Shadow of a Doubt

Tags

1940's, Alfred Hitchcock, Henry Travers, Hume Cronyn, Joseph Cotten, Patricia Collinge, Shadow of a Doubt, Teresa Wright, Thriller

The delightful Maddy asked me to take part in a Second Alfred Hitchcock Blogathon and I just couldn’t refuse. I had to review Shadow of a Doubt, which is one of my favourite Hitchcock movies.

Director

Alfred Hitchcock

Starring

• Teresa Wright as Charlie Newton
• Joseph Cotten as Uncle Charlie Oakley
• Henry Travers as Joseph Newton
• Patricia Collinge as Emma Newton
• Hume Cronyn as Herb

A cracking thriller pulling apart the image of picket fence America, Shadow of a Doubt has director Alfred Hitchcock on scintillating form. Working in a smaller scale, it’s a movie that features many interesting themes and wonderful performances.

Charlie Newton is a bored young girl living in the picturesque town of Santa Rosa, California. She feels she has nothing to do and that her life is dull. Her thoughts of this are quickly changed when news that her Uncle Charlie, who she was named after, is arriving in town. Her family is very happy about the incoming arrival of him as they adore him. What young Charlie doesn’t know is that her beloved Uncle is in fact the Merry Widow Murderer, who is fleeing Philadelphia. Everyone is in awe of Charlie and he lifts everyone’s spirits, particularly his niece. He is accepted right back into the bosom of the picture postcard town. But as much as young Charlie admires her uncle and fawns over him, various things start to worry her about her favourite relative. His behaviour occasionally becomes erratic and dark and two detectives, posing as journalists, also appear in town looking for the man they believe to be the killer. Soon Charlie becomes suspicious of the uncle she always adored and digs into his past. This of course puts her in danger as we aren’t sure whether Uncle Charlie will kill her because she knows too much.

Alfred Hitchcock displays his directing prowess in many ways and brings out the story with darkness and keen insight. Darkness pervades this movie and the eternal battle of good against evil is waged in circumstances that seemed comfortable but are disturbed by something sinister. Suspense builds as Young Charlie wrestles with what she feels about her Uncle Charlie and how he is far from the man she idolized. Doubt tears apart the picture perfect image of society with irony and dark humour. A cracking example is Charlie’s father and next door neighbour whose main interest is discussing mystery and murder. The delicious irony that a serial killer is under the father’s roof is excellent. Plus, I love all of the references to doubles and twins, particularly how the main characters share the same name but at are different ends of the morality spectrum. Shadow of a Doubt may not boast the big set pieces that some Hitchcock movies have, but it features a lot of his artistry and penchant for generating suspense. By being more small-scale, the story comes to the forefront and the characters are the centre. For me, it’s one of the directors finest movies as it explores deep darkness and has fine acting and writing. Hitchcock was always fascinated by the dark side of human nature and his direction and themes are aided by a screenplay that really compliments his vision. The best example is when Charlie and Uncle Charlie are in a bar and he begins to talk of the nastiness behind closed doors that so many people don’t see because of the veil of niceness. While bleak and extremely creepy, Uncle Charlie is definitely on to something that still rings true today. It’s a spine chilling scene that says so much about Uncle Charlie’s character and his view of life. Dimitri Tiomkin provides the score, that undercuts events with a beauty and idyll, while simultaneously revealing the shocking truth and evil within the character of Uncle Charlie.

Leading events is Teresa Wright, who has the right mixture of youthful enthusiasm and eventual maturity as she is faced with her worst nightmare. The sweetness Wright brings is just the amount needed so as not to become cloying, but watching her grow up fast is fascinating and melancholy at the same time. Wright is simply put marvellous as the young girl learning the hard way about the evils of life. Joseph Cotten is a revelation as Uncle Charlie; balancing charm and beguiling nature with a worryingly dark intensity. He does this sometimes in the blink of an eye, making the part one that is unpredictable. Cotten commits to the part, using his usual nice guy persona to deathly, smooth effect and colouring what’s there with something extremely sinister. It is Wright and Cotten who are the big stars here and deliver the goods splendidly. Henry Travers and Patricia Collinge are well suited to their roles as parents, doting on the family and raising their kids the best they can. Travers enjoys a fine rapport with a debuting Hume Cronyn, who steals his scenes as the murder obsessed neighbour.

