Champion

The rise of prizefighter Midge Kelly, leaving in his wake a trail of betrayal and broken hearts.  This is a very routine boxing drama, but in a comfortable way.  I rate it a notch above Body & Soul but not as high as The Set-Up, both as a film and a noir.  Kirk Douglas gives a grand performance, tackling the kind of ruthless, ambitious character he does so well.  The supporting actors are all pretty good, too, especially Paul Stewart and Arthur Kennedy (seeing Kennedy made me start fantasizing about a Blu-Ray box set of Mann’s westerns… maybe someday).  Some excellent photography ties it together nicely.  There’s a couple of sour notes, though.  The training montage is rendered ridiculous by Tiomkin’s goofy score.  And there’s one of the most egregious examples of production code silliness I’ve ever seen: a shotgun wedding over… a rather chaste smooch.  Nitpicking, I know.  Still a very entertaining movie, even if it’s a little too familiar.  Rating: 8

IMDb

The Night of the Hunter (rewatch)

One of the most dreamlike of noirs, and surely not by accident… note the repeated, prominent references to dreams and sleep.  The film almost has the air of a fairy tale and is strikingly surreal and modern for 1955.  It’s been a while since I’ve watched this movie and I’d forgotten how bizarre it is.  The odd rhythms, extremely dramatic lighting, Mitchum’s howls, the use of music… the whole thing just transports you to this nightmarish slumberland.  I’ve also warmed up to the Lillian Gish section, taking special notice this time of the similarities between Gloria Castillo (Ruby) and Shelley Winters, and other ways in which it beautifully ties in with the earlier parts of the film.  While it’s not perfect — Billy Chapin is kind of a dud, and I thought Winters was underused — it’s pretty damn close.  Rating: 9

IMDb

The Mask of Dimitrios

A writer traces the path of a ruthless scoundrel and murderer.  This is my least favorite type of review to write, the type where I just don’t have a solid feeling about it one way or the other.  Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet are both fun to watch and have an enjoyable back-and-forth, Zachary Scott is fine, the situations are generally interesting, the film has a good aura of mystery to it.  I don’t have any complaints (the third act “reveal” is extremely obvious from the get-go, but so what?).  It just didn’t grab me that much.  It’s a pleasant way to pass some time, but I doubt any of it will linger with me and I feel no burning desire to see it again.  Rating: 7

IMDb

Shoot to Kill

I wasted most of my Saturday doing stupid crap, and only had time for this quickie.  And what a stinker it is.  Something about a corrupt assistant D.A., the story is a nonsensical clusterfuck, a narrative framed by a flashback structure that doesn’t hold together at all.  It’s quite confusing, and what can be pieced together is very routine stuff.  The performances are uniformly terrible (sometimes to the point of being comical) and the dialogue is even worse.  The few stylistic flourishes aren’t enough to hide the otherwise amateurish production, and I can think of very little to recommend.  Bleccch.  Rating: 3

IMDb

Thieves’ Highway (rewatch)

Boy, I’m starting to get embarrassed by my old reviews. I gave this a mediocre 7 the first time, but it’s far better than that, right up there with Night and the City. It’s just so action-packed, it’s like The Wages of Fear without all the dull intro stuff. Last time I bitched about the upbeat ending, but now I realize how much it’s earned. You can’t help but want things to turn out well for Richard Conte, with all of his false triumphs and major setbacks. Although the climax does involve a bit of deus ex machina, the general tone of it is just fine and the rest of the film is plenty dark enough. Conte maneuvers through a world of cheats, cutthroats and chiselers of varying degrees, trying his damnedest to keep above it and still earn vengeance for his father. The film has some terrific photography, biting (and witty) dialogue, and most of all a wonderful array of character actors. Just about every performance is a winner, but special mention to Valentina Cortese, who plays a major role in turning the good girl/bad girl motif on its ear. A gripping and highly watchable movie, and despite my earlier claims, very noir. I’m still left with the same nagging question though… who the hell fixed Nick’s tire? Rating: 9

