Vest, James M. “Reflections of Ophelia in Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo.”The Journal of
        the Midwest Modern Language Association 1989, 1-9. JSTOR. University of Pennsylvania
        Library, Philadelphia. 4 Apr. 2008. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1315269>.

         Focusing on the use of water as a pivotal plot device, James M. Vest attempts to draw a connection between Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Hitchcock’s Vertigo. He states that in Vertigo “water couples with the idea of the suicide of a beautiful young woman in ways that precisely reflect images of Ophelia” (1). Shakespeare’s work is said to have been very influential to Hitchcock, who grew up reading his plays. Vest believes that Vertigo is Hitchcock’s attempt at creating a modern Hamlet. After Madeleine falls we see her floating in the water in a posture that draws striking parallels to Ophelia’s suicide. Hitchcock insisted on surrounding the dead body with flowers, a depiction seen in John Everett Millais’s painting of Ophelia in the stream. The connection is further emphasized throughout the film when Madeleine talks about her previous falls into water. Scottie serves as the “Hamlet-like hero” who develops an unexpected relationship with her. Vest also notes that after Madeleine is fished out of the bay, she speaks incoherently and assumes a “somnambulistic” appearance which rivals that of Ophelia’s madness. Other links include the multiple roles each character fills. In Hamlet, Ophelia is the “playful sister,” the “dutiful daughter,” and the “disenchanted lover, while Kim Novak’s character is associated with Madeleine, Judy, and Carlotta. According to Vest, “both stories conclude with an expression of love intimately linked to death.” He also notes that both Vertigo and Hamlet follow a main character who not only is mentally unstable, but also appears to see ghosts.
        James M. Vest provides us with some very interesting insight onto the inspiration for Hitchcock’s story. Hitchcock had always dreamed of directing a film version of Hamlet, and even went so far as to begin production on such a film in 1946. Although the project never came to be, it is clear that his intentions have lived on through Vertigo.
 

In Leitch’s discussion of what he calls fallacies in cinema adaptation theory, he invokes Hitchcock’s name under fallacy number nine, “Source material is more original then the adaptation.” Leitch centers his argument around the idea of auterism. Directors like Kubrick frequently adapted his films from pre-existing source material, yet is concerned to be a very original director. The early films from the Golden Age of Disney can all be linked together whether they are direct adaptation or original stories. All of William Shakespeare’s plays were essentially adaptations of pre-existing stories. He later points out that any work, adaptation or not draws from existing material, usually without even knowing it.

Leitch uses Hitchcock as an example of a director who manages to be an auteur with only rarely using original screenplays, noting in a footnote that Lifeboat as an unpublished novelette is up for debate as an adaptation. Despite having strayed so far from the source material that was not even published, under Leitch’s guidelines, Lifeboat still can qualify as being an adaptation. He disregards the notion that fidelity to source material (in spirit and specifics) and the idea that film adaptations are a way of connecting with the source material as ways of judging an adaptation.

Many criticize the differences without acknowledging the similarities. There’s value in noting that although the character’s names, motivations, behavior, and actions change, certain things did stay the same. Each character comes from the same background and represents the same aspect of society as in the final story. Hitchcock took away the competence away from many of the main characters, the sailors and the self-made man, whom Steinbeck idealized. Some plot elements were retained, though their context changed. Lifeboat is an interesting study for adaptation theory as it breaks with many of the false truths Leitch criticizes in his paper.