I feel that instead of using the title “Rear Window”, it should instead be titled “We Need More Evidence”. I think as a whole film, it would be most properly represented by this title. Throughout the film, we have seen that Jeff is just watching people across the alley through a camera and binoculars. He is constantly looking and making these ideas in head about what happened to Mr.Thorwald’s wife after he didn’t see her in a couple days. His wife Lisa was always skeptical about believing him because Mr.Thorwald was always such a nice guy and “could never do such a thing”. As the movie progresses, we notice that there is more and more evidence that Jeff gathered to prove that Mr.Thorwald killed his wife. The film as a whole is very slowly developed but still shows significant signs of a very well driven plot with a lot of aspects that are needed in order for the film to progress. The whole time, Lisa is telling Jeff that whatever he thinks is happening with Mr and Ms.Thorwald is completely in his mind until he shows her proof. Even after the proof is shown, Lisa is still very skeptical about his findings. I chose to rename the film “We Need More Evidence” because when Lisa starts to see what Jeff is seeing and believing it, she starts to establish that she needs a closer look in order to show the police. Lisa knows that if they call the police and tell them only what Jeff is claiming to see, no one will believe him. Lisa does a tremendous job in trying to find more evidence. She digs up flowers, climbs the balcony and hangs off of it to not get caught; she finds any way possible to prove what their theory is. Including going into Mr.Thorwald’s house and looking through his things until he finds her. Because it is a suspenseful part within the film, I believe that the new title fits it perfectly without giving the viewer any insight on anything that is happening. I chose to make the cover a pair of binoculars and have the view of the window in it to have some type of knowledge without knowing the significance of the window. I feel that as a whole, the title and drawing would fit the film just as well as the original just to keep the viewer in the dark with the plot and keep them interested and wondering about why it is the way it is.

I decided to take a more modern approach for the film cover I made compared to the original one. Instead of an older style with minimal color I went for an eye popping color scheme which I feel would draw the viewer in and make them more interested. The cover I made also reminds me of a few book covers which really gave me the inspiration to make something like this. Even though it’s an older movie I thought why not approach it as if the movie was made in today’s day and age. It’s pretty simplistic but I still feel the concept of the film gets across. I would advertise the film in a way that would make people question “How much privacy do we really have?” With social media nowadays there’s barely any privacy. People pretty much have access to parts of our lives just by searching our name on the internet. It’s a scary thing, so my goal would be to make people more aware. Throughout the film the theme of voyeurism is explored and really leaves viewers questioning the privacy they have in their own homes. Though Jeff watching out the rear window led to him catching a murderer this obsessive “ watching” of people out a window isn’t a good thing, and is an invasion of privacy. The portrayal of privacy in Rear window was invasive and made me as a viewer see just how little privacy we have in society and even more so now with the rise of social media platforms. I didn’t want to change the name too much so the name is pretty much the same but instead of “ Rear Window” it’s the “ The Rear Window Watcher” which adds a bit of suspense. I changed this in hopes of people wondering who’s watching out of this so-called rear window.

The movie Psycho is a magnificent horror/thriller film created by Alfred Hitchcock. The suspense aspect of the movie was something never experienced before. Hitchcock had the ability to keep his audience in the dark until the moment he needed them to notice. This created a great horror movie that became a classic in a line of suspenseful thrillers. When it came to the marketing, specifically the movie posters, the same skill was used and most of the posters were vague. The original poster only had three of the characters in the movie and the title of the movie. The position and expression of the characters give no window into what the movie is about at all. There are no items that you would expert in a horror movie poster like knives or blood. In my personal opinion, the poster is rather boring in how it looks. The other marketing poster put out was about the “Rule” of watching Psycho. The rule was that you had to be there when the movie began, and that you would not be allowed in after the movie had already started. In all, the marketing was horribly vague and uninteresting. I think that because of the vagueness and mystery behind the posters, it drew people to go and see it. It was something to discover, like an adventure. For my take on the poster I wanted to keep the mysterious aspect, but make the poster a bit more captivating.

