Yeah I was already disturbed that they kissed earlier
I found out she was his daughter and I was like "" It was definately a surprise (I haven't seen Vertigo, so I'm completely new to this whole twisted family of movies)
The director wants you to think they are going to kiss. That is why the scene is so damn long and their faces keep getting closer to each other.
Rofl, definately tricked me.. I was sitting there while the camera was going in circles around the two and I was like "Don't you kiss her, don't do it.. Oh my god they're gonna, no they're not..Wait yes, but no no no they can't, but if they.. No they wont"
And then the movie ended
Definately a movie I will see again.
reply
share
rpniew
18 years ago
They did not do "a lot more than kiss earlier." That was the result of a "fevered dream" about their wedding night. They did not actually have sex; she has made it very clear the she is "a good Catholic girl" for the obvious reasons.
The film, by the way is imperfect. I enjoy it, I think it has been unfairly forgotten, and I think it's really the closest DePalma ever got to Hitchcock in his adulative years. However, like many of even Hitchcock's greatest films, the plot doesn't relly hold up to scrutiny. Orchestrating the meeting between the two, for example, would be difficult; orchestrating the scene mentioned above would be nearly impossible. In fact, the whole thing seems like a lot of trouble for a relatively small amount of money. But it's still a fun film, warts and all.
reply
share
secretadmirer2341
18 years ago
Turns out that the censors more or less made Depalma alter the whole marriage plotline, because of the "incest" allusions. That's why the scene where Bujold says, "I am now Elizabeth"... or something similar, is fuzzy.... Robertson DREAMED the marriage.
At the end, Robertson realises that Bujold is his daughter that he thought was dead(She yells "DADDY!").
reply
share
sbrooks839
8 years ago
I know I'm replying to a comment that is 10 years old, lol, but the "censors" didn't have anything to do with the incestuous stuff being removed, that had to do with composer Bernard Hermann suggesting to director Brian De Palma that he should not have that in the film, so it was removed.
reply
share
askmonroville
11 years ago
If you recall, Robert LaSalle (John Lithgow) specifically tells Michael Courtland (Cliff Robertson) that it was all done to get Mike to sign away his ownership of a multi-million dollar property (or set of properties), so it wasn't a relatively small amount of money. That is also why LaSalle was willing to let Mike walk away with the $500,000 in cash... it was his consolation prize (and a means of LaSalle rubbing it in his face).
In fact, LaSalle should have just shut up and not say anything. Mike would have wandered off, thinking he got his 2nd wife killed AGAIN, and probably would have committed suicide (much like what his daughter tried on the plane).
And frankly, I'm surprised he DIDN'T wind up shooting his daughter at the end. She's running up smiling but not saying anything.. I fully expected to hear a gunshot and THEN she says "Daddy!" and falls dying in his arms. Hell, it was 1976.. when they did that stuff all the time (hmm, maybe that's why DePalma did NOT have the depressing 70's ending.. it would have been expected at the time, though it would have been somewhat appropriate considering everything leading up to that point).
reply
share