A wonderfully unnerving and successful thriller from one of the best directors there has been, Shadow of a Doubt is a must see.

Watch on the Rhine

Tags

1940's, Bette Davis, Drama, George Coulouris, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Herman Shumlin, Lucile Watson, Paul Lukas, Watch on the Rhine, World War II

Bette Davis is one of my favourite actresses so to be asked to take part in a blogathon honouring her was a sure bet. Crystal is paying tribute to the great lady with a mighty fine blogathon. My choice is Watch on the Rhine.

Film Title

Watch on the Rhine

Director

Herman Shumlin

Starring

• Paul Lukas as Kurt Muller
• Bette Davis as Sara Muller
• Lucile Watson as Fanny Farrelly
• George Coulouris as Teck de Brancovis
• Geraldine Fitzgerald as Marthe de Brancovis

Taken from a Lillian Hellman play, Watch on the Rhine provides much in the way of drama as it focuses on a member of resistance to the impending Nazi threat and what he must do to fight.

In the year after the beginning of World War II, German engineer Kurt Muller, his wife Sara and their three children enter the United States. Kurt has been involved with fighting the Nazi’s with underground work for the past seventeen years. The family resides in Sara’s mothers house in Washington, D.C. Her mother, Fanny Farrelly  is a society maven who welcomes them back but is unaware about why they are there. The resolute Kurt largely keeps his underground work secret as can be. But there is someone amid all of this who grows suspicious of him. That person is the conniving Teck de Brancovis; a Romanian Count who is also stays and has with Nazi sympathies. He immediately distrusts Kurt on sight and takes it upon himself to weasel what he can out of him. He attempts to blackmail Kurt and expose him, leading to dramatic consequences for everyone involved.

Herman Shumlin allows the story to flow well and doesn’t resort to any visuals tricks, so as to draw more attention to the events on screen. The script is rich with meaningful speeches and impassioned dialogue that allow the actors to shine. Now Watch on the Rhine is not flawless by any means. I’m sure many will see this movie as a propaganda piece and very much of its time. But that ignores the message of fighting for what’s right and standing by your beliefs, which can still be timely even now. Sometimes that message is heavy-handed but it’s mostly depicted handsomely. Occasionally the running time feels stretched and I for one believe some trimming may have benefited Watch on the Rhine. But these flaws aside and the fact that I wanted just a bit more from it, it’s still a great movie with a message that is conveyed throughout. And once the tension rises in the situation, the film gets better and filled with immediacy. A driving score from Max Steiner is a string in the film’s bow too.

Paul Lukas is rightly dignified and quietly strong in a performance that garnered him an Oscar. His greatest asset is his passion and dedication, showing Lukas as a fine actor in tune with the part of a crusading man fighting against fascism and Nazism. It’s a very subtle and natural performance that it often feels like he isn’t acting at all, so exact is his work. And complimenting that nuance is a finely tuned portrayal by Bette Davis. She was often known for her full force delivery but toning it down as the supportive wife here reveals a loving and softer side to her. I liked watching these two work together with a lovely chemistry and dramatic power. Lucile Watson is fine playing the part of the oblivious wealthy mother who is more concerned with her rich life than mere politics. Stealing some of the show is George Coulouris, who is excellently devious and fully warranting of villainy. It is he who kicks events into place with his plots to expose Muller. And there’s Geraldine Fitzgerald making an impression as the wife of the opportunistic Teck.

Bolstered by excellent dialogue and performances, the plight of the individual and the fight for freedom are well dramatised in Watch on the Rhine.

Cat People

Tags

1940's, Cat People, Horror, Jacques Tourneur, Jane Randolph, Kent Smith, Simone Simon, Tom Conway

With Halloween soon upon us, the lovely Maddy asked me to join her spooky blogathon. I decided to review the classic Cat People for my entry into this fine celebration of horror.

Film Title

Cat People

Director

Jacques Tourneur

Starring

• Simone Simon as Irena
• Kent Smith as Oliver Reed
• Jane Randolph as Alice
• Tom Conway as Dr. Louis Judd

A rightfully, highly regarded horror movie that champions lighting and atmosphere to create suspense, Cat People is much deserving of its classic status.