When making the poster I wanted to focus on the killer in the movie, but making sure to keep the identity still a mystery. Alongside the killer I decided to put two icons of the movie in the poster, the house and the bathroom drain. As for the color scheme, because the movie itself is in black and white, the poster should mirror what the movie is like. I wanted the viewer to get a good sense of what to expect, but keeping in the dark how the two silhouettes and icons correlate to each other. The “mother” I decided to be the looming figure over the entire scene. She is the mastermind of the scheme while the son, the tiny figure by the house, is weak and small looking compared to the “mother”. The house itself leaks in the drain below to signify connection. The also has something else draining into it, and to the viewer that liquid could be anything which keeps the surprise of what that liquid actually is. As for the title, even though Psycho is a great title, I wanted something that captures the villain of the movie. Mother is Home gives the sense that “mother” was not there before. As to say that this character is unwelcome, in a familiar saying we all know.

I read the New York Times review of Rear Window, published back in 1954. While detailed in its descriptions of the film, I found it interesting how the author did not include any distinct opinions on the movie. Unlike other film reviews, like Roger Ebert for example, there was no numerical rating, nor was there any strong language indicating whether this film was enjoyable or not. Instead, the reviewer explained and analyzed Hitchcock’s cinematic and theatrical techniques and let the reader decide if they appreciate what he has done. They talked about what parts of the movie were well done and what parts were lacking a little bit. The style in which this review was written made it enjoyable for me to read. Oftentimes I am turned off by reviews from other people, especially strangers, because people’s tastes can vary dramatically. How can I know if I can trust the reviewer? I appreciated how this reviewer detached themselves from the film and backed up their claims with evidence from the movie.

When I read this review for the first time, I was immediately captivated by the first line. “The boorish but fascinating pastime of peeking into other people’s homes.” I just loved this line and I feel like it sums up the premise pretty well. Hitchcock chose to create a film about something that we all do, whether we like to admit it or not. But it is not something we ever really do willingly. Every time I have found myself staring into other people’s homes was when I have exhausted just about every other form of entertainment that I have to the point where I have to turn to something that most of the time is not entertaining at all. It truly is very boring and you almost never see anything juicy. Yet, we all still do it to fill this strange biological need to know what everyone else around us is doing. Describing a movie as boring, but in a good way is such a great way to encapsulate the reader.

Towards the middle of the review, the author says “Mr. Hitchcock’s film is not ‘significant’. What it has to say about people and human nature is superficial and glib.” I understand this perspective. When you boil it down, I don’t see any hidden message or underlying moral to the story. Hitchcock is not trying to sell you some idea. But I don’t necessarily see this as a problem. Not every movie needs to be commenting on an issue in order to be taken seriously. In fact, I found this movie to be quite pleasant to watch as a second semester senior because I didn’t have to try that hard to understand the narrative. I felt that the spectacular writing and beautiful set design fully compensated for any narrative shortcomings.

The review dedicated an entire paragraph to describing the side characters in the film. For this film specifically, they are obviously worthy of that space. I liked how this was a main focus in the article and that the reviewer chose it as one of the selling points of the movie. In my opinion, nothing beats a well thought out cast. Deeply developed side characters are a good indicator of a quality film. The reviewer said just enough to interest the reader while leaving out just enough to avoid spoilers and keep them wanting more. The characters are all so absurd that as a reader, you can’t help but wonder how they all fit together into the story. If I hadn’t seen the movie yet, this paragraph would definitely have made me add it to the list.

