Distrubia/Rear Window

[unclejack]

Hello peoples, allow me to take a minute to crap all over the new movie "Disturbia" about a guy on house arrest who witnesses strange behavior by one of his neighbors and concludes that he is a killer.
Okay, first things first...just in case you didn't already know, Disturbia is a very obvious knock off of the Alfred Hitchcock classic, Rear Window starring James Stewart and Grace Kelly. Now, I knew this going into watching this movie and actually that's the reason it has taken me so long to get around to watching it. You see, James Stewart is my favorite actor and I'm a big Hitchcock fan too. So I'm a little perturbed that they would even attempt to remake a classic like Rear Window.
Where to begin..lemme start with Disturbia. Disturbia is a movie about a teenage guy in high school who grieves over the death of his father and consequently gets sentenced to house arrest after punching one of his teachers in the face. When his mother suspends his internet and ipod priveledges then he resorts to spying on his neighbors with the use of a pair of binoculars. Alot of the film is built around his obsession with the new girl next door who he soon develops a relationship with. The two of them begin observing one neighbor who is a middle aged man who they think is a killer. They watch him dragging heavy black bags into his garage, strange items in his garage, and his dealings with women he invites into his house. Now that's a synopsis with me being kind. Lemme move on to Rear Window.
Rear Window was very different from this new brand of mystery/suspense. Rear Window was based around James Stewart as the main character who is a successful photographer. We are told at the start of the film that he broke his leg during a skiiing accident and thus has been found almost totally imobile, sitting at the window of his apartment complex. He sides with Grace Kelly in the movie playing his girlfriend and potential fiancee. The scenerio is very similar when it comes to the man in question. They witness very strange behavior that cause them to pin him as a killer and proceed to investigate him further and try to prove his guilt or catch him in the act.
Okay, here's where I unload my critisicm of Disturbia. This movie is flawed in so many ways and is actually offensive to anyone who is a true fan of the original Rear Window. First of all, on the subject of character, James Stewart was a successful photographer, and in Disturbia, this kid is a rebellious young punk who couldn't keep his cool when his teacher said somethin he didn't like. As far as all the observations of the neighbors goes, there are several things wrong with the aproach taken in Disturbia. First of all, in Rear Window, James Stewart's character had a very good excuse for watching his neighbors. He was a photographer and one of the things that almost became a character in the film itself was his newfound interst in the behaviours of his neighbors. He fiinds a fascination in the intricacies of human life and becomes transfixed upon observing them with respect for them. In Disturbia what takes place is nothing more than a bored form of voyerism. I don't remember any scenes from Rear Window where James Stewart was seen spying on one of the pretty ladies he is neighbors with while she takes off her bra, or goes swimming in her bikini. This calls into question the quality of character in the maiin character of the film and makes it very hard to respect him in his predicament. Maybe I'm just old fashioned. Maybe a young rebellious punk who likes to watch young girls get undressed when they don't know he's watchin is more exciting to watch for some people than a respected photographer who finds an interest in the people he lives next to.
Something to consider in comparing the two films is that in Rear Window James Stewart was confined to a small apartment and the only real form of entertainment available to him was watching his neighbors as they do there laundry, walk their dogs, etc. Plus, it all took place in an apartment complex so it felt alot less intrusive than spying on someone all the way across the street. In Disturbia, this spoiled brat has a whole house to roam around in complete with an x-box, ipod, cell phone, and lots of household chores which he refuses to do. Instead he chooses to oogle the girl next door in her sporty new bikini and to play detective with his neighbors.
Alot of the reactions in Disturbia to everything become rather silly near the middle of the film also as they begin following the suspected killer and taking pictures of him shopping. I think that's the part where I turned it off. Two things came to mind when I was watching this movie, first of all, why don't you just call the police because many of the things they witness are much worse than anything that James Stewart ever sees. And second, this kid is no James Stewart.
One of the things that makes Rear Window so good is the relationship between Stewart and Kelly and there struggle to move towards marriage. Alot of the issues that they talk about and deal with are very real and practical in real life wheras in Disturbia all we witness is a lustfull infatuation that takes place between the guy and the girl in the movie.
Anyway, I could go on all day about how bad this movie is but I'll just go ahead and give it four bags of burning dog crap. If you're a fan of the classics and have seen Rear Window, don't bother with Disturbia because you will be dissapointed.

[j. d. worthington]

Not particularly interested in seeing Disturbia, from what I've heard of it, and I'm not particularly surprised if they're trying to redo Rear Window... or rather, make a Rear Window for Dummies.....