Serbian sketch artist Irena meets marine engineer Oliver Reed one day in Central Park Zoo while drawing a panther. The two enjoy a flirtation, yet Irena is hesitant to take events any further. Eventually, Oliver charms the shy Irena and after a courtship, they marry. Yet after they are married, she reveals a strange fear to Oliver. From childhood, she was aware of tales in her village of evil women who would turn into cats when feeling jealousy or experiencing passion. As a result, she is terrified to be intimate with Oliver and consummate their marriage. Oliver tries to support his wife, but her fears and sense of terror drive him away as he finds it harder to cope with the situation. He finds support in the form of work colleague Alice, who loves him more than just simply a friend. Irena is admitted to a psychologist, who tries to dispel her anxiety of what might happen if she is to be intimate with her husband. Yet even he is slightly curious as to why Irena has this fixation on the idea of her becoming a panther when jealousy or passion are about. But it may in fact be too late, as Irena becomes aware of Alice’s attraction to her husband. With jealousy aroused the results could be deadly. Or is it all just a delusion from the mind of Irena?

Jacques Tourneur is in the directing seat with the great producer Val Lewton also making a mark with this horror that’s all about the mind and what is hinted at rather than deliberately shown. Tourneur is an adept director whose expertise and ambiguity lend themself beautifully to this gorgeous and creepy exercise in spooky atmospherics and hidden horrors. At the heart of it, Cat People is just as much a mystery as it is suggestive horror. The main question of whether Irena is simply delusional or in fact in fear of a tainted curse she has no power over, provides Cat People with a really compulsive air and a tragic one too. On the visual front, the symbolism of all things feline and entrapment abound, much like how feels so caged and frightened of what may happen if she becomes intimate with her husband. Chiefly, it’s the shadows and sounds that are key to the eeriness of Cat People with many a moment being shrouded in darkness with just the right amount of light to back up the mystery of everything. There are two specific celebrated sequences that showcase just how effective suggestion can be. In the first, Alice is followed by something and is startled by a very loud noise, which is something else than what she thinks but still a jolt to the system and quite cunningly done. It’s a sly and very creative trick to use. The second sequence features Alice in a swimming pool, with light flickering about her as the noise of a panther stalks in the shadows around her. Both scenes wonderfully use the idea of what it could be, rather than what it is to generate the spooks and creeps within you. Cat People is more chilling than jump out of your skin frightening, but that’s the strength of it. It manages to tap into something subtly psycho sexual without being to overt about it, with regards to Irena’s fear of getting close to her husband in the physical sense. Rounding out things is the suspenseful music that knows exactly how to jangle nerves in this strange story.

Simone Simon, with her already feline features and slightly off kilter appeal, is sublimely cast as the terrified woman at the centre of this atmospheric film. Is she a pretty predator or a victim of a tainted curse? That’s the best part of Simon’s performance; the deep ambiguity and exotic mystery. Her eyes convey tragedy and can be simultaneously fragile and sensual in a great balancing act that keeps you guessing just what is the meaning of her fears and whether they have any validity. Kent Smith is the All-American guy who loves Irena deeply, but really can’t work her out as the movie goes on. Jane Randolph succeeds at not simply making her character a home wrecker, but a woman who actually wants to help and is assertive along with sympathetic. Then there is who is more than a little too interested in his patient’s condition and about to pay the ultimate price. Out of them all though, it is Simone Simon who makes the largest impact to this classic horror.

A masterwork of tension and mystery, Cat People is a horror that earns its stripes through its refusal to be over the top and the way it captures the imagination of the viewer with what it presents.

Gilda

Tags

1940's, Charles Vidor, Film Noir, George Macready, Gilda, Glenn Ford, Rita Hayworth

Film Title

Gilda

Director

Charles Vidor

Starring

• Rita Hayworth as Gilda
• Glenn Ford as Johnny Farrell
• George Macready as Ballin Mundson

A seductive film noir that boasts a star-making, iconic turn from Rita Hayworth, Gilda is a dark movie to be treasured for how it spins a pretty sinister story into something classic and watchable.

