Showing its age?

Rating: 7/10 (28 December 2004)

I'm not sure if it is the film or me showing age, but somehow this movie just doesn't pack as much wallop as many of Hitchcock's other movies. Perhaps I've seen it too often and my familiarity with the film is in he process of breeding a degree of contempt.
Technically, the film is beautiful. San Francisco, ever the photogenic backdrop, provides one glorious setting after another. The score superbly captures the pent-up emotions of the characters as the story unfolds. From there, however, problems begin.
As the reviewer "jrbleau" noted, the film suffers from a rather implausible set of circumstances. Rather than repeat "jrbleau's" synopsis, just this one example will suffice.
"Scottie" is supposed to be an experienced police detective, but his powers of detection seem none too sharp in the plot line. I find it pretty hard to believe that he didn't actually figure out that "Judy Barnes" was "Madeline" until she actually puts on "Carlotta's necklace." Perhaps we are supposed to chalk that up to the overwhelming infatuation/obsession he feels toward "Madeline," but Kim Novak's portrayal of the character does not provide a sufficient spark to carry the day on that score. Their encounters before the first all from the mission tower are really quite bland. Scottie doesn't seem to be overwhelmed by her at all -- just mildly interested.
This remains a fine film, but somewhat overrated in the overall context of Hitchcock's body of work.