However... I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on Stewart's character in Rear Window. Part of what makes that film is that he's stepping over the line... he is voyeuristic, and uses his background as an excuse to pick this way to relieve his ennui... and this character flaw is what lands him in danger... it also allows the killer to be detected, but Stewart's character here (as in Vertigo) has a very dark side to him where this is concerned. He's manipulative, he doesn't really respect his neighbors, but finds them a source of entertainment, and yes, he does watch an attractive woman... though not undress; rather, exercising and practicing (she's a dancer), and focusing on how much those cloth-tightening moves reveal certain anatomical points of interest.... Hitchcock played with that aspect of it throughout the film... having others criticize him for such behavior, then go right ahead and do the same thing (both Thelma Ritter and Grace Kelly do this). And this is also an element in the original Cornell Woolrich short story. Both Hitch and Woolrich were exploring how ordinary, decent people, will overstep the line and excuse doing so... and asking how far is too far in doing so? They both play to the character's titillation on this, with intent to make the audience more than a little uncomfortable about this character they are invited to sympathize with... and both also self-reflexively ask the question about watching (or reading about) someone who does this... does this not make us voyeurs, too?

So, that aspect is spot on... but I would imagine that they go for the extremes, complete lack of taste, and the lowest (and easiest to attain) level they can address this at. I'll stick with Rear Window (also one of my favorite Hitchcock films, along with Vertigo, North by Northwest, and several of his earlier films, among others). At least Hitch approached this uncomfortable subject with some style, subtlety, and panache... and a wicked sense of humor....

[steve12553]

Good point, JD. Many of Hitchcock's films feature main characters who contribute to their own miseries. I also really enjoy a good Hitchcock film.

[unclejack]

I really don't dissagree with that. I can admit that in alot of ways Stewart's observations of his neighbors could be seen by some to be intrusive or somewhat nosy. However, as I stated before, I do find the fact of his physical plight, i.e. being virtually imobile due to a broken leg, to be something that at least makes his behavior a little more understandable than in the case of Disturbia. Restless boredom leads to him crossing the line in the realm of what I would consider to be a very mild form of voyerism. The crossing of a line in his character admittedly does add to the drama of the film, but once you get caught up in the mystery of the supposed killer you're very much interested in finding out how it turns out. In the case of Disturbia, the main character's flaws stand out with glaring clarity and drown out any respect you may have for there efforts to expose a killer. I think if the film in question is one where the main character is corrupt in nature then it's okay to display an array of faults that many find offensive, but in the case of a cat and mouse good versus evil scenerio you don't expect to see the goodguy in the film as a perverted little punk you can't control his temper.
I'm definately not saying that Stewart's character was perfect in the film, but his character was much more enjoyable to watch. That's the main point and you don't end up disliking him so much through the film that you cease to care whether or not he uncovers the mystery of the killer.

[steve12553]

Originally Posted by unclejack

II'm definately not saying that Stewart's character was perfect in the film, but his character was much more enjoyable to watch. That's the main point and you don't end up disliking him so much through the film that you cease to care whether or not he uncovers the mystery of the killer.

Hitchcock main characters are generally sympathetic with a somewhat dark side. That's why I've seen Rear Window and certain others a dozen times and won't get bored enough to see Disturbia. It's a shame when they copy the Master but it's probably more out of an incompetent tribute than anything else.

[unclejack]

I agree, and yeah, it was just boredom that led me to even watch it. When I saw the trailer I knew it was a Rear Window knockoff and that's actually one of my favorite hitchcock/Stewart films. I did think I could at least sit through the whole movie though but I was wrong.

[j. d. worthington]

I'd agree with you on several points there. For one thing, Jimmy Stewart was a very good actor, who could play a role with many layers (I've heard, for instance, that the stage production of Harvey had Elwood being considerably darker, giving the entire production a very uneasy, menacing feel -- and this was the way Stewart wanted to play it on stage; while in the film he's eccentric, but presented as a warm, lovable sort of eccentric.) I have trouble picturing nearly any of the young actors of today having the nuance that Stewart could bring to a role.

I also agree that it makes a film much better -- richer -- by having Stewart's character a sort of everyman who steps over the line... that was part of the point: one can see oneself falling into such behavior under the right circumstances, and that makes it all the more uncomfortable and effective. From what I've heard here and elsewhere, like nearly all of today's films, Disturbia is going for the "blunt instrument" approach (say, one of Wyle E. Coyote's 16-ton ACME weights)... another sign of disrespect for the ability of the audience to catch or to appreciate things on a more subtle level than a pie in the face.....