In Buenos Aires, Argentina, newly arrived thug Johnny Farrell is going about his cheating ways of getting money through trickery and underhand tactics. After being accosted and almost killed by a disgruntled crabs player, Johnny is saved by the elegant Ballin Mundson. This strange man warns Johnny that he must up his game if he wants to make a living. Johnny eventually finds his way to a casino where he continues his dirty tricks. He is caught and put before the owner, who turns out to be Mundson himself. Johnny being something of a con man, talks his way into a job with Mundson. Gradually, he gains his confidence and makes his way up the ranks and into a lavish lifestyle that he’s aspired for. While retaining a friendship with his boss, there is something controlling about Mundson, as he seems to consider Johnny something he owns. Regardless of this, things go well for the two of them in their relationship, trust and business. Things take a definite turn when Mundson returns after some time away with a gorgeous and playful wife named Gilda. The thing is Johnny and Gilda are very familiar with each other, stemming from an old love affair that ended badly. Being loyal to his boss, Johnny tries to avoid his definite attraction to the seductive Gilda, who delights in putting on a show and seemingly tormenting him with her wiles. Mundson is also involved in some scheme that proves life threatening, just as the heat between Johnny and Gilda comes into view. Though both attempt to keep the lid on their feelings, it proves very difficult. Yet with the love-hate relationship between Johnny and mysterious Gilda intensifying, it’s just a matter of time before things get out of hand and much darkness arrives for all of them.

Charles Vidor infuses a stylish direction into this all-consuming tale, lending something of a voyeuristic approach to how we observe the gradually twisted triangle set up among Gilda, Johnny and Mundson. His control over pacing is marvellous, never wasting a second and pulling us into this seedy world populated by equally immoral people. The black and white cinematography is gorgeously smoky and shimmering, finding a glamour, danger and tension in the main setting of the casino. Shadowy deals paired with the overall feeling of everyone using each other is noir at its grandest and finest. Gilda brims with a darkness and sexual underbelly that go hand in hand. It is a playful yet dark hearted film noir that has a lot of things going on under the curtain. Of course, with the film being from the 40’s, you couldn’t explicitly showcase anything too graphic or racy. And yet through its sizzling dialogue( much of which has many meanings depending on how you look at it), a real perverse angle covers the film in a surprisingly stylish way. The trio of main characters are all nasty, vindictive and rotten ,yet you can’t tear your eyes away from them as their machinations and web-spinning gets out of control. They all appear to enjoy toying with each other for whatever pleasure they can get, even if it ultimately leads to their undoing. This is significantly highlighted by the back and forth of the script that knows exactly how to avert the censors with witty words and subtle hints. Control and power play heavily into the narrative, with the troika of characters all using it in some ways; essays it over both Johnny and Gilda, while the eponymous siren wields it in abundance over the two men in the picture . Dominance is thematically featured, most notably in homoerotic undertones between Johnny and Mundson , thanks to the suggestive and ambiguous dialogue. If some of it gets overly complex, it is quickly forgotten because of the tension and heat of the piece, with everything fit to boil at any minute. Being a classic movie, there are oodles of memorable moments from Gilda to cherish, but two stand out. The first is the entrance of Gilda herself; tossing her hair back in wild abandon, before realising that someone from her past is now very much a part of her present. And the most iconic moment is the sensational performance of ‘Put the Blame on Mame’. Gilda, clad in that memorable dress and slowly removing a satin glove, teases playfully with this song of how men blame women for their downfall. While being a sexy scene(showing that you can be seductive without revealing a lot), a pointed darkness is also apparent in further enhancing the perverse nature of this noir.

By far the thing you’ll remember the most in Gilda is the presence of the luscious Rita Hayworth in the title part. Conveying a devastating gorgeousness that is truly spellbinding and a mysterious personality that is hard to place, Hayworth commands the screen and cemented herself as a Love Goddess of the screen. For all the sexiness brought to it, Hayworth’s fine acting also adds a distinct melancholy that punctuates in between the scheming and alluring appeal. This is a role that will forever be remembered, largely down to Rita Hayworth’s impact and charms in it. Glenn Ford is ideal casting for the no-good small time Johnny, whose want for something comfortable and rich is compromised by his desire for Gilda that leaves him falling down. Ford gets the sneaky, wastrel like areas just right, coupling it with a ruthless need to succeed in things, until his anger and lust can’t take it. And his scenes with Hayworth are loaded with simmering tension. George Macready rounds out this twisted trio with a courtly yet menacing display of cunning and trickery, constantly testing everyone around him to see what the results will be.

