In a Lonely Place (1950)

In a Lonely Place (1950) movie poster

director Nicholas Ray
viewed: 06/21/2017

The pessimism of film noir, the dark soul of post-war America already fully formed in 1950. Nicholas Ray’s In a Lonely Place is a noir of the soul, as well as a noir of Hollywood. It’s certainly placed within the world of the machine of movie-making dreams, the dark side, behind the scenes, the drunken, the embittered, the misanthropic.

The film’s very anti-Hollywood ending, maybe the surprise that was unexpected, that love does not conquer all, vindication for a criminal charge doesn’t solve the problems, that the darkness of men’s souls may still overtake it all. Hardly riding off into the sunset after a prolonged kiss.

I’d seen In a Lonely Place before, decades ago, and was duly impressed, as I am with most of Ray’s movies. But more recently, I read the novel In a Lonely Place by Dorothy B. Hughes, which is absolutely among the best crime novels I’ve read. What’s amazing is how far departed the film and the book are, so far departed that they are truly absolutely distinct entities, whose qualities are as different as the works themselves.

Hughes’s novel is about a serial killer, a lost man, back from the War, haunting the greater Los Angeles as he kills and kills again. It’s a haunting, frightening portrait, not at all the psychological violence that underscores this film. In Ray’s picture, the violence is under the skin, in the heart and mind, and mostly off-screen, utterly in the soul.

It’s also remarkably funny and snappy as well. Some really great dialogue.

A classic film from a classic book (that more people should read) though barely the twain really meet.

Ride the Pink Horse (1947)

Ride the Pink Horse (1947) movie poster

director Robert Montgomery
viewed: 05/03/2017

Ride the Pink Horse is an unusual name for a film noir. Despite the fact that I’ve recently read the Dorothy B. Hughes novel from which it was adapted, its oddity still stands out, even knowing contextually from whence it comes.

Hughes’s novel is set in Santa Fe, New Mexico, during a fiesta in the small town that has drawn locals from all over the state for the festivities, still somewhat pagan in their origin. Director/star Robert Montgomery and screenwriters Ben Hecht and Charles Lederer change the setting vaguely to San Pablo, a stand-in for Santa Fe, even though some shots seem to indicate that Santa Fe also stands in for itself.

As an adaptation, it’s quite deft, tightening up some parts of the story, softening others, developing some of its own designs and ideas. Though Hughes’s novel was published in 1946, Montgomery and crew shift this noir into more specific post-war haze. Montgomery’s character is no longer a thug turned blackmailer but a veteran turned blackmailer. And his pursuant lawman, no longer a local Chicago cop, but a federal agent straight out of D.C.

A couple of the best things about the film are some character actors: Wanda Hendrix as Indian waif Pila, Thomas Gomez as immensely affable Pancho the owner of the litte carousel, and Fred Clark as the big villain with a hearing aid. All three are excellent in their own ways (Gomez even became the first Latino-American actor nominated for an Oscar for his role). Hendrix may not look the least Indian or Latina herself, but she’s very beautiful, and young and small, really embodying the spirit of the character.

I liked this much better than Montgomery’s Lady in the Lake (1947). Hughes is an excellent crime novelist of her era. She also wrote the amazing In a Lonely Place, which was also turned into a a classic film noir. I was surprised to see this was a Criterion production, but glad to see it gets recognition.

Shock (1946)

Shock (1946) movie poster

director Alfred L. Werker
viewed: 4/20/2017

Shock is a film noir starring Vincent Price and Lynn Bari, set supposedly in San Francisco and the Bay Area, though not a frame of the film looks to have been shot on location.

The “Shock” of the title befalls a young woman (Anabel Shaw) who has come to the city to meet her husband returning from WWII. Her husband, though, is running late, and in a distressed state of mind, she witnesses a murder (by candlestick) in a neighboring room and is later found catatonic. Conveniently enough, the murderer is also a crack psychiatrist and is also Vincent Price, who takes her to his sanatorium for treatment. Only his conniving nurse/lover (Bari), a true femme fatale, thinks they should brainwash or kill her or just call her crazy.

On the edgier side of the style and genre is an early dream sequence of Shaw’s that involves some surreal imagery and is kind of interesting. Outside of that, it’s neither the richest or the poorest noir you’ll ever see, though it remains consistently interesting throughout its concise 70 minutes.

Films in the public domain aren’t always in the best shape, but Shock is certainly worthwhile. And the poster is pretty sweet.

Hangmen Also Die! (1943)

Hangmen Also Die! (1943) movie poster

director Fritz Lang
viewed: 02/19/2017

This year has got me thinking a lot about resistance to Nazis and fascists. So, now I’ve opened a new trope in my movie-watching “Anti-nazi/Anti-fascist movies”, particularly those made during the build-up and duration of WWII.

It’s not that Hollywood itself was ahead of the game on this, because in fact, it largely wasn’t. There was still money to be made in Europe and calling out the fascists didn’t happen a lot until war was actually declared. And by that time, the stuff shaped more in the form of propaganda a lot of the time.