IMDb

The Locket

A man is warned that his bride-to-be has ruined three other men before him. This is a compelling psychological melodrama with John Brahm’s usual dazzling visual style. The main problem is the ending, which shoots the film in the foot in two ways. First, it ties everything up, Psycho-style, with a lot of silly mumbo-jumbo. And second, it ruins the wonderful “unreliable narrator” possibilities of the film’s structure of layered flashbacks. At one point, we’re hearing Laraine Day’s flashback as told to Robert Mitchum as told to Brian Aherne as told to Gene Raymond. It’s not as convoluted as The Saragossa Manuscript but it certainly makes you question who is telling the truth. Unfortunately, the ending deflates any chance for ambiguity. However, it’s far from a total disaster… Day gives a great performance, Mitchum is always fun to watch, the music and especially the camerawork are first-rate, and the film is genuinely engaging. A more open-ended conclusion would have been nice icing on the cake, though. Rating: 8

IMDb

The Naked City (rewatch)

Another one of my risky recent purchases, in this case it didn’t turn out as well as Pickup on South Street. I’ve developed more of a fondness for police procedurals, so I’m rating it just a notch higher than last time, but it’s really not much more than a simple police procedural. The unique thing about it is the unusual use of voiceover to delve into the private thoughts of random individuals, almost like Wings of Desire in that respect. But it doesn’t really add that much to a rather mundane procedural with mundane characters and mundane performances. Only Barry Fitzgerald and Ted de Corsia make an impression. It’s entertaining fare, but needs a lot more sizzle and for me it holds its position as the weakest Dassin I’ve seen. Rating: 7

IMDb

Kiss the Blood Off My Hands

We have a winner for the best title of Noir-vember. Burt Lancaster is a Canadian ex-GI who accidentally kills a man in a British pub fight. He seeks refuge in a woman’s house and the two fall in love, but a shady witness threatens to unravel everything. The film looks wonderful, with all those foggy London streets brought to life in rich chiaroscuro lighting. Lancaster is appropriately intense and his character says a lot about the postwar mindset. The main problem here is Joan Fontaine, whose character is too tough to pin down. She seems to go whichever way the plot demands. As a result, the chemistry between her and Lancaster never rings true, which ultimately robs the film of the lyrical sensibility it’s striving for. Nonetheless, it’s a beautifully stylized film with a moody tone. Rating: 7

IMDb

The Killer Is Loose

A bank teller helps out with an inside job.  During his arrest, a cop accidentally shoots the teller’s wife, and the man swears vengeance.  This film has the same problem as He Walked By Night — when it sticks with the bad guy it’s amazing, but during the rest of it, it’s pretty bland.  HWBN manages to overcome this for the most part.  This one doesn’t, because the bland parts are really, really bland.  I’ve come to expect this from Rhonda Fleming, but Joseph Cotten?  It’s surprising how terrible he is in this movie.  His scenes just felt all wrong, and I never cared about him or Fleming as much as I was being asked to.  However, it’s worth watching for Wendell Corey, playing way against type as one of the most unusual and disturbed noir villains I’ve ever seen.  I never thought I’d see like him do a character like this.  He definitely carries the film.  Rating: 6

IMDb

Caged

This doesn’t really count as film noir, but it’s certainly loaded with cynicism and has amazing, stylized cinematography.  I never expected a “women in prison” movie to look this incredible.  As for the rest of the film, I’m not sure what to think.  It’s relentlessly bleak, and the only happy moments get squashed instantly.  But I feel manipulated even though I can’t point to a particular item that strikes me as manipulative (well, okay, maybe the kitten).  Maybe I’m just thrown off because this is usually such a tacky and lurid milieu and yet this film takes itself very seriously.  Because it has serious matters to discuss and makes no attempt to hide the fact that it’s calling out for prison reform.  At first I objected to the idea of putting a “good girl” in prison to make the argument, as if only special kinds of criminals deserve humane treatment.  But it does eventually get to the point I was hoping for, that all (or most) of the inmates were “good girls” at one time, and the system helped beat that out of them.  I’m also not sure about the performances… Hope Emerson is once again imposing as hell, but perhaps a bit over-the-top.  Eleanor Parker was a little trite and annoying at the beginning, but seems to settle in the role more convincingly as the character starts to toughen up.  Overall, I have some reservations but in general I thought it was very powerful, continuously interesting, and damn fine looking.  Rating: 8

IMDb