A dazzlingly dark and twisted noir covered in a gorgeously photographed sheen, Gilda is not to be missed by movie fans.

Sorry, Wrong Number

Tags

1940's, Anatole Litvak, Ann Richards, Barbara Stanwyck, Burt Lancaster, Ed Begley, Film Noir, Harold Vermilyea, Sorry Wrong Number, Thriller, Wendell Corey, William Conrad

Film Title

Sorry, Wrong Number

Director

Anatole Litvak

Starring

• Barbara Stanwyck as Leona Stevenson
• Burt Lancaster as Henry Stevenson
• Ann Richards as Sally Hunt Lord
• Wendell Corey as Dr. Alexander
• Harold Vermilyea as Waldo Evans
• Ed Begley as James Cotterell
• William Conrad as Morano

A well paced and inventively structured film noir thriller, Sorry, Wrong Number makes fantastic use of its setting and unfolding of dark mystery to form a tight and tense movie. Expanding on a famous radio play yet keeping a certain flair for drama in a limited setting, plus a fine cast headed by Barbara Stanwyck and Burt Lancaster, Sorry, Wrong Number is recommended viewing for noir and thriller fans who will no doubt find it very satisfying.

Leona Stevenson is a demanding, selfish heiress who is largely bed-ridden and when we meet her, alone in her Manhattan apartment. She gets more than she bargained for when she accidentally overhears a phone conversation(thanks to a telephone glitch) between two men, plotting and arranging a woman’s murder that very night. Leona has been trying to reach her husband Henry, who works for her father’s pharmaceutical chain, but hasn’t been able to locate. Panicking over the horrible plot she overhears, she becomes desperate to stop it happening. The fact that she only caught little bits of the conversation doesn’t help when she calls the police, due to a lack of clear evidence. Calling whoever she can think of for attempted help or news on Henry, through various flashbacks, revealing events and machinations fall into place regarding everyone it covers. We see Sally Hunt Lord, who was once romantically linked with Henry, Leona’s Doctor Alexander who holds important information about her, her controlling father James, a chemist named Waldo Evans, a mysterious gangster Morano and of course Henry himself, who we glimpse as feeling emasculated and weak thanks to his overbearing spouse. An underhand and malevolent scheme is also found here, but just how does it link to Leona and the planned murder? Growing more anxious and distressed as pieces slowly come into fruition but still remain confusing, Leona is left to decipher them before it is too late.

Anatole Litvak dials up the suspense with skill, letting the film play out largely in real-time and lets us discover many alarming things without spoon-feeding them to us. His control over ambience is also evident in how the mystery is gradually evinced and how it turns out differently than one might have wondered. Often times in some movies, flashbacks can often feel more than a bit redundant and overused. The same can’t be said of Sorry, Wrong Number, as the dips into the past are crucial to our understanding of the characters and their reasons for actions that may come back in some dark form. Sorry, Wrong Number provides a great exercise in visual style with panoramic and gliding camera shots that take in important details that tell parts of the story in a teasing but imperative way. The characters have a sense of change in them from the flashbacks to present, further giving a level of both distrust and curiosity. There is a heightened paranoia and isolation as Leona is prone to overreacting but thus time is telling the truth and all alone in her apartment. The home is often somewhere we consider safe which is reversed here. Then again, the nefarious and murky atmosphere of outside as the various facets of the puzzle come together is equally as dark. There is no real place of safety, which plays beautifully into the sinister heart of film noir and allows the film to have the feelings of a pitch-black noir. The twists are complex and unexpected, yet only sometimes confusing, thankfully the shocking nature of it all is intact and on display. Drama and genuine menace can be heard in the fine score by the amazing Franz Waxman, who really knew how to ramp up tension and suspense with his music.