Emigree director Fritz Lang made three films during WWII with explicit depiction of Nazis. He claimed to have been approached by Joseph Goebbels to join the Nazis as a propagandist and took this meeting as signal to get the heck out of Germany. Whether that story is disputable or not, Lang did emigrate and make films like Hangmen Also Die! a film noir resistance thriller based loosely on real events.

Hangmen depicts a fictional version of the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, the Nazi Reich Protector of German-occupied Prague, the highest ranking Nazi assassinated during the war. In Hangmen, the assassin is Brian Donlevy, a doctor involved with the underground Czech resistance. In his flight after the murder, he runs into a young woman (Anna Lee) who inadvertently helps him escape and soon becomes involved in his continued escape during a vicious and random crack-down by the nazis to root out the killer and any possible associates.

The ruthlessness and brutality of the crackdown no doubt have basis in fact, but the rest of the story is total fabrication. But it works and is tense and thrilling. Shining brightest is Tonio Selwart as the chief of the Gestapo, the canny, cruel mustachioed policeman who orders roundups and executions with cheerful disregard for humanity.

Propaganda is propaganda, but Nazis suck.

Sudden Fear (1952)

Sudden Fear (1952) movie poster

director David Miller
viewed: 02/17/2017

When a dictaphone is shown in the home office of a writer with such elaborate demonstration, you know it’s going be a key plot device later in the film. And that’s the thing with Sudden Fear. It’s not so much boilerplate woman-in-distress noir, as it is rather conventional and obvious.

Leave it to star Joan Crawford and an excellent Gloria Grahame and a slithery Jack Palance to give heft to this piece. And old San Francisco gets shown off in some glory as well, maybe not as primely as in a couple other notable SF noirs, but still pretty nice.

I’ve always had some weird issue with Crawford, just the extremity of her visage. Those eyebrows! That mouth! Those eyes, almost always glaring. But she’s very good here as the semi-spinsterish successful playwright who foolishly falls for an actor she fired (Palance).  Grahame on the other hand is pitch perfect as Palance’s floozy girlfriend, pretty and nasty.

I guess that’s why there were movie stars. To elevate mediocre pictures to decent ones.

Angel’s Flight (1965)

Angel's Flight (1965) title shot

directors  Raymond Nassour, Kenneth W. Richardson
viewed: 01/28/2017

Somewhat maligned (one imdb.com user review reads “Bad Writing, Bad acting, Bad Editing – Great Locations!”) and super obscure, the 1965 film noir Angel’s Flight is pretty interesting. It’s named for the funicular railroad running up Los Angeles’s Bunker Hill, the structure still exists, though the hill itself and the neighborhood depicted in the film, were razed in 1969 via urban renewal.

I’d noticed the Angel’s Flight funicular railroad in another film noir, 1949’s Criss Cross, and it really caught my eye. Apparently, Angel’s Flight and Bunker Hill showed up in a bevy of films noir like Cry Danger (1951), Joseph Losey’s American re-make of M (1951), and Robert Aldrich’s classic Kiss Me Deadly (1955). I’ll have to make it a point to watch and re-watch those.

The movie itself is low budget and feeling it, but watching the movie via a rough YouTube print, cries out for restoration. To get your hands on an obscure flick, it’s worth watching, but the print doesn’t do the movie any favors.

Indus Arthur stars as a neighborhood burlesque dancer (read: “stripper”) who slashes “pretty men” when they start to get fresh. William Thourlby (the original Marlboro Man) is the drunken writer who wants to pen an ode to Angel’s Flight, falls for the dancer, and discovers her secret.

There are campish aspects to the movie, but it’s also far from the worst movie of its period and type. The camera work is actually pretty good. And then it’s got what it has: location, location, location.

There is an excellent write-up about Angel’s Flight on noiroftheweek.com by Steve Eifert. I had the pleasure of seeing the railway first-hand the very day I watched the movie (the raison d’etre for the viewing), but it’s very interesting, even if you can’t see what’s left of it in person.

Rififi (1955)

Rififi (1955) movie poster

director Jules Dassin
viewed: 01/22/2017 at the Castro Theatre, SF, CA

A few big differences since I first saw Jules Dassin’s masterpiece, Rififi. This time, watched it as part of the Noir City festival at the Castro Theater, alongside my kids. In the intervening 8 years since I first saw it, I’ve managed to see a number of Dassin’s other film noirs. Rififi was the first of Dassin’s films I ever saw and I knew little or nothing of him specifically at the time.

One big thing that is still utterly the same is the film itself and its brilliance.

That Dassin, however French his name may look and sound, was American is significant. He was blacklisted in Hollywood, chased from the country, and harassed even from afar to find employment in film. Rififi was the first film he made in France and the first he had made in 5 years, after the also brilliant Night and the City (1950), filmed in London. Top that off with featuring as a great character performance himself in the film as César “le Milanais”, what did he NOT do?