I understand completely why the author chose not to speak of the ending for fear of spoilers. After all, many people read reviews before they set out to watch the movie. However, from someone who has already seen the film, I craved for some discussion about the end. I want to hear other thoughts about whether the ending came as a shock. While I could relate to LB Jeffries’ curiosity and voyeurism throughout the film, I could not relate to his confidence and need to interfere. I simply do not have the courage to confront people like that. For me, I spent the entire movie doubting LB Jeffries just as I would doubt my own thoughts if I were in his position. Therefore, when Thorwald actually ended up committing the crime, I was truly surprised. Despite seeming like a straight forward ending, Hitchcock subverted my expectations by not including the classic twist ending.

Works Cited Crowther, Bosley. “A ‘Rear Window’ View Seen at the Rivoli.” The New York Times, 5 Aug. 1954.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is a technical and precise movie that shows its wit in a different way from most movies. It uses comedy that most wouldn’t even try and the storytelling is risky but works extremely well. Wes Anderson, The director of the film uses certain skills in a lot of his movies like his quick and witty comedy that lights up the movie or how detailed he is in his storytelling. The GBH is one of the most technical movies I have ever seen with the way that the director has everything set up so perfectly.

Wes Anderson uses his detailed shots to give the film a more realistic and alive feeling. During the shot where the camera tracks Mr. Chuck while Zero is interviewing for a job follows and pauses multiple times to show how the hotel is very up and running. This gives perspective on the hotel and shows that Mr.Chuck is an important man. This tells the audience the importance of his character and to watch him closely to understand the story. Another example of a technical shot is when Zero was being taught all the ropes of his job and increasingly got better at the tasks. This shows his determination to become a better employee. It also shows that he is grateful for having the opportunity. Wes Anderson is one of the more technical directors with his great storytelling and it shows with these shots how he can transform a simple scene into a scene with a lot of meaning.

GDH shows the characters and the way they act and gives them meaning. Like Zero, for example, he represents immigrants who work hard and how much friendship means in the world. Mr.Chuck represents a good soul who turned bad and has been wandering but once he found a true friend he snapped into place. He saved Zero and in turn, he died for him. The woman’s family represents the lack of love in the world. The importance of these characters was a technical decision. It shows that love and peace will always win over hate and ignorance. The choice of characters is meticulous showing every background and giving characters the background like Zero and being from a country of war or the guests at the modern hotel while not playing the biggest role in the movie still has the background of being taking photographs and writing books.

The last big technical part of the movie is the different timelines. The first timeline shows a young lady getting ready to read a book that seems to have something to do with the statues she’s sitting next to. She doesn’t seem that important but it’s still added into the movie. Next is the present day where a man is staying in a random hotel and is interviewing the owner. The last piece is that the owner tells the story in a flashback story. While risky I think it structures the storytelling well. The young lady is reading the second man’s book while the second man is interviewing the owner about the story he writes. This gives perspective to the timeline and shows how a story can travel over many different times and places and have different impacts on each person who reads it.

The Grand Budapest Hotel shows that a movie can be both technical and beautiful as it has done both things beautifully. From the types of shots to the characters and even the timelines it all comes together to make a masterpiece. The Grand Budapest Hotel is a technical and precise movie that shows its wit in a different way from most movies.

Westerns fundamentally revolve around the juxtaposition of modern, civilized life and the rudimentary, untamed frontier. They take place in a time of transition. One where the inherent human inclination toward expanding territory coincided with the rapid growth of technology. The technology and desire for growth and adventure fed on one another, creating a society evolving at an extreme pace.

“Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid” captures this feeling precisely. To make a poster reflective of this, I decided to follow the example set by the western genre as a whole and combine new with old. To satisfy the classical aspects of my poster, I examined the trope of western wanted signs and previous movie posters and attempted to format my poster similarly. The elements I drew from these were large, centered portraits of the main character in a semi-painterly style and the type font standard in these posters. I also used text with highlighted bars to draw the observer’s concentration first, allowing them to comprehend the information essential to marketing, such as the name of the movie and starring actors, before looking at the scenes depicted.

