Based on a few comments in earlier posts, are we in agreement that Margaret Lockwood didn't measure up as Iris? I'd credit her with at least becoming a more sympathetic character as the movie evolved, since she was such an arrogant, spoiled heiress to begin with. Maybe that bump on the head triggered her personality makeover. Or since this is a movie wherein nobody is who they seem (a governess as a spy, a high-heel-clad agent as a nun), maybe we're supposed to extend Iris the same benefit of the doubt.
Lockwood was all right. She depended a little too much on intense, aren't-I-lovely stares that made her come across more as an ingenue than an actress.
And I wonder whether Hitchcock would have cast her if he'd made the call. Given his proclivity for cool blondes, Lockwood might not have made the cut.
3 comments:
I think she held her own in the movie. I think you're right about the emphasis on her "aren't I pretty" looks. It probably would have been unthinkable in that era to cast someone as a leading lady who wasn't first and foremost a pretty face.
Grace Kelly is my favorite Hitchcock leading lady. She is supernaturally beautiful, to be sure, but she was also a fantastic actress. Her charms went far beyond the physical.
I really liked Lockwood, but maybe that's just because she's so lovely.
KC, I loved Kim Novak, too. She did elegant and elusive so well that it was a shocker to see her as the cheap Kansan when James Stewart rediscovers her in "Vertigo."
But Grace Kelly might be peerless. I like "Rear Window" better but think her acting was best in "Dial M for Murder."
Post a Comment