The Plot Holes of Vertigo (and why they don't matter)

[@liteflightify]

People tend to confuse “plotholes” with something that’s far-fetched, has logic gaps or is purposely nonsensical.

[@GrandArchPriestOfTheAlgorithm]

Yeah, Jeremies have a bad habit of confusing Plot Convince with Plot Hole.

[@Mondomeyer]

Like real life.

[@poetcomic1]

My life is full of plotholes and far fetched coincidences and I'm just an ordinary guy.

[@phillytheflyerable]

Purposely nonsensical is better????

[@jayme3181]

@@poetcomic1 Your life can't be full of plot holes. A plot hole can't happen, being a logic error.

[@nateds7326]

"what if Scottie didn't take the case" My headcannon is that Galvin had a lineup of like 30 old friends in the police force with newly developed physical conditions, and he's actually had 7 interviews that day and Scottie was the first guy to accept.

[@EyebrowCinema]

This is now my headcannon too.

[@jeffzest8393]

Scottie was an old friend.

[@brianjohnson4082]

Omg and all the conditions are different, we could have had a movie called irritable bawl syndrome.

[@jasonbaylor9865]

​@@brianjohnson4082 He couldn't ascend the bell tower because he desperately had to shit

[@Fanfanbalibar]

"what if Scottie didn'nt take the case"? Then there wouldn't have been any Sir Alfred"s masterpiece!!!!!!!!!!! What if my mother was a man?????

[@harpgal9950]

I still remember my first viewing of this great film. I was mesmerized, drawn in so deeply that everything else around me stopped. And that's what a great film does. One does not stop to think about plot absurdities; it's the storytelling, the acting, the music, costumes, photography, etc. that work together to create an intense feeling. Vertigo will always be my #1 for doing just that.

[@Fanfanbalibar]

It couldn't be better said !

[@RZ393]

Yes, you nailed it.

[@TrixiLovesYou]

The greatest sin is that this movie never got the sequel "Vertigo 2: Scotty's Revenge" where Scotty hunts down Elster in Europe, overcomes his vertigo and throws Elster from the roof of a bell tower while roaring: "This is for Madeleine. Bon voyage, motherfucker." And, of course, Elster goes up in an explosion.

[@xBINARYGODx]

LUL

[@Mondomeyer]

You just gave me an idea for a screenplay. (By that, I mean I'm stealing your idea).

[@RettaTheRipper]

I'd pay good money to see that action haha

[@poetcomic1]

The original script had a horrible happy ending in Switzerland with Elster caught. Thank GOD Hitch said no.

[@clumsydad7158]

haha, that is a great back pocket one to do someday, luv it ! sylvester stallone as 90 yr old scotty, hahahaha

[@margomckaine78]

Judy wasn't "stupid" putting on that necklace. She wanted Scottie to know. She wrote him a letter initially, remember? But she tore it up. Yet, subconsciously she still wanted him to know. She didn't want any more deception. Subconsciously she put on that necklace, knowing he would recognize it. And by that time, she'd still be looking like Madeline and Scottie would still be in love with her and she could smooth it all over. It's just that Scottie didn't respond to the necklace the way she needed him to.

[@exnonred]

​@@christianjimbomb8204Bro, what are u on about? U ruined my immersion smh

[@raymeedc]

~ Conjecture ~

[@forasgarddd]

she wrote a letter to reveal a twist to the audience, that’s just how it felt

[@alannothnagle]

Judy‘s mistake was not realizing that Scottie was a dedicated cop and lawyer whose instincts commanded that he pursue and solve the case. Their romance was no match for his ethical foundation.

[@ZaryasBestFriend]

But the film doesn't ultimately take this stance. "You shouldn't keep souvenirs of a killing" is a rejection of your interpretation. The movie clarifies that she wants Scottie to love her for her, so she's willing to do everything to get him to love her. After she tears up the letter, there is no indication that she wants him to know the truth. She is uncomfortable morphing back into Madeline at every step of the way. I don't know how you can argue a character's subjective thoughts/feelings if they're NOT directly shown/told to us. In words and action, Madelyn is uncomfortable with the process. She had torn up the letter, signifying she was opting to live in guilt and hide this crime. There is no indication she 'wants' Scottie to find the truth--I mean, just look at the level of resistance and conflict in the ascent up the tower. Scottie is bringing her to face her guilt and truth, and she's so haunted by it so much that it claims her life. I don't think she's stupid, but she's using her 'love' for Scottie to blind him from the truth. She continues to play dress up because she hopes it will be enough to help him move on and love him for her. She states her desire to be loved "for her" several times. She wants all of the good parts of the past with Scottie while being able to ignore the real consequences of her crime.

[@BonnerDoemling]

I’ll give you an example of asking yourself what’s gained by a plot hole, logic gap, etc.: In “Toy Story,” Buzz lets Andy treat him like a toy even though he doesn’t know he is one. But he also thinks he’s an intergalactic space traveler. When he sees the other toys submitting to Andy he probably saw that as a safety measure made by the planet’s inhabitants up against the species of giants. So it kind of adds to the character: Buzz is not only someone who thinks like a space ranger, but also an adaptable one

[@R0CKDRIG0]

But none of that explanation is in the movie, in the movie it's just a plot hole. It would have been nice though to have a scene like what you are describing where the toys have to trick him.

[@browngreen933]

The "plot holes" are there because Scotty dreamed the whole thing before falling to death at the beginning of the movie. Madeleine was a dream of his mother.

[@grahamh.4230]

I'm really not sure how you could possibly have come to the conclusion that "Elster" is pronounced "Elstree."

[@yogeshraut4928]

Oh good, I'm not the only one who noticed

[@Dresdenflower]

@@yogeshraut4928same! I was yelling ‘Elster’ at my phone throughout the video.

[@hebneh]

I always thought that the old woman claiming that Madeleine had never come into the hotel was because she’d been paid to say that as part of the overall murder plot. I didn’t think that was a plot hole although it did seem odd that it was never explained.

[@jeff__w]

It hardly matters but to the extent the audience _might_ wonder about it (I did), Hitchcock _could_ have covered that explanatory gap with a simple throwaway line, no matter how farfetched, e.g., “I slipped past the hotel clerk” or “Elster paid the hotel clerk to feign ignorance”-it almost doesn’t matter _what_ the explanation is, just that there _is_ one.* The video is absolutely right that, in the scheme of things, with _Vertigo_ being the film it is, the explanatory gap itself doesn’t matter but I’d concede that, even if that’s true, it’s the type of thing that Hitchcock would have been better off covering. *Hitchcock did that in _Notorious_ with these lines: *DR. JULIO BARBOSA:* I simply question why we don't find some way of taking them into custody. *CAPTAIN PAUL PRESCOTT:* It'd do no good. Even if we arrested their leader Alexander Sebastian, tomorrow another Farben man takes his place and their work goes on. *BARBOSA:* Yes, you're right. I see, Captain Prescott, your method is the best way.

[@leehung4429]

IMHO Hitchcock threw in a "red herring" to make sure we never understand the movie 100%

[@Terry-te1ij]

Ellen Corby played the innkeeper. Old, you say? How old was Ellen Corby in 1957?