The heist is the film’s centerpiece and is duly and rightfully praised and influential, but the whole of the film is amazing. Paris is a bleak yet beautiful backdrop to the criminal activities and the rain-soaked streets emblematic of the fatalistic reality of the common man, even if he is a common criminal.

The brutality toward his nightclub moll is the one troubling aspect of the film for me. Women are rarely treated well in noir, but the nasty beating Tony (Jean Servais) metes out to her, while it makes contextual sense in the narrative, is still rather hard to sit with. Tony is, in the end, a good guy, and women, in the end, are largely functional or decorative in the film. So. Yeah. Anyhow.

Strangers on a Train (1951)

 

Strangers on a Train (1951) movie posterdirector Alfred Hitchcock
viewed: 01/08/2017

Another personal favorite Hitchcock was our second film in our mini-marathon. Strangers on a Train features one of my favorite Hitchcock sequences and shots, the tracking to the murder and the murder itself, reflected in the fallen glasses of the victim.

Adapted from Patricia Highsmith’s first novel, Strangers on a Train moves a somewhat gimmicky set-up, two strangers who meet on a train and exchange murder plots, and elevates it to fascinating stuff. Though the movie breaks with the novel in significant ways, it’s hard not to think that its influence did not play out in Highsmith’s other work at times, elevating the sense of duality and doppelgangers, things that play out in other works of hers as well.

Robert Walker really steals the show. His callow, creepy Bruno is a disturbing villain. I also think Kasey Rogers/Laura Elliott who plays Miriam, the murder victim, is terrific in her small role. She’s the bespectacled bad girl, who cheated on her husband and goes through the Tunnel of Love with two, count ’em, two guys, only to get strangled by the stalker with whom she is flirting. At least she is executed in one of the finest Expressionistic images of murder Hitchcock (or anyone) ever created.

Every scene at the fairground is amazing. Bruno popping the boy’s balloon. The carousel gone crazy. That little guy, who crawls under the speeding carousel only to cause it to go flying to bits, is hilarious and cool.

Classic, classic stuff.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) movie poster

director Alfred Hitchcock
viewed: 01/08/2017

My son and I had a mini-Hitchcock festival, hunkering down indoors while a big storm blew and pelted outside. We began chronologically with a film that I have long considered a personal favorite, though one I hadn’t seen in some years.

Shadow of a Doubt stars Joseph Cotten as “Uncle” Charlie, who we know from the opening scenes to be a criminal, how bad we will only find out. He sneaks back to Santa Rosa, California to his sister and his favorite niece, his namesake Charlie (Teresa Wright), who goes from elation to sheer horror as she comes aware of the real nature of her uncle.

And really this is was this war-time noir is all about, the idyllic small town America and the dark and twisted elements lurking therein. Shadow of a Doubt was co-written in part by Thornton Wilder (“Our Town”) and Sally Bensen (“Meet Me in St. Louis”), bringing knowledge of the cheerier sides of Smalltown USA. The darkness isn’t just entirely in Uncle Charlie’s worldview of widows leeching off the world, a true misanthropy, brought on perhaps by a childhood head injury.

We also see a glimpse of the seedy side of things in the ‘Til-Two Bar which Uncle Charlie forces the younger Charlie into. Niece Charlie has never set foot in such a place (though it’s right in the downtown.) The town’s dark ends are right there, if you look for them, and in the ‘Til-Two, there is listless barmaid, a former schoolmate of young Charlie, as young but beaten down by life, a glimpse of an alternate reality.

The film also features prime examples of Hitchcock’s black humor. Henry Travers and Hume Cronyn are hilarious as the murder-obsessed friends, planning endlessly the end of one another in a harmless game.

Cotten, Wright, the whole cast are terrific. While it doesn’t feature any one particular signature Hitchcockian moment or shot, it’s a very dark musing upon the reality behind the facade of Americana.

Daughter of Horror (1955)

Daughter of Horror (1955) movie poster

director  John Parker
viewed: 12/21/2016

“To what degree this film is a work of art, we are not certain but, in any case, it is strong stuff.” – Cahiers du cinéma

I watched this on a crappy public domain version on Amazon Prime, the version with the narration, and I’m still pretty sure that I’ve found another favorite film of all time.

An independently produced horror-noir originally without any words as Dementia, re-done here with some narration (by Ed McMahon of all people), Daughter of Horror is cheap and lurid art house Expressionism, outrageously weird and remarkably well-made (for its obvious low budget).  It’s a nightmare of sexual violence starring an uncredited cast and featuring excellent cinematography.

The Surrealism is vivid, and even with the campy voice over, it’s brilliant.  I like the camp as well as the highbrow qualities.  I’m sort of beside myself, wishing I could lay hands on the apparently “out of print” Kino edition of the film that features restored copies of both versions.  I need to see this again.

One of the most amazing, strange, obscure wonders that I’ve discovered in years.