Rear Window

The 1954 Alfred Hitchcock mystery thriller, Rear Window, is often helmed as one of the greatest movies ever created. While Hitchcock has made his fair share of classic films that have been ranked equally as highly this adaptation of the 1942 Cornell Woolrich short story ‘’It Had to Be Murder’’, is still credited by film historians years later for its tense atmosphere, immaculate build-up, effectively on-edge performances, and its simple yet intricately woven presentation that did a lot with very little. With so much hype around it and with several decades since its release, it’d be expected if some things didn’t hold up as well as they did originally. It’s a good thing then that true classics stay relevant for a reason. In an apartment complex in Manhattan, professional photographer L. B. ‘’Jeff’’ Jefferies (played by James Stewart) is confined to a wheelchair while recuperating from a broken leg. Bored out of his mind, he spends his time watching his neighbors from his rear window, getting a small glimpse into their often-troubled lives. This ‘’outside-looking-in’’ vantage takes a different turn however when Jeff starts to suspect that one of his neighbors, a one Lars Thorwald (played by Raymond Burr) has killed his wife and now plans to escape town before he’s discovered. After his socialite girlfriend, Lisa Fremont (played by Grace Kelly) and his nurse, Stella (played by Thelma Ritter) start to believe him as well, the three plan a way to uncover whether or not this man truly did murdered his wife, or if this is a huge misunderstanding sparked from misinformation, which is what Jeff’s NYPD officer friend, Detective Tom Doyle (played by Wendell Corey) seems to believe. While it may not contain the usual sparks of horror or a layered narrative like Hitchcock’s other work, this is easily one of his best crafted movies, with a fantastic screenplay, tight and concise direction, engaging performance, and perfectly handled visuals from a storytelling and presentation level.

Most murder mysteries often involve an active pace that keeps evolving as the story unfolds, with the characters going from location to location to try and put the pieces together, whereas this film takes on a new direction by sticking the entire film within a solitary viewpoint. This could very easily be done badly as not only could the limited cast members, set location and even select scenes become repetitive and dull after a while, but it also feels like there’s very little you can do with such an idea, and it might come across like a forceful cinematic gimmick. However, Hitchcock, along with screenwriter, John Michael Hayes, really knows how to bring out the best of Woolrich’s original story, which also presented several amazing qualities. On the surface, the content of the story seems a little straightforward and not that hard to follow, which might seem oddly basic for someone like Hitchcock, who’s known for working with either entirely complicated or entirely vague source materials. It can also feel like the commentary, while well told, isn’t as strong as it could be and might feel a little superficial and forced at times (a specific monologue during the middle is a little out-of-nowhere as well as pretty poorly acted), but this film more than makes up for it with how fantastically composed this movie is from a visual and scripting level. The dialogue feels like something right out of a book in the best way possible; it’s not entirely realistic sounding, but is highly descriptive, details a lot of backstory and context about the characters in a believable way, and is lyrical in a sense that makes you hang off every word being spoken for its entire running time. Hayes is excellent at making this manner of speaking feel natural and commands the story in a way that also uses its visuals just as well as its dialogue. The amount of context and information given through visual storytelling as opposed to blatant exposition is very refreshing and creates a mood that the rest of the movie follows through with, as it brilliantly establishes a lot of clues, character motivation and details through its presentation alone, which ultimately builds a mystery that isn’t easy to predict and develops into a very impressive climax. Hitchcock nails the tension through the minimal musical score, the perfectly stressed but composed acting style, and the tight and often times real feeling of suspense and terror that is felt throughout this movie (especially during the ending). There are a few oddities of the time that come through in that ending like some awkward camera trickery which can seem a little goofy, but it doesn’t ruin anything, and it still ends on such a perfect note.