[@hebneh]

@@Terry-te1ij Regardless of how old she was in real life when the film was made, she has grey / white hair in her scene, so she is in fact playing an "old woman", as I wrote.

[@Terry-te1ij]

@@hebneh Woman?

[@stephanusb6692]

Although Vertigo is in fact my favorite movie, I've always thought that statements like "the greatest film ever made" were just silly. This is art, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. This is entertainment, and enjoyment is an extremely subjective thing. Different aspects of film are more important to one person than to another. Some people really do prefer logical cohesiveness, and that's OK. That said, it really is nice to see Vertigo finally getting its rightful appreciation, after so many years of neglect. It has everything in it that I personally like: enchanting beauty, mystery, magic. The plot is just a reason for all this to happen.

[@lannypanlock]

Absolutely- I’ve yet to see anyone present adequate criteria for objective aesthetic greatness.

[@Nocturnalux]

Agree. My favorite Kurosawa Akira movie is Dreams, a movie that by definition eschews plot as such, clinging closer to imagery, tones- one per vignette- all invoking particular emotions, from dreamy joy to nightmarish horror. But I won’t claim it is necessarily better than the very realistic and heartrending Ikiru. If all movies were like Dreams, much would be lost. Diversity is the spice of life and of fiction as well: which is why this idea of “the” best movie is flawed by definition.

[@orkanner2183]

if so, then you're against calling any movie "the greatest'' cause plots don't truely matter, emotion and characters do (it's this way for any story-based art form) and Vertigo has some of the most stunning cinematography and editing i've ever seen.

[@clumsydad7158]

i think you nailed it mentioning art, beauty, and eyes ... film thankfully is a visual media, and in that greatness is assessed under different criteria - one of the main ones being the criteria of illusion ... peace/ty

[@curiositytax9360]

The visuals are doing a lot of the heavy lifting story wise, like Citizen Kane and the snowglobe. Here, Scotty’s interior is reflecting outwards into the world and we are solely in his pov and his mind is affecting everything we are seeing. It’s close to silent cinema. So that’s why it’s probably considered one of the best. Don’t Look Now is a similar film like that, which comes to mind.

[@johnryskamp2943]

Remember it 's a whodunit. What is the earliest point in the film you can tell that the woman is not Madeleine, and why? That's the real question. Like in Psycho: when is the earliest point you can say that Mrs. Bates is dead?

[@SnapperChannel]

James Stewart throughout the movie: STRANGE THINGS ARE HAPPENING TO ME!! Another fantastic video Dan

[@EyebrowCinema]

Silly things like that are my favourite parts of editing.

[@mst3kharris]

To me, Vertigo is about the viewer growing to realize, and then empathize with, Judy’s pain. Becoming Madeleine again for Scottie hurts her so much, and he doesn’t even appreciate her for it. It’s almost more of a tragedy than a thriller.

[@jeff__w]

I’m _really_ glad you made this video essay. Pointing out the “plot holes” in a movie like _Vertigo_ is for me almost like a cinematic enactment of the Dunning Kruger effect: the person doing it is trying to show how smart he or she is while missing the point entirely. You can’t watch _Vertigo_ and not realize that Gavin Elster’s plot to kill his wife is so obviously absurd that Hitchcock, who was no idiot, plainly saw it as merely a vehicle, a MacGuffin in his words, on which to hang a film that explored what Hitchcock _really_ wanted to explore: insecurity and phobia, guilt and romantic obsession. There’s an unreal quality to the film-for example, in the cemetery at Mission Dolores, at Muir Woods, in the green glow as Judy emerges from the hotel bathroom as Madeleine-that seems to me to hint at Scotty’s state of mind. It’s almost as if, in some other alternative version of the film, with Madeleine and Judy being two very similar-looking but different people, the murder plot could have been an insane _delusion_ that Scotty comes up with-so it doesn’t really feel out of place in this one. I seem to recall one film critic (perhaps Roger Ebert?) who said something like _“Vertigo_ was the closest Hitchcock ever came to filming a dream” and, if that’s the case, it’s almost beside the point to go on about what appears to be nonsensical in a dream. The film is operating at an entirely different level.

[@ariesroc]

There is no "plot hole" in the Star Wars example. There is no contradiction either. Yoda tells Luke exactly what is true at that moment. He shouldn't go face Vader before completing his training. He didn't listen and went and faced Vader. When Luke comes back Yoda tells him exactly what is true at that moment. "Already know that which you need." No more training does he require but he must face Vader again. Yoda keeps his own counsel on who is ready when. The Luke that left him wasn't ready. The Luke that came back was. This was due to his confrontation with Vader. In doing so, and surviving, he learned that which was going to be the completion of the training which was learning and accepting that Darth Vader was his father. This is all in the scene in Return of the Jedi.

[@Progger11]

Calm down, buddy. Star Wars isn't as good as your nostalgia makes you think it is. It's okay if there are some plot holes.

[@ariesroc]

@@Progger11 I could care less about nostalgia. I care about the characters and story. If people are blinded by their nostalgia so they overlook what's actually in the movies then that is up to them. It's pretty amazing what people don't know about the movies. Maybe they just view them nostalgically and that's it. Time and time again I come across people who literally don't know what goes on in the movies, say they wish this was in them and then I tell them that it already is. Then they get defensive because they realize that they either missed it or completely forgot about it!

[@errwhattheflip]

Star Wars is excellent, but plot holes don't really dictate how good the story is. Or at least, not that much. Empire Strikes Back is pretty widely considered to be a near perfect film, and Return of the Jedi, regardless of pacing issues, has no real plot holes.

[@ariesroc]

​@@errwhattheflip I find that tons of people have no idea what is and what isn't a plot hole anyway. Look at all the people who actually believe there is a plot hole in ANH with the Death Star's destruction. So much so Disney did an entire movie to explain it but Rogue One misses the point and does entirely the reverse. By that movie it's nonsensical that the Death Star even made it to ANH because it was sabotaged but the sabotage didn't work! It also means that not only did Death Star II have to been sabotaged but the droid control ship in TPM. I mean how else could they be destroyed? Someone had to non-sabotage sabotage them before they were destroyed.

[@errwhattheflip]

@@ariesroc There's nothing wrong with people thinking there's a plot hole in a movie. You can refute that, but it isn't outright bad to claim something like that. Still, I get what you're saying

[@Steve_Zilla]

Thanks for talking about one of my all time favorite films. It blew me away the first time I watched it giving me a true film experience that I love to pass on to others. I believe the reason no one cares about logic in Vertigo is because everyone gets hypnotized at some point and get sucked into it.

[@maximillianford9301]

Nice analysis. You genuinely had me going with the earnestness of your plot-hole identification, in spite of the title. Vertigo's had a weird effect on me recently as I've rewatched it and watched others' reactions to it. I've come to see it as an absolutely extraordinary piece of art. The sequence where he molds Judy into Madeleine is legitimately the most perverted scene I think I've ever seen, more so than any rape or torture scene. You want to scream at him to stop, and yet you still feel empathy for him as he desperately tries to find an emotional tonic to his anguish. My favourite Hitchcock will always be North by Northwest (because it has just the right amount of everything) but this one was his masterpiece

[@fosbury68]

I think Notorious is far more perverse. Devlin knowingly forces Alicia to have sex with Alex in order to prove her worth to him. And she does it - and what's more, she does prove her courage and worthiness to him through her (nearly fatal) sacrifice. In the end, Alicia and Devlin save each other (and send poor mother-dominated Alex to his doom).