Contrasting these widely used tropes of western culture are two images in a more modern style. First is a portrait of Butch and Sundance staring into the camera. While the concept of shoulder and up pictures in a movie poster is nothing new, the gradient behind them and the eye contact with the camera is a new twist used in current posters, such as “Moonlight” and “The Martian.” Along with the contrast, the portrait also captures attention. The human face evolutionarily draws our eye. Therefore, having too large faces will lead to more people looking at the poster, which is the goal. The second image I used to imbue the aspect of modernity is a digitally rendered, 3D scene containing a landscape of dunes and rocks with two blacked-out characters walking from left to right. Similar images are not often used in posters because it is fairly monochromatic, lacking the attention-drawing colors and intense action of other posters. In the context of this poster, the unassuming image is a feature, not a flaw. It is naturally observed after the title and portraits allowing for a complete experience of initial interest-grabbing and further exploration. I chose to create this render in the form I did because it emphasizes the aura of mystery and adventure promoted by the western genre. You don’t know why and where the people are walking. All that is known is that they are, giving an incentive to see the movie and fully understand the poster.

Through an integrated combination of attention curating composition and image, font, and color choice, my poster put a new spin on an established art form and serves as a successful poster.

Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window is centered around voyeurism. The characters living in this tight nit and closely built community allows for the easy invasion of privacy, even on accident. Each character can easily look into another’s home or space and come up with a conclusion about the events taking place. This is an invasion of privacy for the person being observed and creates tension, especially if they know they are being watched. By watching and concluding, people can assume, make false notions, and even feel entitled to more information or others’ decisions. In a bigger context, it creates a safety issue for both parties. The person being observed has to take liberties to hide what they don’t want to be shown. The voyeur puts themselves in danger by involving themselves in commodities they shouldn’t.

Everyone has become an L.B. Jefferies, an invasive observer at one point or another. The general curiosity we all have can lead to an obsession with someone or something. In turn, we sneakily watch, look or take a peep, and from our perspective, we develop conclusions. They can be outlandish or sound-minded but they were developed from an invasion of privacy.

Close nit housing and row homes in modern-day society create voyeurs because of proximity. Curiosity in addition to access creates temptation. The temptation is then acted on, leading to “peeping toms”. Which in turn prohibits others from their private isolation. Social media creates people who pry. People post intimate things about themselves or their lives. Others observe those posts. Without knowing a person closely or having met them in reality, they can learn or retain multiple facts about their lives and what they do daily. This is especially true with social media influencers. People with a platform or large following that have established credibility with a particular industry can then persuade people to buy things based on their recommendations. Social media influencers, people of high social status, and celebrities are subjected to extreme invasive voyeurism. Their voyeurs develop obsessions. From this obsession, entitlement is produced. Entitlement to more information, judgment on their mistakes or decisions, and entitlement to make choices for them.

Companies have become spies as well. Different “free” apps that use advertisements may be tracking your data and selling it to give you more personalized advertising. The only way they can obtain this information is by watching the different hyperlinks you follow, the ads you don’t skip through, the things you purchase, and how you got to purchasing. By observing your choices, and trying to follow a brain pattern, companies are then able to persuade you. Companies and apps invade your privacy to freely choose. Every choice means something and is closer to putting you in a targetted audience.

Surveillance is also a form of voyeurism because of the observation they provide from cameras in video or photo form as well as audio recordings. Places with surveillance cameras invade people’s privacy to protect others. The cameras themselves or the recordings they create allow others to view you and anything you’ve done or engaged in for that whole recording. Photography and cameras on their own accord not connected to surveillance can be considered voyeurism as well. Cameras and photography can amplify the curiosity and psychological tendency to pry. An example of this could be a picture with background noise, catching people off guard. Regardless of the actions the people committed, they have now been captured without their knowledge.

