Judy Barton on the side, because "his wife lived in the country and rarely came to town".
Presumably, Elster was sick of her sh*t in some way. Looks and money aren't enough to make a happy relationship, and some people want the money in their own name, not their spouse's.
And I don't think Elster actually hated Scotty, I think he saw him as a useful pawn. His fear of heights could be exploited to set up the murder scene, and so what if it drove him to a complete breakdown. Elster must have been a total sociopath, perfectly willing to destroy people to get what he wanted.
“Seventy-seven courses and a regicide, never a wedding like it!
@OP: Troll. Obviously the characters' birth years aren't the same as the actors'. And what's with your subject line?
shareThere was actually a time when audiences didn't need everything spelled out for them. They paid attention, they listened, they followed plots and were equipped with intelligence. Of course the movie goers in 1958 were well aware of the age difference between Stewart and Bel Geddes...but so what? The story tells us their characters went to college together and that's all we need to know. They are playing Scottie and Midge, not James and Barbara. Apparently, for the intellectually barren audience of today, that's impossible to grasp.
shareThe age screw-up in this film is distracting . . . it hurts the story . . .
shareI'm quite sure many men had their college careers either interrupted or postponed by serving in WWII. And back then, not everyone went to college directly after graduating from high school. I'm perfectly willing to believe Scottie bummed around for a coupla years, maybe even joined the SFPD. Then was drafted or enlisted, and another 4-5 years went by. Comes home, decides a college degree may help him rise on the force, and then meets Midge in school.
May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?
If I had mod points, and if there were mod points, I'd mod you up to the top!
Thanks for an insightful post. That is actually what 'movie' stands for, as opposed to 're-image reality'.
With that same misguided logic someone could ask if James Steward wasn't unfaithful to Grace Kelly from the Rear Window!?
I'll also add that the real Jimmy Stewart did serve in WWII. He was a bomber pilot. So he (as well as his character) is very believable as a WWII veteran. And yes, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that he didn't attend college until returning from the war and there he would meet someone younger like Midge.
shareI have no idea what you are talking about. Engagement??
share"Three whole weeks."
shareI have no idea.
shareThat's the problem with discussing this film with strangers. I'm sure many of us have seen the film many, many times. Others have probably revisited it three or four times. And no doubt there are a few single view-ers who drop by with the usual "SO OVERRRRATED" line.
But yes, according to their dialogue, Scottie and Midge were engaged for "three whole weeks" during their "good old college days". Maybe it's a generational thing, but I've never had a problem just accepting this and moving on.
I guess the "geekification" of popular culture has turned every viewer into a self-styled continuity expert. I know I'm watching a movie, that actors are playing characters, that Connery and Moore are playing the same character despite completely different approaches, etc., and depending on how much good will the film has generated up to a certain point, it's quite easy to ignore any problems that might pop up like the respective ages of these actors.
Well said. In addition, some people just see the "Macro" view of film, others the "Micro." But the more you see a movie, the more details you tend to notice. I recently saw West Side Story again and noticed new things. And people love to point out bloopers and mistakes. I tend to "Suspension of Disbelief." I love to enter a film and be swept away. If you study and analyze a film with serious intent, it can be enriching...... but Magic Busting, too.
shareThat's kinda ridiculous, if something in a film doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense, I'm not going to ignore it.
shareAs with anything in life, there are degrees to be considered. I mean, when Clint Eastwood and Charlie Sheen drive a car out of a top floor of a skyscraper moments before it explodes during The Rookie, then miraculously survive, that doesn't really "make sense" now does it?
Does it hurt my enjoyment of the film? No, because I accept the ridiculousness of the entire endeavour -- from Tom Skerritt's posh mullet to Raul Julia playing a German.
But what exactly doesn't make sense here?
That Jimmy Stewart is older than Barbara Bel Geddes, thus making their shared "college days" improbable? Seems like small beer to me.
I mean, there are obvious rear-projection and matte shots in the film, therefore it is a film, therefore I can't accept the film at all?
I mean, let's keep in mind that you didn't even remember that they were engaged at one point, so it's hard to point to that as being distracting insofar as it doesn't "make sense".
In other words, no one's asking you to ignore anything, but film as an art form and as an entertainment will always -- always -- require the viewer to make allowances for inconsistencies, improbabilities, limitations, etc. It's only recently that viewers have become pathologically obsessed with films being TRUE TO LIFE, despite the fact that storytelling has always required the suspension of disbelief.
