Vertigo

I feel that everything that went right with Raging Bull went wrong here: In the former, Scorsese took a turd of a script, and reworked it completely into something brilliant. In the latter, Hitchcock took an equally stinky sample, and decided to leave poor enough alone. Scorsese resisted the temptation to cast known quantities in the leading roles, and not only pulled masterpiece performances seemingly out of thin air, but cemented the careers and reputations of some of our finest actors. Hitchcock almost lazily cast the obviously over the hill Stewart in the lead, and couldn't pull so much as a simmer out of him.

Vertigo is admittedly lovely. Hitchcock is, as always, a master of mood, but shows here that he can create more than suspense. Perhaps it was out of necessity that he managed to show Stewart falling in love with Kim Novak entirely through camera angle. And of course the dream sequence and visual effects are all of the sort that have since become so common that one needs context to appreciate how artistically they are done.

Nonetheless, it is clear that a great director is not enough to make a great movie, and with the other two necessary elements missing--a great script and great performances--I consider this the first time that the AFI has really missed the mark in identifying a great film--let alone ranking it 9th.