[@johnryskamp2943]

You left out the weakest link: that Judy would stay in SF after the murder, especially since she knows Scotty lives only a few blocks away.

[@no288]

Judy answered that one. In her own words she said this to him in the tower, " _i was safe when you found me there was nothing you could prove_ ".

[@seray8765]

i just can’t figure out this one thing; when did the fake madelline take the place of the real one, Gavin Elster’s real wife? Because the story started with Scotty following Elster’s real wife, some stuff happens, and at the end of the first part, we learn that, in the church scene, the women who attempted (her second) suicide is not madelline herself. So when did she had replaced?

[@Northbirdy]

I too, would love an answer to that question

[@alannothnagle]

Scotty never followed Gavin‘s real wife, it was Judy from the start. He only saw the real one falling from the tower. The real wife lived outside of San Francisco, leaving plenty of opportunity for Gavin to cook up his murder scheme.

[@RZ393]

correct!

[@brutalboy1000]

This is great, especially since I just watched, a few days ago, Folding Ideas talking about Nostalgia Critics take on The Wall.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Thanks, Rafael. I also loved that Folding Ideas video. Probably the best critique of NC I've ever seen.

[@kostajovanovic3711]

@@EyebrowCinema possible, lady Emily gave him a run for his money with her critique

[@kingly4900]

I’ve been waiting to watch this video for awhile (I only just watched vertigo yesterday and loved it) because I’ve been so fed up with this whole plot hole culture. 90% their criticisms are real plot holes, and even when they are they tend to add more to the story than take away. it’s very rare I’ve seen this type of criticism actually impact the story the film is trying to tell. Movies are about ideas and emotions, not plot, and it just feels disrespectful to ignore everything going on in a movie to nitpick logic. Phenomenal video that demonstrates all that perfectly

[@EyebrowCinema]

Thanks man. I'm glad you circled back to this. And I'm really glad you loved Vertigo :) Also your comment here is spot on.

[@clumsydad7158]

it's kind of like when people insist on 'the plot' ... like all people want to watch is a good murder mystery... i could care less about 'the plot' - i've never loved a movie or fell in love with a movie because 'hey, it had a really strong plot!' ... yippy skippy

[@gerardcote8391]

Frankly for me a plot hole is any gap in the plot where something is not explained or explainable because to do so would be inconsistent with the rest of the plot. The fact that an elderly woman didn't see her enter the building, or that she hid somewhere while they were in the room and snuck away is not a plot hole. Anymore than Indiana Jones being on the outside of a U-boat when they went to Antartica. Time was of the essence and U-boats top speed is when surfaced and they typically go around half speed when submerged, so they would have stayed up the whole trip.

[@JT-rx1eo]

The hotel desk clerk claiming that Madeline didn't enter was not a plot hole imo, but rather a plot device to intensify mystery, suspense, and the ethereal ghost-like quality of the film.

[@understandingart9961]

While Vertigo is not one of my favourite movies because of some inconsistent performances ( in my humble opinion), I really love the story. It is so dreamy and sometimes I have doubts what was real or fake in that movie. Really great video.

[@grey_f98]

"critics" that evaluate films by the amount of nitpicked plot holes they have are the equivalent of people that think finding spelling errors means you've won the argument

[@jeffzest8393]

Pedantic

[@Tyler-nc4px]

Damn right.

[@lazedreamor2318]

UNDOUBTEDLY TRUE

[@alannothnagle]

Agreed, but I think nitpicking over plot holes is a sign of appreciation. If I didn‘t like a movie I wouldn‘t care about its plot holes.

[@bradleystinchcombe8371]

Galvin Elster is a human MacGuffin. His murder plot has no relevance to the film outside of putting events in motion, and he's barely even a character- he appears in two scenes, we don't see him fleshed out or described. His only relevance is to get Scottie and Madeljudy together. Hitchcock does something similar with the character of Alex and his Nazi spy plan in "Notorious", he only exists to stand between Devlin and Alicia and his plot is only relevant to getting the two together.

[@BugVlogs]

Most of the “flaws” of Vertigo were directly addressed by Hitchcock in his interview with Truffaut

[@Pocket543]

What did he say ?

[@CorbCorbin]

@@Pocket543 He said, “Good Evening............Thank You.” 🎶 Da Dun, Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Da Dun, Da Dun, Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Da Dun... 🎶 Dun Da Dah Dem Dum Duh Da Dah, Dum Da Deh Duh Doo Da Dah Duh...🎶

[@the_narthex]

Truffaut's book is a GREAT read. One of my absolute favorite books on filmmaking. Highly recommended.

[@ravivasudevan7273]

Hitchcock was not atall convinced by the story logic

[@SuperNuclearUnicorn]

You could also say that you shouldn't have to watch an interview to understand why certain things aren't actually flaws. The movie should stand by itself, just like how I don't need to have read every Marvel comic to enjoy Avengers

[@civilwarfare101]

I find picking out plotholes and that's it to be the most boring form of criticism there is. There's much more to a story than just being entirely "logical". It's how certain things add up and make the whole. I prefer a story that has tons of logical problems but makes me think than a story that plays it safe and is mostly logical. As much as I think Spider-Man is overexposed as a character as of late and the Raimi movies especially 2 get so much praise, and how much I don't like Doc Ock in that movie that much, him throwing a car at Peter and MJ in the Cafe doesn't ruin the movie for me because I like how that movie examines Peter and his motivation for wanting to be Spider-Man, I can connect to it and find it relatable, interesting and motivating. While Thanos in the MCU while his plan not making any sense, also is a completely boring and uninteresting villain. Overpopulation and balance was never once a theme in the MCU and to me, what makes comic book villains interesting is that they represent certain sides of the hero. And what the fuck does Thanos even remotely represent about the Avengers? I can't think of much at all. And his "rivalry" with Iron Man is so half assed that I don't even know where to start. As much as I hate using live action superhero movies as examples of this, since I think live action superhero movies are overrated and prefer the comics and animations, I can't help but use these as examples.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Well said.

[@fin524]

Yes, Thanos's plan is impractical considering the unpredictability of gauntlet, but what's important is that he considers it to be right decision because his planet became wasteland. He is not doing it because he enjoys it, but because he thinks he will help others even if everyone is against it. While villains that are just opposites of heroes are essentially evil versions of them, but they are just evil and that's it there is no complexity to them.

[@civilwarfare101]

@@fin524 My big issue is how none of this shit was ever foreshadowed in the MCU beforehand. They only shoved it in because the writers thought his comics motivation isn't "interesting" enough. In the comics, Thanos is actually conflicted on what he does and I often viewed the overpopulation thing as him justifying in his actions. His wiping out the populations was to help Death harvest more souls and the Infinity Gauntlet was a way to do it faster. That is bullshit. Evil villains can be very complex when done well. Norman Osborn in the first Spider-Man movie works so well because he contrasts very well with Spider-Man. Spider-Man uses his powers for a greater responsibility. Norman uses his great power for personal gain and to get whatever he wants. And the way both handle great power is interesting. MCU Thanos doesn't contrast with any Avenger or show any traits of the Avengers in anyway.

