Rebecca, Hitch, Welles and cinema's soul

Rebecca floats around in that Platonic list of "best" Hitchcock films.  I remember loving it in high school, losing interest though once Rebecca is packed in with the rest of Hitchcock's work.

Rebecca is, nodding now at Aristotle, a classic film. Archly romantic and melodramatic in its story adaption by Alma, Alfred, Joan Harrison and David O Selznick. Beautifully framed and lit by George Barnes. And directed with real restraint by Hitchcock.

There is little doubt that Hitchcock knew a test when he was taking one. He was aware that his golden contract with David  O, was tomorrow's bird cage lining if he didn't pass. The test?  To make the best Hollywood  film. Or the best Selznick film,  for in 1940 these are synonymous.

Hitchcock aces the test, winning for Selznick the Oscar for Best Picture and himself the respect of the industry for not being another Orson Welles.

Citizen Kane was Hollywood's other story that year. Kane is flashier and better than Hitchcock's Rebecca. The two films are fascinating to double feature. They are oddly similar.  Both are about the hero competing with an idea of an antagonist. The new Mrs DeWinter vs Rebecca. Kane vs Charles Foster Kane. They are heroes that gain peace by film's end only to see that which haunted them consumed by fires. 

The difference in artistic quality and ability between Welles and Hitch is two small to measure. They are distinct in their interests and style. Their talents off screen could not be further apart  Welles difficult and insulting to the East Coast money that was still the life blood of Hollywood. The enfant terrible artist who didn't need the Thatchers of the world.

Hitchcock with his stern mother and Jesuit education was the disciplined school boy.  Hitchcock's economic wisdom built a career and an artistic oeuvre without parallel.

Welles gave us Kane. Hitchcock gave us Vertigo. The battle between the two films and the two artistic sentiments is the soul of cinema.  Not for the soul. It is the soul.