That is not true, if one has to make allowances then the movie is not well done. Everything inside a movie needs to make sense, even if it is fantastical, then within its own universe, it has to make sense. And who is asking things be true to life? You surely haven't gone into the Prometheus board, one of the worst films ever done were nothing makes logical or cinematic sense, and you have people bending themselves backwards to try and justify the massive plotholes and inconsistencies in the film. A film like all art is a construction, it can't have any holes.
shareIt's art or....entertainment, not a machine. And I don't mind a little Swiss cheese in my movies. I guess I'm more right brain than left.
shareIt is both art and entertainment, but it's also a language and it can't be nonsensical. It's a visual language.
shareWithout specifics, this discussion ends up becoming an absolutist farce -- suspension of disbelief vs. complete and utter commitment to verisimilitude. Any truth that's worth a damn in this regard is, of course, going to be somewhere in the middle.
It's funny you'd mention Prometheus, a movie that I don't have much affection for at all -- but not because it doesn't make sense (although a case could be made...) but because it's an unsatisfying hodgepodge of clichés and character-wise I didn't believe a moment of it. But again, these are fundamental problems with the script, not a superficiality like the age problem here. (Which probably isn't even a problem -- it's not entirely impossible that Scottie attended college later in life, maybe after getting out of the service?)
Based on some of your other comments, it seems more like you recently saw Vertigo, didn't like it, and now want to prove to everyone else that it's not a great film. If so, good luck with that.
So, specifics -- what is "nonsensical" about the character of Scottie and the character of Midge sharing time in college?
I didn't say them being in collage was nonsensical, you did. Yes I recently saw it and technically it is spectacular but the story and the pace are seriously lacking.
shareMaybe Scottie went to college on the GI bill after serving in WWII which would explain his being much older than Midge.
shareVery common for that generation of men. (Also, Jimmy Stewart served in WWII himself). I never questioned the age discrepancy, I guess because Midge (and females in general in 1950's movies) appear older and more sophisticated than women in today's youth obsessed culture, where even middle aged adult women act like giddy teenagers. Ever watch Hoda and Kathy Lee? Or any woman on daytime TV in the U.S.
shareI think Midge broke off the engagement 'cause Scottie wouldn't stop bugging her about jacking up her eyebrows, putting her hair up, making it blonder, wearing a grey suit, losing the glasses...
shareI think Midge broke off the engagement 'cause Scottie wouldn't stop bugging her about jacking up her eyebrows, putting her hair up, making it blonder, wearing a grey suit, losing the glasses...
---
Ha. One in a series...
Presumably, Elster was sick of her sh*t in some way. Looks and money aren't enough to make a happy relationship, and some people want the money in their own name, not their spouse's.
---
Recall in the Hitchcock movie "Dial M for Murder," that husband Ray Milland was out to have his wife Grace Kelly murdered because he knew of her affair...and feared that she would divorce him and leave him with no money or hers...or at least far less than he had access now.
Hitchcock characters rather "repeat" across the movies, and Gavin Elster -- with very few scenes and no real discussion of his motivations by either Judy(in the letter she writes and throws away) or Scottie(in the tense climactic ascent to the belltower -- "What -- did he dump ya?") -- can be seen to "echo" Ray Milland in Dial M -- just as Milland echoes Farley Granger -- both are tennis pros, one current, one retired -- in Strangers on a Train.
---
And I don't think Elster actually hated Scotty, I think he saw him as a useful pawn. His fear of heights could be exploited to set up the murder scene, and so what if it drove him to a complete breakdown. Elster must have been a total sociopath, perfectly willing to destroy people to get what he wanted.
---
A total sociopath. And two films later, Hitchcock would give us a total psychopath. And IN Vertigo, in addition to Elster the sociopath, we have Scottie the borderline(non murderous) psychopath -- obsessed and trying to bring a dead woman back to life.
CONT
I call Gavin Elster "the villain who wasn't there." He's barely in the movie -- (1) the early scene where he gives Scottie the case; (2) a later scene where Scottie reports to him in a plush Man's Club; and (3)his final scene a the inquest -- where he is nothing but a supportive friend to Scottie ("That was pretty rough, Scottie -- we know who killed Madeline.") Elster leaves Vertigo as a "good guy"(though perhaps we suspect him of SOMETHING), by the time we find out how evil he is -- he's gone.
If Vertigo was a "standard thriller"(which it is not) Gavin Elster would be there in the bell tower for the climax, fighting Scottie, falling to HIS death, leaving Judy and Scottie to live "happily ever after" - with Judy perhaps in prison for awhile.
But Elster is gone -- "the villain who wasn't there." We are not even told if Scottie got word to the police to capture Elster --its possible Scottie jumps at the end and the secret ends there.
I can't see how Scottie and the police could tie Elster to his wife's death.
shareI can't see how Scottie and the police could tie Elster to his wife's death.
--
That's a very fair point. Gavin Elster and his plot are given such scant consideratrion in Vertigo(only three scenes for the man, played by a non-star actor) that I suppose Scottie actually being able to PROVE the crime would be difficult if one gives thought to it.