Voyeurism isn’t always a bad thing, as seen in Rear Window. If the main character had not spied on his neighbor. A murder would go unsolved or noticed. This is true in our modern reality as well. Witnesses can be essential in solving a case and making sure the perpetrator gets the punishment they deserve. Many witnesses obtained their information by watching and observing. These observations are more often than not a product of invading privacy. But without that action and without the testimonies that come from making the observations many people would not receive justice.

Rear Window uses voyeurism to bring awareness not only to the way we watch movies but the way we watch eachother. Watching and observing isn’t always a bad thing but to watch and observe could be invading someone’s privacy. It has thus become a cultural artifact because of this trope.

To this, I propose completely rebranding “Rear Window” with the title “Unbeknowst Briefs”. Call it silly but I find that this takes a funny take on what this movie is. Now the title was conceived purely out of what may be sleep deprivation, but also to what the b-line segment of the story is. The man we focus on for the main gist of the story is essentially an adrenaline-seeking photographer always shooting for that perfect shot that is temporarily disabled, forcing him to stay put at home to almost be almost immobilized for (honestly I forgot how long). For this period of time or main protagonist needs some sort of hobby right? What kind of person can sit idle for hours a day with nothing at all to do? Maybe some sort of serial killer to be fair, but not our main protagonist. So what will our main protagonist ever do with a broken leg for weeks on end? Sleep? No. watch some television? Heavens no? Pick up some skills in the kitchen? What is this the 2010’s? Oh wait, I got it!, or the main protagonist will begin to become a mildly and weirdly educated peeping tom on all the neighbors! And what’s this? A potential love interest? Could be, but it turns out that our main protagonist has gained a friend in the middle of his post-injury boredom that grows very fond of him since there seems to be a weird way shape or form of connection between the two. Now the second protagonist is against the idea of the main protagonist being a peeping tom.

Why I really wanted to stick with the title is because the word unbeknownst can be defined as something happening or existing without the knowledge of someone specified —usually used with to, or in simpler terms; you don’t know what is going on. I wanted to aim for this title to be shot in the neighbor’s direction as they are unaware of what creep creeps on them while they are oblivious to the man behind the bifocals keeping tabs on everyone’s niche actions and private moments. In my opinion, this title choice is great because it is comical, it summarizes the point of what is happening and I also wanted to get kicks about how the main protagonist could catch people moving around in their underwear, hence the briefs part. Also can double as a play into how long we get to see our neighbors being put on display for our protagonists. Pure gold.

I adored Rear Window. I loved the way it was never too much in one genre: sometimes it was thriller and mystery, other times it was romance, and for a few scenes it almost felt like a mockumentary. I read several reviews in preparation for this project and landed on My favourite Hitchcock: Rear Window, written by Killian Fox and published in 2012 by the Guardian. Unlike many reviews I’ve read that are more formulaic, this review intersperses summary with analysis. By including random scenes Fox remembers from his first viewing many years ago, his review reads like a friend explaining their thoughts on a movie you saw a while back.

Fox starts with: “The first time I watched Rear Window, I was 14 or 15 and living in a remote part of Ireland. There was a mile and several hills between us and our nearest neighbours, so the concept of looking out the window and being able to closely survey the lives of an entire community was alien to me, and totally fascinating.” One of the main reasons I became invested in this film was because I live in a city and could understand its portrayal of city life. I know what city heat feels like and can sometimes see what my neighbors are watching on TV, so even though it was set seventy years ago, many aspects still felt relatable. I wonder if the same would be true for viewers from a city watching a film set in a rural area. Nevertheless, this quote shows Hitchcock’s ability to engage viewers from anywhere. He makes the setting central to the storytelling in this film, yet you don’t need to know anything about city life before watching.