[@clumsydad7158]

true, it's kind of like arguing about the nature of existence while at a dinner party ... it misses the point of the gathering !!

[@civilwarfare101]

@@clumsydad7158 Plot holes at the end of are only worse if the story sucks.

[@peacefuldawn6823]

I thought Vertigo was trash on my first watch. Then every susbequent rewatch I grew to love it more and more, with it now being my favourite Hitchcock film (Strangers on a Train is second though).

[@EyebrowCinema]

I appreciate the mention of Strangers on a Train, which I also love. One of my favourite Hitchcock's as well.

[@glamdolly30]

For my money 'Rope' is a Hitchcock masterpiece. Never saw the point of 'The Birds' though, I feel it has dated badly and is massively overrated. Hitchcock had wanted Cary Grant to play Scottie in 'Vertigo' but he wasn't available. He always felt James Stewart was second best, and that he looked too old to be Kim Novak's love interest (ironic, since Stewart is in fact 4 years younger than Grant). Much as I love Cary Grant and his performances in other Hitchcock movies like 'North by Northwest' and 'To Catch a Thief', I can't imagine him bringing the exquisite vulnerability to the role of Scottie that Stewart does. He was perfection IMO, and his chemistry with Novak totally convinced.

[@clumsydad7158]

i watched it as a teenager on a sh&tty and grained vhs copy ... was too young and the image too botched ... but it sparkles now with clarity and maturity

[@savsa]

I just watched it and hated it. Wonder if the same will happen to me

[@phillytheflyerable]

​@@savsaI watched it the first time 15 years ago and didn't like it at all. Deemed it the most overrated movie of all time. Watched it again yesterday and was mesmerized. Although some things still bothered me like the plot twist and the ending

[@Robbi496]

WAIT! The version I have seen, Judy FALLS from the bell tower because the nun speaks and she accidentally falls from the tower and then the movie ends??

[@Northbirdy]

What other version would there be?

[@maximthepurplefalcon8187]

Great video. You made me love one of my favorite movies even more! Vertigo rules.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Thanks dude!

[@johnfitzpatrick3094]

When you mentioned the Krendler plot hole in Silence, I remembered watching the deleted scenes on the Blu-ray. Demme was right to cut those scenes because they slowed the movie down. They were also the usual "You're off the case!" cliché scenes you see in most cop movies.

[@EyebrowCinema]

100% agree.

[@a.m.8252]

The first plot hole is never mentioned: how does Scottie survive his hanging from the building? He's left hanging there and then turns up in nothing more than a corset at Midge's apartment. How did he get off that building ledge?

[@no288]

Well, the writers could had fix that. He could had been rescued by the fire dept. Either by a ladder/crane or if he fell onto a huge air mattress below, which could explain that he was wearing a corset. I think the plot hole would be if you see Scottie falling to the ground and then cut to the next scene in Midge apartment with Scottie sitting there. Just think about 'Skyfall'. How did James Bond survive after being shot, and sinking unconscious to the bottom of the sea?

[@johnryskamp2943]

He got down the same way Madeleine slipped past the landlady.

[@DwRockett]

5:32 just want to let you know that I literally died at this joke (Anyone who needs to use my death for an elaborate scheme to, like, get out of gambling debts or something is more than welcome to, just please contact my estate so that everything can be co-ordinated)

[@EyebrowCinema]

Glad you laughed, but also sorry you're dead. You've always been so friendly in the comments.

[@JT-rx1eo]

All those plot lines that strain credulity didn't bother me too much. But Hitchcock's choice to anticlimactically reveal everything so soon through Judy's narrated letter did bother me. My creative writing teacher used to tell me "don't reveal too much" (too soon). Let the denouement develop naturally. Ive heard Hitchcock say in interviews that suspense requires that the audience be kept informed so they weren't confused. But it bit him in the butt here.

[@haineshisway]

It didn't bite him anywhere. Suspense vs. Surprise.

[@JT-rx1eo]

​@@haineshisway😂 Susoense vs. suprise? Meaning what?

[@haineshisway]

@@JT-rx1eo Meaning WHAT??? Clearly, you know nothing about Mr. Hitchcock. In Vertigo, surprise is withholding the twist until the very end of the film, as in the novel on which Vertigo is based. Suspense is letting the audience in on the twist earlier so that we know something the hero does not. Here, I'll let Mr. Hitchcock explain it to you: “There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean. We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let's suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, "Boom!" There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the decor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions, the same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene. The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: "You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There is a bomb beneath you and it is about to explode!" In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story.” Hope that helps.

[@JT-rx1eo]

​​@@haineshisway😂 No it didn't help. I've heard that interview with Hitchcock. Moreover, I addressed that very "bomb under the table" idea in response to someone else below. The anticlimactic reveal of Judy/Madeline is very different than the "bomb under the table" suspense scenario. In fact, while revealing the bomb under the table to the audience early heightens the suspense, not revealing the confirmation of Judy as Madeline early heightens mystery/suspense (is she or isn't she?). Opposite in a way. Revealing the bomb under the table sets up suspense, whereas revealing the true identity of Judy undermines suspense. It may be beneficial to properly apply Hitchcock's concepts for good analysis. Hope that helps.

[@haineshisway]

@@JT-rx1eo No, nothing you say helps. You're another KZbin know it all looking to make money and thinking you know about film. I'm not going to explain to you why you're wrong because it would do no good. I suggest it is you who do not understand what Mr. Hitchcock means by surprise vs. suspense. The bomb is merely one example. He has specifically talked about the reveal in Vertigo many times. But, you know, your creative writing teacher said something so it must be right. Nothing bit Mr. Hitchcock in the butt. He made a choice based on his idea of suspense vs. surprise. You don't like that choice, and I'm sure others may agree with you, while just as many, including some of the world's greatest filmmakers, would disagree with you. And doing a reveal in beginning of the third act is hardly revealing too much too soon. Some of us have been Vertigo fans from the start - 1958 to be exact, which is when I first saw it at a neighborhood theater. I have seen it many, many times since. I don't need Robin Wood or anyone else to guide opinions on the film, which I find to be a masterpiece. I've been seeing Hitchcock films since 1954. have owned both 16mm and 35mm IB Tech prints of Vertigo at a time when there WERE no prints to show, and have seen Mr. Hitchcock talk about his films in person. How old are you, one wonders? Not out of your twenties, I'd wager, from the sound of your voice. Also, your need to "score" your video with ridiculous music is a big "why". EDIT: Never mind, I've just seen who you are and I was right. Hope THAT helps.

[@mjr2451]

I’d like to thank the author of this video I say for being so specific in their criticism of the text that one knows he is talking precisely about the text. So many other essayists, visual and written, try to make a larger statement without addressing the context of those points within the text itself first. Thank you for taking a 1 2 3 step instead of a 1 2 7 step. Also it was a funny clue that you were taking the piss with your plot hole criticisms when you said “the Spanish missionary“ instead of “the Spanish mission“. Referring to a building like a person was a nice clue that you were impersonating someone who didn’t know better.

