Review: Kim Novak’s Vertigo | DIFF 2026

Score: B-

Director: Alexandre O. Philippe

Running Time: 77 Minutes

Rated: NR

Kim Novak's Vertigo is unlike a lot of movies about Hollywood's Golden Age. It's even unlike a lot of the director's previous documentaries about cinema and obsession. It's an immersive, intimate doc about one of the last stars of the studio system that sometimes veers into pretentiousness.

There are no talking heads, no interviews with past collaborators or lovers. It's Kim's show all the way. Part of that is that she's outlived nearly everyone she shared the screen with. Another part is that she essentially walked away from acting in the '70s, appearing in only a handful of films and one season of Falcon Crest. She instead devoted her life to art and animals, sometimes to an unhealthy degree.

Even though Novak has suffered multiple house fires, she still has quite an archive, which she gave Philippe full access to. This includes photos, memorabilia, and most importantly, her grey dress from Vertigo. Late in the film she finally opens the sealed box it's been stored in for decades, and it's a truly powerful moment as she reckons with film history and her own past.

Though she touches on her early works, the film's focus is obviously the Alfred Hitchcock classic, which has become one of the most acclaimed films of all time in the last 20 years. Novak played Judy and Madeline, the two women who haunt Jimmy Stewart's Scottie. Novak has nothing but kind words for Stewart, who seemed to know exactly the right emotional beat to hit in each scene. (They would play opposite one another in the rom-com Bell, Book and Candle later the same year.)

There's not a whole lot more to explore, given her brief career. That means the film is quite short. Indeed, it probably would have made a better short than feature. But Novak is an absolute one-of-a-kind, and her outlook on the world – however kooky it might seem – is unique. So too is the film. If you care at all about old Hollywood and big personalities, it's quite essential viewing.

Facebooktwitterredditmail

About Kip Mooney

Like many film critics born during and after the 1980s, my hero is Roger Ebert. The man was already the best critic in the nation when he won the Pulitzer in 1975, but his indomitable spirit during and after his recent battle with cancer keeps me coming back to read not only his reviews but his insightful commentary on the everyday. But enough about a guy you know a lot about. I knew I was going to be a film critic—some would say a snob—in middle school, when I had to voraciously defend my position that The Royal Tenenbaums was only a million times better than Adam Sandler’s remake of Mr. Deeds. From then on, I would seek out Wes Anderson’s films and avoid Sandler’s like the plague. Still, I like to think of myself as a populist, and I’ll be just as likely to see the next superhero movie as the next Sundance sensation. The thing I most deplore in a movie is laziness. I’d much rather see movies with big ambitions try and fail than movies with no ambitions succeed at simply existing. I’m also a big advocate of fun-bad movies like The Room and most of Nicolas Cage’s work. In the past, I’ve written for The Dallas Morning News and the North Texas Daily, which I edited for a semester. I also contributed to Dallas-based Pegasus News, which in the circle of life, is now part of The Dallas Morning News, where I got my big break in 2007. Eventually, I’d love to write and talk about film full-time, but until that’s a viable career option, I work as an auditor for Wells Fargo. I hope to one day meet my hero, go to the Toronto International Film Festival, and compete on Jeopardy. Until then, I’m excited to share my love of film with you.