ritics to agree on that its perception by spectators, shooting details and movie’s role in the history of cinema highly depend on director’s personality.
To start with, all the analyzed authors discuss the influence of personality and public image of the creator of Vertigo (1958) on its perception. In particular, some of them claim, “Hitchcock was cleverly cementing a clearly-defined screen persona – the slow drawl, the black suit, the sense of humour, the portly figure, and the famous profile” (‘Original Review’, 2008). In other words, the marketing efforts of the Vertigo’s director surely had an influence of its approval among that part of public, which had already liked Hitchcock as a personality. Although, Spark (1996) shares an opinion that “the less people know about “Vertigo,” the more it can be appreciated.” In this context, some critics acknowledge this phenomenon and mostly emphasize on the role of this certain movie on the development of Hitchcock’s public image. For instance, Travers (1996) defines Vertigo as “the high point of Hitchcock’s brilliant career.” Thus, it is evident that Hitchcock obtained a certain style and worked on it in each of his movies, either more evident and attractive for spectators and critics or less. In this context, critics find numerous illustrations of his style in Vertigo. In fact, they analyze “the precise visual style” (‘Original Review’, 2008) in the way “he used obvious images and surrounded them with a subtle context” (Ebert, 1996) or underline the work of his team, meaning “Robert Burks’ serpentine camera,” (Travers, 1996) and “Herrmann’s remarkable score” (Spark, 1996). In general, all of them connect these and other specific traits of movie’s shooting and production with Hitchcock’s personal choice.
Furthermore, critics reveal the direct link between Hitchcock’s emotions in the reality and the concrete details he showed on the screen. Generally, critics