[@jasonvaughn4886]

As great as this analysis is, I'm afraid it doesn't hold a candle to Citizen Kane's giga-plot hole: How is it that someone heard "Rosebud", when there was nobody else in the room with Kane? Kane wins, hands down

[@lampad4549]

The butler in the room heard it.

[@jack_myers]

I've always thought exactly the same thing, it is said later on in the film that the butler was in the room but we never see him present in the opening? Does it matter? No. But does it prove a point? Yes

[@jasonvaughn4886]

@@jack_myers Well, audiences in 1941 had a lot more suspension of disbelief than modern ones. Even excellent film makers like Welles weren't immune to small mistakes.

[@isabeamon1190]

The butler was there. This isn't the plot hole that so many claim it to be. Citizen Kane > Vertigo, and I love Vertigo.

[@lannypanlock]

Exactly. We can’t see Raymond the butler in the shot, but we don’t see the entire room, either, and as they say “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” Raymond later claims he heard Kane whisper his last word, and nothing we see in the first shot contradicts that… though nothing in that first shot confirms it either. I would suggest that might (though not necessarily) have been an intentional choice by Welles to present an ambiguity thaa see y allows for various interpretation (including the often offered “Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge”-like notion that the entirety of Citizen Kane takes place within Kane’s mind in the last moment(s) of his life).

[@joshuachavez7375]

It’s simple, this movie is a retelling of Ambrose Bierce’s An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. Every moment that occurred following Scottie hanging from the building was a fantasy. Everything that happened was his brain creating a better existence for him as he slipped from the gutter. Plot holes? No, merely lapses in his brain trying to hide the reality of his situation.

[@R0CKDRIG0]

Wtf. What is gained from the whole movie being on his head?

[@strongdecaf3729]

Good god almighty, why do young people go through tortuous over-thinking on movies? Making logical sense is so incredibly over-rated. Feeling and beauty have getting ignored by hyper-emphasis on plotting.

[@EyebrowCinema]

For sure. Fixating too much on plot is a way to deny oneself pleasure.

[@auldthymer]

Young people want the world to logical and seek to understand how things work. I'm middle-aged: I've given up on logic. I now want to avoid the parts that hurt.

[@Melbournelost66]

Vertigo definitely is a masterpiece. Also, a fantastic window into mid 20th century life.

[@mallorymontenegro520]

One of those movies I wish I could watch again for the first time.

[@SirGrimLockSmithVIII]

I think the thing with Buzz Lightyear can be explained as him thinking he's adapting to the "alien world" he's supposedly "exploring". Like, Andy is an apex predator and he sees the other toys play dead to survive or something to that effect. Haven't watched the movie in a long while tho, so I'm not sure if that's explicitly mentioned or if that's something the audience came up with.

[@jameswhitaker12]

Great video, loved the matrix example too. Funnily enough, the first time I saw Vertigo I felt tricked by the 'reveal' having totally bought the supernatural mystery; it wasn't until later that I realised that identifying with Scotty was the whole point the movie was making

[@EyebrowCinema]

Thanks, James. And yeah, that's an excellent point. That first time through the supernatural mystery is so finely laid out that the reveal really does blindside you.

[@jameswhitaker12]

@@EyebrowCinema Yeah! I distinctly remember the movie reaching what I thought would be the end point, madeleine's 'death' and then feeling very uncomfortable when the film just... carried on going

[@Bonkatsu12]

Another plot hole that always came to my head was, isn't it extremely convenient that Scotty never saw a photo of the real wife. Especially after she died.

[@no288]

Its not a plot hole. A plot hole is a new event that would contradict previous events. Scottie went down hill very quickly. Later he was hospitalized for almost a year

[@alannothnagle]

Hey, if you want to see a REAL plothole, check out Truffaut's "The Bride Wore Black" (1968). In it, a man is randomly shot dead at his own wedding. His traumatized bride/widow (Jeanne Moreau) then embarks on a vendetta, taking out each of the men responsible one by one. Pretty cool premise, right? Except, how the eff could she ever know who these guys were, especially considering they had no relationship whatsoever with the unintended victim? You'd think Truffaut could have come up with SOME way for her to track them down, but no, she just KNOWS. Maybe he thought we just wouldn't notice that the movie makes no sense? Now THAT's what I call a plot hole!!

[@aerpx]

i’ve wondered how scottie got his car back at his house after she falls into the water

[@jhexp999]

Who helped scotty when he was hanging from the roof ?

[@alannothnagle]

A reasonable question, but do you really want to watch a major rescue operation that early in the movie?

[@jhexp999]

@@alannothnagle You're right cant ruin a good stalker movie.

[@RZ393]

It doesn’t matter, just Hitchcock introducing the fear of heights.

[@jhexp999]

@@RZ393 then stalks a woman till she dies and then repeats the first part of the movie.

[@jhexp999]

R U A BOT?

[@BiserAngelov1]

David Lynch pays tribute to Vertigo, with Twin Peaks character Madeline Ferguson, the cousin of Laura Palmer. You can say that Vertigo is the original Lynchian film.

[@sanitorz232]

18:18 and more importantly this character is played by Roger Corman!!!

[@EyebrowCinema]

Surprise Corman cameos are always the best.

[@julius-stark]

Most of Hitchcock's films have ridiculous plots but he's so fucking good at it you don't care. North By Northwest is my favorite movie and trying to cropdust a man to death is as silly as it gets.

[@RZ393]

That is the real genius of Hitchcock; like being conned by a magician!

[@MousePounder]

Pre-watch comment: Good morning! This looks like it will be a blast.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Hope you dig it, Mouse.

[@johnryskamp2943]

BTW, the Rosebud thing is a plot flaw. When the butler talks about rosebud, it is because it has, somehow, become famous, so even he has heard about it. We dont know how it became famous. There are no facts which lead us to suppose the butler is in the room. The nurse doesnt hear Kane say rosebud, she hears the ball hit the floor. The real question is, what is Kane doing holding the ball, when he is supposedly gravely ill? How did he get it? However, in this case it doesnt matter, because Kane is not a whodunit. There isnt anything odd about people questioning the plot of Vertigo. It is the whole trick behind the whodunit genre. The plot is supposed to be consistent, so you cannot figure out whodunit. A plot flaw means the challenge has failed: the author has failed to distract the audience. So when should a first time Vertigo viewer be able to tell that Gavin is the murderer, that is, that he is about to kill his wife? Or do we first need to know that she is actually dead? If the latter, then that leaves very little time before Judy spills the plot. What evidence is there a clever viewer could put together to conclude that Gavin is the killer? This is an unexplored aspect of Vertigo. Here is a quiz. In Psycho, the moment the Sheriff says mother has been dead 10 years, a clever first time viewer has enough facts to know Norman killed her. How? BTW, there is a plot flaw in The Brothers K.

[@paulklee5790]

Thank you... a lovely piece of work. And your absolutely right, the film is about dream logic, not moronic logic.

[@lolamby1]

Do you believe that the kind of "moronic" analysis you describe is increasing in prevalence in recent years, and, if so, to what broader cause do you attribute to this?