Later on in the article, Fox writes, “When I watched Rear Window again at university, I was able to appreciate what the film was saying about the cinema-going experience – of sitting in a dark room and gazing into other people’s private lives.” I like that he brings up that he watched it at university, a place where you are often in a living situation closer to what Jeff has. Although I’ve never lived in a dorm, I can imagine that due to the typical high-density housing, it can be easier to look at your neighbors. I wish Fox wrote more about the similarities he found between the setting of Rear Window and his university life. I understand reviews typically are supposed to be more about the film and less about the writer but this would’ve been a great way to continue the theme started in the first paragraph.

He concludes, “If the film was critical of voyeuristic behaviour, Stewart and his co-conspirators would be proved wrong…this is Hitchcock, connoisseur of the perverse, and the film ended up saying the opposite of what I thought it should.” This is the only line I disagree with. I would not have liked the movie as much if they had been wrong, all the suspense would have been a letdown. In class, we’ve talked about Hitchcock’s “the bomb must never go off” ideology. That seems like it could be applied here, but instead of just the audience knowing about the bomb under the table, the characters know, too. In Rear Window, the characters feel the same type of suspense the viewers do so Hitchcock uses a completely different kind of suspense that only is worth it if what we think is going to happen, happens. I’m not super into thrillers or mysteries, because I’m often pretty gullible when it comes to movies. I tend to believe what the main character believes and I’ve never guessed a plot twist before it occurred unless it’s super cliché. Rear Window is a movie for people like me, I didn’t have to do my own detective work to guess what was going to happen, I just listened to the characters.

Fox ends his article with: “Voyeurism has its rewards; keep a close eye on your neighbours and you might just root out a murderer.” This line seems a bit sarcastic and hyperbolic. You probably won’t solve a murder, but you could tell if a neighbor is sick, or find they have a new lover. Above all, voyeurism (to a respectful extent) creates community. You may not know your neighbor’s name or anything about them, but you know they exist, thus you know you’re not alone.

Fox, Killian. “My favourite Hitchcock: Rear Window | Alfred Hitchcock.” The Guardian, 25 July 2012, https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2012/jul/25/my-favourite-hitchcock-rear-window.

I noticed a general lack of explicit thriller themes in the official rear window posters, so I made mine as over the top and blood splatter-ey as possible. I also wanted to convey themes of spectatorship, voyeurism, violence, and reflect various scenes from the movie in the poster. Starting with the top panel, we see the silhouettes of a group of people, watching the scene shown in the middle two panels. I also have a little quote from the movie that I added for the cool mysterious aesthetic. I had a scene in mind when I made this panel. When the lady across from Jeff’s dog is killed, she loudly accuses her neighbors of apathy, while they watch from their respective places. I feel as if this scene represents the theme of spectatorship quite well, as we have Jeff confronted with the nature of his curiosity, his intentions questioned. Is Jeff a seeker of justice, willing to go to any lengths to see it be served, or a voyeur, merely interested in satisfying his boredom? This is where our title comes in. Scrutiny! Which we will get back to later. Next is the middle left panel, where we have a pool of blood with flowers sprouting out. This is in reference to the flowers in which Lars Thorwald buried a piece of his wife’s body. We have bloody footprints leading away from the flowers, which is just a stylistic choice that references a mystery cliche, and leads our eyes to the next panel. The footprints take us inside the window, behind Jeff, who has his camera out. We see a silhouette behind Jeff, as well as a flash that references the scene where Thorwald invades his home, and Jeff defends himself using a camera flash. I wanted to tell a bit of a story here, implying that the murderer was sneaking up on Jeff, though this doesn’t happen in the movie, I thought it would be cool to have some motion within my poster. Then, boom! Bottom panel! Title! Scrutiny! As viewers, we are tasked with scrutinizing the actions of Jeff and the others on a scale, deciding where and when the line between curiosity and voyeurism gets crossed. It’s a bit of a “do the means justify the ends” kind of situation. Ultimately, Jeff is vindicated, as Lars Thorwald is revealed to be the murderer, but the moral ambiguity of his actions are thought provoking, and (in my opinion) the main focus of the movie.