Rear Window

Rear Window was an interesting adaptation to observe for class.  Considering it was adapted from a short story, I think Alfred Hitchcock did an amazing job expanding the source material.  Hitchcock took the simple concept of staring out the window in a confined setting, and made it into an engaging 2-hour film. 

           

I first came across the film in a different class, and I was blown away that the movie took place almost exclusively inside the apartment.  As a matter of fact, there were only two shots that were taken outside of Jeff’s apartment.  In a story centered on a main character that spends his free time observing his neighbors through his window, this creates an interesting atmosphere for us viewers.  There is a parallel between the audiences looking unnoticed upon the life of Jeff through the screen, and Jeff looking unnoticed upon the life of his neighbors.  Since Jeff is unable to move around, the claustrophobic atmosphere through which we are forced to view Jeff’s life helps us connect to him.  The limited perspective really drew me in, the film managed to be engaging despite the fact that we’re stuck in Jeff’s apartment.  It was incredible to me that a 2-hour movie about a character looking out of a window managed to hold my attention so well.  Did anyone find the movie to be boring or lacking at all because of the atmosphere? 

I found this trailer to be really interesting; it describes Jeff's life as being shrunk down to the window, which I thought was a good illustration of what happened to Jeff when he broke his leg. 

I also thought it was interesting how in the short story, watching his neighbors was excused.  In the film however, it was questioned whether or not it was right to spy on his neighbor’s lives.  I think ultimately the film justified it, since it solved a murder.  It made me consider that as an audience, we enjoy watching the lives of other people.  We are outside observers of these character’s stories, that is what our entertainment is made up of.  Books, movies, and television aren't quite on the same level as watching your neighbors through the window, but it's still watching people's lives, and it's what we call entertainment.  Granted in film the people are fictional, but are we any better than Jeff? Is there anything wrong with what Jeff was doing?  Is it different for us because we look in on fictional characters where Jeff is watching actual people?  It’s a fascinating question that the film raises. 

Just briefly, this clip helps illustrate my point below.  After looking at it, think of how the characters were shown at the beginning, and how they evolved throughout the film.

One area I think the film did slightly better than the short story was opening up multiple storylines.  For a man who watched his neighbors all day, the short story really only focused on the life of the Thorwalds.  The short story did briefly discuss the other neighbors, but nothing much happened to them throughout the story.  The film gives life to the people Jeff is watching, there is more to them than there was originally.  Miss Lonelyhearts, The Songwriter, Miss Torso, and the newlyweds.  We see most of them differently by the end than we do at the beginning, because their characters actually evolve.  If felt that the characters in the movie were richer than the characters in the short story.  Anyone feel that the neighbors were just as engaging in the short story? Anyone think it would have been better to focus more on the Thorwalds?