[@EyebrowCinema]

Great question, Chris. I do think nitpicky plot hole obsession has been a lot more prevalent in the internet age and I think the main reason comes down to the economics of making "content" on the internet. It's faster and easier to nitpick the logic of a plot rather than engage emotionally or thematically, which makes it faster and easier to produce a lot of content with that slant. Then, plot holes function perfectly for the listicle style of articles or video that draw attention and clicks, i.e. "18 Star Wars Plot Holes You Never Noticed". There are other factors too but if I had to summarize why I think this focus on plot has become so predominant that would be why.

[@auldthymer]

@@EyebrowCinema I find fairytales to be fascinating. They take place in a reality in which a house can be made out of candy and your mother lives in a tree -- not a treehouse: the actual, entire tree. These worlds are seldom logical or realistic. But they create a space in our listening that (can) connect to our wishes for love, security, wealth... and seven short friends. I think Hitchcock creates that space in our eyes and hearts.

[@PhoenicianPrincess88]

@@EyebrowCinema cinema sins

[@baumer2504]

Lmao 🤣

[@completesentences2125]

What if Kevin McCallister wasn’t left Home Alone?…

[@raymeedc]

~ How is it Stewart didn’t recognize the deception by how Judy, a woman he loves and has studied, moves, speaks, embraces & kisses….. makes no sense whatsoever ~

[@raymeedc]

~ Not to mention her physical appearance, of course! Every mark, crease, nuance, etc. is exactly the same as the woman he just lost….. RIDICULOUS‼️

[@no288]

Well yes and no. 'However when he takes Judy to dinner his attention goes to a woman in a grey suit, not knowing the woman he is looking for is sitting across the table.

[@Flyboytroyy]

Scottie never got down from the gutter. He died there, and the rest of the film is a dream of a dying man. Film scholars Robin Wood, Charles Barr among others have already proposed this idea.

[@jamesedward3619]

Somehow, that makes the movie even worse.

[@haineshisway]

Oh please. What a load of hogwash.

[@raventongue2946]

KZbin film critics should make more videos like this, instead of those awful Cinema Sins-like nitpicky videos

[@jamesedward3619]

This just seems like a very weak attempt to justify glaring flaws in narratives so long as they aren't central to the core theme. Just because Vertigo is primarily about obsession and emotional spiraling, that doesn't mean it's ok for the writer to do a second-rate job on constructing the aspect of the plot that causes that obsession and spiralling. It's fine to say that Vertigo is still a good movie overall despite its major flaws, but to say that its flaws aren't really flaws because they aren't related to the absolute central core of the themes (even though they are arguably pretty central to the main plot) is absurd. Same as what was said here about the plot-hole in The Matrix. Was the restaurant scene in The Matrix a good scene? Yes. Did it add something important and valuable to the plot and themes? Yes. But would the film have been better if they had established something in the plot to explain how it makes sense that Cypher could be meeting with the Agents in the matrix without his crew having to be involved? Absolutely! To say you don't care about plot-holes like this is to excuse lazy writing and to do a true injustice against those writers who actually make the effort to ensure narrative cohesion and logic in their stories.

[@fruzsimih7214]

Hitchcock doesn't spoil the mystery early. In the novel, it only turned out on the last few pages what had happened. Hitch's scriptwriters revealed the twist earlier on (about 30 Min. before the ending), because they wanted the audience to sympathize with Judy and her plight and understand better what Scotty was doing to her when he forced her to impersonate Madeleine.

[@clumsydad7158]

i always marvel at the structure of this movie and try to figure out how many climaxes it has - must have the most emotional climaxes of any movie i've seen

[@JT-rx1eo]

If that's true I think it was a bad decision. I've heard other critics fault it too. The anticlimactic revelation does not really heighten audience sympathy for the characters as it does shortcircuit the mystery and suspense. Sympathy for a young doppelganger because she knew he was obsessed with this Madeline is already established. Alternatively, for audience members who already think she IS Madeline, they wouldn't need the early revelation to confirm it. Usually waiting to resolve all the plot lines is best. I agree with the critics who fault the anticlimactic revelation.

[@floraposteschild4184]

@@JT-rx1eo The point of the movie is not the "mystery". It's the characters. Judy's plight in the second half of the movie mirrors Scotty's -- she's pulled back and forth between two selves, and a dream and reality. Revealing the plot twist early also heightens the audience tension. Inevitably, her secret will be revealed to Scotty, but how? I'd compare it to Hitchcock's bomb under the table story: "Let us suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, “Boom!” There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it…In these conditions this same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the secret.'

[@JT-rx1eo]

​@floraposteschild4184 Revealing the plot twist early rarely heightens tension! It does in the "bomb under the table" scenario but the Judy situation is not akin to that scenario. Part of the mystery for the audience is who this young girl who looks like Madeline really is. Is she Madeline or some young girl who happens to be her doppelganger? The audience does not need the anticlimactic revelation to sympathize with her. She knows he is obsessed with the memory of this woman. And Vertigo, much like almost all Hitchcock movies, is very much about the mystery and suspense. Certainly it's also about the characters, as that and suspense are not mutually exclusive. I just watched Marnie, and the depth of the characters were very much part of the movie. But the mystery of Marnie's past and root causes of her criminality and psychological makeup were very much at the forefront too. And Hitchcock waited till the end to reveal the denoument here.

[@edwardwilson7858]

The interesting thing to find out is whether Hitchcock kept the plot holes in on purpose or just didn't notice them. Maybe he was taking his cue from Raymond Chandler, who was also criticized for leaving holes in his novels. Chandler's attitude was "good scenes make good stories".Whether the scenes connected to each other seemed unimportant to him.

[@ZerogunRivale]

The lady at the Mckitrick Hotel was in on it. The fact that she never saw Madeline come in makes this fairly obvious.

[@jeffzest8393]

She could have easily missed her coming in the hotel.

[@josephrocco2954]

Hitchcock wasn't going for plot coherence, the movie was about mood and atmosphere.

[@seba_salto]

I really like the video. I would like to say only one thing, that is if you read the book of Truffaut and Hitchcock, he tells why he chooses to reveal the mistery before the third act.

[@no288]

interesting as his producer had a big fight with Hitch when he tried to cut that scene out. Hitch came under a lot of pressure, so he decided to keep it in. What did he say in the book?

[@RandalltheVandal]

Great video. You give great examples and I completely agree with your points. The older I get, the less I care about a movie feeling "logical." In fact, I'd say the more illogical and insane, the better.

[@epeck1115]

I agree that the hotel desk clerk saying she did not see "Madeline" come in is not a plot hole. You say it's plausible that the clerk really didn't see her. Maybe. But I always assumed the explanation is that the clerk was in on the scam. After all, this wasn't a random hotel. "Madeline" led Scotty to that particular hotel and certainly staged the whole encounter.

[@no288]

But it doesn't explain how Judy (dressed a Madeline), got out of the hotel even if the desk clerk was in on it....

[@epeck1115]

@@no288 Not to carry this sort of thing too far, but I can imagine any number of ways she could have gotten out of there, including a back door or side door or back staircase or fire escape or even a ladder. This was a one-time scam she and the desk clerk pulled off.

