Comparison Of Meshes In The Afternoon And Vertigo

As we delved into the selection of movies for this course, some were familiar, having crossed my path in the past, while others were entirely new to me. However, regardless of their familiarity, each film offered a fresh and enlightening experience because I was able to view them through a different lens and with the added experience and perspective. Among the exceptional works we studied, two films, in particular, stood out: Vertigo directed by Alfred Hitchcock and Meshes in the Afternoon directed by Maya Deren. I chose these two films to write about because they both surprised me the most as I watched them. I liked Meshes in the Afternoon much more than I expected to, and I liked Vertigo much less than I remember liking it the first time.

Storytelling lies at the heart of any cinematic masterpiece. A compelling narrative, crafted with intricacy and precision, has the power to transport viewers into different worlds and eras. In Vertigo the narrative takes the audience on a psychological journey. The storytelling is intricate and deliberate, weaving a web of mystery and suspense that keeps the viewers engaged from start to finish. Hitchcock's meticulous attention to detail and carefully plotted twists heighten the emotional intensity of the film. Meshes in the Afternoon, on the other hand, employs a non-linear narrative that blurs the lines between reality and fantasy. The storytelling here is unconventional and experimental, challenging the traditional linear structure and inviting interpretation. An example of this is the recurring motif of a mysterious figure with a mirror-faced mask, who appears in multiple scenes. While Vertigo and Meshes in the Afternoon may differ in their narrative styles, both films excel in using storytelling as a powerful tool to evoke emotions, challenge perceptions, and prompt contemplation. Hitchcock's masterful craftsmanship in constructing a psychological thriller and Deren's vision in experimental filmmaking showcase how storytelling can transcend traditional boundaries and create cinematic experiences that resonate deeply with the human

Undeniably, the film showcased Alfred Hitchcock's mastery in cinematography and aesthetics. The visuals, combined with Bernard Herrmann's haunting score, created an eerie and alluring ambiance that captivated me from the start. However, my reservations lay with the plot, particularly its conclusion. While I appreciated the film's exploration of obsession and psychological depth, the ending left me unsatisfied. Through the beginning of the film I actually kind of liked Scottie and had some empathy for him. As soon as the film got to Scottie meeting Judy, he lost any semblance of likability he had in him. Although I think the scenes were very well crafted, they were incredibly hard to watch Judy being treated so terribly. Nonetheless, I realized that movies have the ability to evoke deep and meaningful responses, even if they aren't always positive - and that this doesn’t mean it's a bad film. The film's willingness to leave certain questions unanswered and challenge conventional storytelling conventions ultimately adds to its artistic merit. This realization taught me the importance of being open to interpretations and embracing ambiguity in films, as it often enriches the viewing