For its small roster of characters, it not only does a great job making each main player feel like fleshed out individuals with established backstories, but it also does a great job at providing each neighbor with the same level of privilege. Most if not every single neighbor in this complex doesn’t even get a line of dialogue or scene where we can hear their personal discussions, but that hushed distant manner of speaking not only matches the viewpoint of the lead and provides plenty of tantalizing half-truths that will make the audience crave for more, but the visual storytelling and acting provides each neighbor with enough context and backstory to make them also feel fleshed out and show what struggles they’re going through in their own lives. While some of them might not be the best actors as whenever you hear them talk, they aren’t the most convincing, they get across a lot without having to do much and stand as good examples of the theme about ‘’not knowing the full story’’ and the dangers that come with making assumptions from an outsider’s perspective. The highlights within this camp are Judith Evelyn as a character titled ‘’Miss Lonelyhearts’’, whose lonely existence and tragic love life does make you feel sympathy for her, and Raymond Burr as the supposed killer, as his glances and facial expressions make him hard to read and you never fully know whether or not he’s truly guilty or not. The leads are very well handled and are coupled with really solid actors that manage to convey a lot of personality as well as fear very well. Wendell Corey as the NYPD officer is a little one-note and isn’t given much to work with, but the acting is still decent enough that it works out. James Stewart can play the average Joe without even trying, but his moments of stress and panic are where he really exceeds and stands apart from the norm in this performance, delivering a character that is flawed and even a little difficult in many respects, but still comes across as watchable. Thelma Ritter as a street-savvy nurse results in a pretty memorable support, and Grace Kelly as Lisa Fremont actually provides much more than you’d expect her to. Given the time period and even the kind of character she’s playing, you’d expect the role to either just be a blond bombshell that gets tortured in the film (as Hitchcock loves to do with his blond actresses), or just a background support for the main character to lust after from time to time, but she actually proves to be a very engaging character in this. She’s definitely classy, a social butterfly and a bit naïve to some of the gritty details of people who live in the ‘’down-and-dirty’’, but she’s also hard-working, genuinely passionate, and caring, is smart enough to carry herself in any conversation, and is an active part of the film and gets involved in the scheme to expose the truth rather than just watching agape from afar. Grace Kelly’s acting can be a little overly airy at times and does feel like a traditional performance of the era, but it does match the character, so it works out in the end.

The movie seems like it’s very small in scale due to its very tiny budget of only $1 million, but it does a great job using every cent of that money in creating a believable environment and atmosphere that adds presence to the film rather than making it feel cheap. This apartment complex is given a nice sense of quaint homeliness to it, as its cramped nature mixed with how the people interact both in and out of their rooms, creates an odd sense of community that despite being very closed-in, still feels purposefully distant and isolated from each other. Set designers, Hal Pereira and Joseph MacMillian, spent several weeks building this complex, making it the largest that Paramount (who distributed the film) had ever seen, and it paid off not only in how it looks, but also in how the surrounding aesthetics are enhanced by it. There’s a lot of fantastic lighting moments in this film that help to convey a mood (whether through the strong use of it or extreme absence of it), the camerawork by Robert Burks is immaculately handled and portrays this environment in an intricate enough manner to provide for some fun dramatic angles, but also grounded enough to make every shot from the character’s perspective really feel like someone peering out a window, even the set decoration by Sam Comer and Ray Moyer, along with costume design by the famous Edith Head, really sells the time period as well as the social standings of each of the characters, which in turn provides even more context clues that build upon the film and its narrative. The music is also a useful tool in the film that is handled in a very smart manner, as while the original score created by Franz Waxman seems a little too preppy and active for a film of this type, that is only used for the opening and ending of the film, with the remainder of the picture using diegetic noises and songs as a means of conveying mood, character and emotional turmoil in a very effective fashion, especially during the ending where the tension is high, and you are terrified of what might happen as there is no music to inform you of what to expect during the suspenseful moments.

Rear Window is definitely one of Hitchcock’s best movies, but this mainly comes from how expertly crafted the film is from a writing, directing and production standpoint. The content it has is solid and leads way to some interesting ideas of commentary, even if they aren’t as explored as they could’ve been (you could even argue this idea of living vicariously through other people’s torment without having to engage with it was the first step towards reality television), but its real strengths are in the tightness of the script, the fantastic pace and flow of the direction, the simple but memorable characters with solid actors attached, and effective camerawork and lighting that turns a little into a lot. It’s debatable how many people will consider this a favorite, as others like Psycho, The Birds, North by Northwest and Notorious are more run by their mainstream appeal and delivery whilst also housing impressive technicals, whereas Rear Window is a fantastic telling of a solid but not revolutionary original source. It will leave you impressed, engaged, and even terrified in ways that other Hitchcock films haven’t before, this classic is well worth a watch.