[@glamdolly30]

Excellent analysis, sophisticated insights.A movie is not documentary and tied by those strict standards of truth and logic - it is art, something entirely different!

[@exnonred]

This video creates a masterful contrast that adds a lot to a second viewing experience: Presenting the unimportance of the 'plot holes' makes the movie's essence shine that much brighter 👌

[@TheSweatyGorilla]

Appreciated the use of music from "Dawn of the Dead".

[@EyebrowCinema]

It's a perfect song.

[@carl44acq]

And what a coincidence that Elster's wife and Judy just happened to be wearing the same outfit on the day of the murder.

[@johnryskamp2943]

The whole thing at Ransohoff's is not understood. It's where the real Mrs. Elster shopped. That's why the saleswoman says that she remembers the outfit. What Hitchcock loved about SF was how claustrophobic it was, and how remote it was from anything else. It's really a big urban area in the middle of nowhere. SF is so small geographically that it's a place where lives can cross and recross.

[@YggdrasilAudio]

I don't really have a problem with overly focusing on plot and story, as long as that is not the only thing being heard.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Good point. It is one element of many.

[@jithinmk9098]

Both the real Madeline and Judy have resemblance but have two different faces. Elster ' s plan would have gone awry if Scoty looks at the deceased's photo.Having said that, Vertigo is my favorite film only after No country for old men. Revealing the suspense early made that film greatest ever. Kim Novac deserved an oscar ❤❤❤. This movie is about unfulfilled love. Judy to Scoty, Midge to Scoty, Scoty to the concept Madeleine. 😥😥😥

[@florinivan6907]

This does raise a question. When do plot holes matter? I think its in situations where they are used as solutions to impossible situations that the characters have been thrown into. When the writers can't think of a solution and they simply don't find one.

[@clumsydad7158]

when they are too stupid that they break the illusion for the audience. this is subjective, but brutal ones will ruin a movie for most watchers

[@avawladar4223]

I clicked so fast on this and it was so so worth it I love your analysis

[@EyebrowCinema]

Thank you, Ava :)

[@prilljazzatlanta5070]

Why dont they matter? Because even real life has plot holes

[@jeffzest8393]

Miss USA Chelsie Kryst jumping to her death.

[@alexandersims1613]

This is wild. When I was taking film classes in high school in college, I remember thinking how wild it was that this brilliant film was overlooked. I still tell people who watch films about it and they have (mostly) never heard of it.

[@jeffzest8393]

Anyone give even a far fetched way Gavin could have known when to be at the tower with his dead wife?

[@jeffzest8393]

To answer my own question, Madeleine persuades Scotty to show him her illusions are based on reality, and then before leaving to show her the reality, she calls Gavin.

[@krautgazer]

Great video! Vertigo is a masterpiece, one of my top 3 Hitchcock movies together with Psycho and Rear Window. However, there is one thing in the movie that I've always felt uncomfortable with and it's the ending. I've always felt like it was a bit rushed and even a little bit random with the nun going upstairs and that happening. I don't know, I've always felt like there has to be more to that scene that I don't fully comprehend yet. I've seen people claiming the nun might represent morality, chastity or religion in general, but I feel like there has to have been a precedent of religious symbolism in the movie, instead of it ONLY happening in the very last few seconds. Also, she didn't run from a nun, she only saw a shadowy figure, she couldn't tell it was a nun. When the nun reveals herself in the light, Madeleine was already gone. The nun is only used as a scary figure, that's why I find it a bit random. The only explanation I can think of right now is that perhaps Hitchcock couldn't show suicide in the film because of the Hays Code, and maybe a full suicide was the intended ending, but he had to come up with the nun to justify the jumping. I don't know but I would love to hear other opinions about this, I'm very open.

[@jeffzest8393]

I would have like the ending to have been more developed as well. Actually, on first viewing, I thought she jumped. But life doesn’t always end up in a resolved manner.

[@jasonfenton8250]

I figured the nun represented her guilt in some way. Either because some churches are rife with guilt based teachings or because a nun represents a moral ideal, which is terrifying to Judy due to the knowledge of the evil she has committed.

[@johnryskamp2943]

The nun is Carlotta. The point is that Judy finally believes Carlotta came back from the dead. Or, the film had to end somehow. It's only a movie.

[@LyndsieDances]

There are no plot holes here. Just things that go into deeper meaning

[@dhruvmiku3007]

We are the early watchers of this video.

[@EyebrowCinema]

Much appreciated :)

[@TheVileOne]

Good analysis. The whole thriller plot is secondary in Vertigo. It's about Scottie's obsession with "Madeleine."

[@johnzeszut3170]

Enjoyed the criticism very much. Notice that when Scotty drives he usually goes downhill? Today the guy would be a stalker.

[@anne-zh2kd]

I do think it is valid, depending on genre, to question inconsistency, plotholes etc. Hitchcock movies rely heavily on mystery. Logic DOES matter if the genre depends on logic. That is why internal logic is incredibly important for whodunnits. Also, if you portray a reality close to ours within a mystery story, a story that depends on the viewer constantly playing detective, you need to pay that off.. If you cannot count on a semi- reality, mystery becomes flat, boring, because we can't play detective. I like Vertigo, so wont say that it isn't valid as a more artistic narrative, it is. But it is ALSO a mystery. And making points about a lack of logic in a genre movie makes sense. Hitchcock was about suspense. To disreguard the very real aim of Hitchcocks movies, because it doesn' t fit an artistic narrative is a bit pretentious. Yes, he wanted an artistic narrative, but also suspence, mystery etc, he wanted things that have mass appeal.

[@johnryskamp2943]

Of course plot holes matter. They are a test for every whodunit.

[@samuelbarber6177]

There are some films where picking apart the plot is just missing the point. Vertigo is one of them. The same way the villains’ scheme in North By Northwest is completely not the point of the plot. The same way it doesn’t matter that Glinda could have just told Dorothy how to get back to Kansas in the first place, or that the exhaust port being a totally obvious weak point in the Death Star in Star Wars doesn’t matter, or even that The Joker’s scheme in The Dark Knight is overly complicated to the point where he must have plans and plans and plans within plans and an unreasonable number of contingencies in case something goes wrong. If Nolan had sacrificed The Joker being an intimidating threat in favour of the plot making sense, it would be a worse movie.

[@RZ393]

The genius of this movie is that the viewer is so manipulated by Hitchcock that all these inconsistencies never come into play.