But let's try.
Scottie doesn't jump. He goes down the tower stairs, calls the police and starts things in motion. First he has to prove that he didn't PUSH Judy to her death -- the nun should testify on his behalf.
So we have a dead Judy -- and a dead REAL Madeleine in the cemetary(Scottie visited her grave.) Scottie will have to make his murder claim against Elster(who would have to be extradited from Europe, as is detailed in the "alternate ending" shot for Vertigo). A prosecution against Elster would begin. Much would have to be proved about Elster's connection to...Judy Barton. Scottie would testify based on JUDY's confession to SCOTTIE. (Which is hearsay of a sort.) The motive is provable -- Elster inherited all of Madeleine's wealth...
I'm not sure. I think your point is well taken. A prosecution COULD be launched against Gavin Elster, but in a court of law...he might just get away with it. Key: whether or not Judy's confession, as related by Scottie, is believed by the jury. But again, Elster just might get away with it.
I'll bet Elster thought of THAT, too...when he made his plot.
And imagine the lifelong pain of Scottie(already mentally ruined seven ways to Sunday) if Elster got away with it and remained free.
The necklace that matched the necklace in the museum painting would be on Judy's body, presumably a family heirloom from Elster's wife's family. Elster, of course, could deny any knowledge of such jewelry, could say Scottie must have given her that along with the rest of her makeover.
Elster's whole plan was totally bonkers. Scottie still nearly made it to the top of the tower at the time of the wife's murder. Wouldn't the police check the spot where the wife supposedly jumped? Maybe Elster and Judy went down to the chapel and pretended to pray for awhile. Imagine Judy in Scottie's apartment pretending to be in a trance and thinking "Oh crap! He's gonna actually undress me!" Wonder if she mentioned that to Elster?
Scottie should have just stuck with Midge!
Imagine a sequel where Scottie, realizing he couldn't prove anything, coming after Elster on his own...
Elster's whole plan was totally bonkers. Scottie still nearly made it to the top of the tower at the time of the wife's murder. Wouldn't the police check the spot where the wife supposedly jumped?
---
This has been a source of debate and discussion for decades. When the movie came out in 1958, the critic for Newsweek or Time(I can't remember which) wrote: "This is another Hitchcock and Bull tale in which the mystery isn't so much whodunnit as who cares?"
And as the years went on and a strong horde of critics starting pushing Vertigo as "the greatest movie Hitchocck ever made" and eventually "the greatest movie ever made"(Sight and Sound critics voted it that in 2012)..a lot of voices were foiled against that onslaught: But Gavin's plan is crazy!
Lovers of Vertigo almost seem to take its ridiculous premise as a thing of honor. The point -- perhaps correctly -- being made: the mystery plot DOESN'T MATTER. ''
Thus Vertigo isn't really ABOUT Gavin's murder plot. It is about how that murder plot "backfires emotionally" as Scottie falls in love with Madeleine, Judy falls in love with Scottie, and Scottie's breakdown morphs into an allegory about how "men put women on a pedestal" until they see the real woman. THAT's what Vertigo is REALLY about...and the failure of trying to "bring back the past or to bring back the dead."
But I think in this "Moviechat age" where plots ARE dissected for logic...Vertigo is sinking fast under that analysis. Gavin's plot is crazy.
CONT
But maybe Gavin's plan ISN'T crazy. Folks here are making a good case that Gavin could have gotten away with it even if Scottie accused him and the plot was good ENOUGH (Gavin was pretty sure Scottie couldn't get up those stairs, and it WAS hard, he WAS slowed down) and Hitchcock famously loved to leave details up to us to guess (So, did Gavin take his LIVE wife up there and manage to strangle her or break her neck just MINUTES before Judy ran up the stairs? Hitchcock lets us wonder.)
---
Scottie should have just stuck with Midge!
--
But that is something else that Vertigo is about: a man preferring "two in the bush to one in the hand." Midge is available and a woman...but rather more like a male buddy than a lover, more like a SISTER...or a MOTHER...to Scottie. There is no fire there, no passion.
When Madeleine comes along, there IS passion. Guys ..even graying old guys like Scottie, maybe ESPECIALLY graving old guys like Scottie ...sometimes try to "get with the impossible sexual dream" rather than settle for a sisterly pal.
Midge herself pushes this to the breaking point when she paints herself as Carlotta. She can't match the dream. "Its not funny, Midge," Scottie says with, frankly, way too much seriousness.
---
Imagine a sequel where Scottie, realizing he couldn't prove anything, coming after Elster on his own...
---
That might have been a sequel to see. As we have it..the bad guy gets away in Vertigo. The bad guys did NOT get away in Hitchcock's next two movies(North by Northwest and Psycho.) They were bigger hits than Vertigo.