[@Gregorius24]

Alfred Hitchcock was known for his meticulous attention to detail and his belief in the power of visual storytelling. When it comes to the criticism of "plot holes" in his films, including "Vertigo," Hitchcock had a unique perspective on the artifice of cinema and the importance of visual design. Hitchcock famously stated that he was more concerned with the "plausibility" of a film rather than its "realism." He believed that cinema was an art form that should create a heightened, stylized version of reality rather than trying to mimic it exactly. Hitchcock acknowledged that films were constructed narratives, and he embraced the artifice of the medium to create a specific emotional and aesthetic impact on the audience. In the case of "Vertigo," which features a complex and intricate plot, some critics are often more than happy to point out potential plot holes or inconsistencies. However, Hitchcock's focus was not on rigid adherence to a logically flawless storyline but rather on crafting a visually immersive experience. He believed that the emotional impact of a film and the audience's engagement with the story were more important than strict adherence to realism or plot coherence. For Hitchcock, the design and visual composition of a film were paramount (get it? paramount ;-). He meticulously planned every shot, considering the placement of characters, the use of lighting and color, and the overall visual composition to create a visually stunning and thematically resonant experience. Hitchcock saw cinema as a medium that allowed him to control every aspect of the frame, creating a meticulously designed world that emphasized the emotions and themes he wanted to explore. In this context, the presence of potential plot holes or inconsistencies in "Vertigo" would be seen by Hitchcock as secondary to the film's overall impact. While he did strive for narrative coherence and audience engagement, he prioritized the visual storytelling and the emotional resonance of his films above all else. Hitchcock's approach to filmmaking, emphasizing the importance of visual design and emotional impact, has influenced generations of filmmakers. His belief in the artifice of cinema and the power of meticulously crafted visuals continues to be celebrated and studied, even if it means occasionally sacrificing strict narrative logic or addressing potential plot holes.

[@jorgebarreto5093]

It was fun to watch this analysis. While its true those plot holes exist in Vertigo, we as an audience always buy a ticket that comes with a warning that we will have to digest the premise of suspension of desbelief for probably 99% of movies in the market.

[@akalaalaka7570]

I feel like a wealthy, incredibly powerful man coming up with an overly complicated, incredibly flawed, deeply masturbatory solution to a relatively simple conundrum isn't a plot-hole or a contrivance, it's just being true to life. The fact that there wasn't any real opposition to it because of Scottie's own inadequacy and Judy's terror only makes it's success more tragic. It could have failed if, *at any point*, these two actually had an honest conversation about their lives and Scottie just stopped being an abusive ass, but Scottie didn't change as a person and thus Judy died.

[@billolsen4360]

For years, Vertigo had not been screened anywhere after Hitchcock had bought the distribution rights and didn't release it to theaters for along time. Maybe that's why it wasn't as popular as it deserved to be. Yes, there's plenty of plot holes, like 'How did Scottie get down from that roof? He couldn't have held onto that steel gutter for very long.' But I love the film just like you do.

[@errwhattheflip]

I don't consider most of these plot holes, like you said, but rather plot contrivances. And Hitchcock does make a good point, a lot of life makes literally no sense and can often be illogical. It's something to accept for the story's sake. At the end of the story when it's revealed that he suspected that she was a double for Madeline, I always suspected that the obsession he had, while still obsession over the loss of his lover, could also be seen as him actually using his detective skills. Perhaps, seeing how she could resemble Madeline could reveal the truth of the situation.

[@Pssybart]

I think plotholes can hurt a movie when they are laughably noticable, and when the plot is integral to the movie. Classic Disney movies tend to have nonsensical plots. But you hardly notice that because fairy tales are stories that don't thrive on logic. Now that Disney is remaking its own animated movies you can see that the stories are being padded out with more dialogue, and you could say more detail to world building. But that sometimes has the consequence that the movie calls out more attention to its plot, making the flaws of the story more noticeable.

[@MFLimited]

I love this movie. it makes sense more as a dream than as a logical tale. For example, Scotty and Madeline‘s husband both went to college together and Scotty also went to college with Midge, when they were briefly engaged. However Scotty and his old friend are in their 50s whilst Midge is about 34. At what age do they attend college then? There are simple scenes, like at the end, when they are driving back to the Mission. Scotty is driving an American left-hand drive vehicle on the left side of the road, as if he’s in the UK. This doesn’t make logical sense but neither do the lighting changes. when watched as a dream, it plays out to perfection. I don’t think there’s anything wrong in noticing potholes and details though.

[@bjornerikroth]

It's a dual carriage way.

[@legzdiamond2356]

The whole reason movies - or any story really - get told is that they are unlikely, beyond the pale, and amazingly uncanny. This goes back to the beginning of storytelling itself. The oldest stories are all centered around capricious sky-gods who fuck with human kind. Stories are stories because they take us to other, less mundane, more fantastical, realities.

[@oalternativo]

I don’t think that “what if” questions are a good way to point out plot holes. What if Scottie didn’t take the case? Well, the movie wouldn’t happen. What if Doc Brown didn’t invent the time machine? BTTF wouldn’t be a film. What if the man had sabotaged his wife ‘s car? The movie wouldn’t happen. What if Scottie had climbed all the way up? The film would end there. The story is about a man who did take the case and couldn’t go upstairs. As for the necklace, Scottie never saw her wear it before. He had seen it on Carlotta’s portait. Jude never new it. Besides, Vertigo is not a hyper-realistic film. It’s a psychological thriller. All those “what if” questions make no sense here. Scottie is clearly weak of mind. You have to accept that. Just like you have to accept it when you’re watching Sunset Boulevard, for example. IMO

[@no288]

Agree! All this "What If" talk are not plot holes. Or how did, Gavin Elster know this or that. Its just people who are overthinking it after seeing the move too many times.

[@danielcappell]

Macbeth has a pretty unrealistic point where they assume that Duncan's sons killed Duncan just because they skip town, and also never do an investigation into Duncan's killing nor suspect Macbeth. But, as Mr. Eyebrow has pointed out, it just goes to show how little such realism matters.

[@johnryskamp2943]

Also unconvincing: the reasons offered for why Hamlet is not king. But then, plots are a continual weakness of S's plays.

[@SteRDLK]

You're a very apt pupil of Vertigo!!!

[@davidhull1481]

So the essence of your message here is that people shouldn’t confuse fictional movies with documentaries. Movies are allowed to be inconsistent, at least to some degree.

[@gregisom45]

Thank you, by relating 'The Matrix' with 'Vertigo' proves my point that the second half of the movie isn't real. Both movies question reality. 1st half is real, second half is a dream of a cop solving his case from his bed still in the asylum; the other a light bulb breaking free from powering the matrix and finds that his can control it. The church bells ringing louder at the end is an alarm waking Stewart from his dream. Now I really like this movie.

[@alannothnagle]

Do these count as plot holes? 1. At the McKittrick hotel, Scottie shows the clerk his police badge to get information. But didn‘t he retire from the force? If so, do they let you keep your badge as a souvenir? 2. Moments later, Scottie effortlessly climbs up a very high and very steep stairway, essentially identical to the one in Psycho. Where‘s his vertigo now?

[@gottathinkupanewone]

In the original ending of Vertigo, Scotty had returned to Midge, who was waiting for him as she listened to a radio news report on Gavin Elster's arrest in Europe. She is now wearing neutral colors, as opposed to her former bright, upbeat colors like red and yellow. There are no lines other than the broadcaster on the radio -- just a lot of meaningful looks. It's very symbolic of having come full circle. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jHulhIaho5V_mtk

[@johnryskamp2943]

Dreadful. Who would return to a midge? Next scene? Midge complaining that Scottie missed a spot while mopping the kitchen floor.

[@defiverr4697]

Ill bet no one youtube can do a video on emotional holes of a movie. They can't because they dont understand the emotional cause and effect of stories. This movie is a perfect emotional cinema. The greatest. Ever.