Barbara Stanwyck impressively heads the cast as the pampered heiress Leona, whose night is turned into waking hours of terror once she hears the murder plot. Stanwyck strongly gets across the various mood swings and changes from past to present of the character, that are very intriguing to watch. Moving from self-absorbed and entitled to terrified and near mental collapse as everything unravels, Stanwyck covers it all with the assurance of the great pro she was. Her biggest achievement is that she telegraphs that Leona is not just some innocent victim in all of this, but a manipulative and petulant woman who we still feel some form of sympathy for in her time of horror. Burt Lancaster plays with his somewhat tough guy image to find something spineless and tired within husband Henry. While there is darkness to him, we aren’t quite sure to what extent it will emerge, mainly due to the excellence of Lancaster in the part. He may just be misunderstood or possibly to easily lead into something fishy , Lancaster suggests a mixture of both. There is a good ensemble of supporting characters played by great actors, who somehow or another slot into this mystery. Ann Richards is quietly convincing as a former flame of Henry’s, while Wendell Corey supplies us with much knowledge as the doctor. Probably the most sympathetic character is the chemist who is somehow sucked into the dark web of dealings, and played with understated gravitas by Harold Vermilyea. Ed Begley and William Conrad flesh out the other two people who have bearing on the complex story.

A tense and efficient noir, Sorry, Wrong Number is just the ticket for when you want some murky thriller of complex motives, nice performances and atmosphere to watch.

It’s a Wonderful Life

Tags

1940's, Christmas, Donna Reed, Drama, Fantasy, Frank Capra, Henry Travers, It's a Wonderful Life, James Stewart, Lionel Barrymore, Thomas Mitchell

Film Title

It’s a Wonderful Life

Director

Frank Capra

Starring

• James Stewart as George Bailey
• Donna Reed as Mary Hatch Bailey
• Lionel Barrymore as Henry Potter
• Thomas Mitchell as Uncle Billy
• Henry Travers as Clarence

A movie that practically defines the term life affirming, It’s a Wonderful Life is a beautiful hymn to the spirit of community and the difference of one person on so many others. A perennial Christmas movie, it earns all of that adulation through the story, moving direction of Frank Capra and the lead performance from the iconic James Stewart.

George Bailey is a dreaming young man who has always wanted to travel and explore. Unfortunately, fate has had different plans for him which leaves him forever in his hometown of Bedford Falls. As he is a kind-hearted man, over the years he has had to make multiple sacrifices to help others. The biggest one was foregoing an education after his father’s death,  so he could take over the building and loan business. This is largely due to him not wanting the sly and crafty banker Henry Potter to take advantage of the small town, as he is known for trampling all over anyone who gets in his way. George gets some respite from his troubles thanks to his lovely wife Mary and their young children, but even then George starts to feel like he hasn’t achieved anything and has constantly put his life on hold. Events come to a head on Christmas Eve when his Uncle Billy, who works with his nephew, loses a large sum of business money that secretly falls into the hands of the wicked Potter. Terrified of the potential scandal on his business and how it will affect all of those closest to him, George is beset by suicidal thoughts. While George is contemplating killing himself, prayers from many have reached the heavens and a bumbling angel by the name of Clarence appears to George. Clarence is there to persuade George that he should continue with life(in return he will receive his wings), even though George dismisses his ideas. Seeing no other option and throw his powers, Clarence shows George what life would have been like if he hadn’t existed, hoping it will bring him back from the brink and notice how valuable he is.

Frank Capra’s direction is one that touches the soul deeply and never rings false with any of the emotion displayed. With gentle humour and careful insight, he conjures up the importance of being there for others and while life can be unfair to us, we can be rewarded for our good deeds with the respect of others. While It’s a Wonderful Life is known for its sentiments and uplifting story, it also manages to temper this with the possibility of what if, as a despairing George comes to see how much he has influenced everyone and the deeply felt love they have for him. Even when there are melancholy moments, the glimpses of hope are never very far and this film balances both joy and bittersweetness in peerless fashion. It’s a Wonderful Life splendidly poses the notions that even when it is a dark time, there is always something out there to pull you back up again. I particularly love the framing device used in the film. We begin with two angels(represented by flickering lights in the sky) explaining about George and what he plans to do. Clarence joins and is given his task to help poor George see that life is worth living and then we get the vignettes from George’s life to explain just why he is contemplating ending it all. In the second half of the picture, the narrative catches up with the present and the mystical and divine intervention takes the film to soaring heights of finely felt emotion and morality. I don’t know why the structure of the film appealed to me, but I think it had something to do with how it fleshed out George as a character and made us all see the doubt that was creeping into him. A suitably twinkling score, laced with the festive cheers bubbling underneath it, evocatively brings forth the observation of how one person can have a big impact in the grand design of things, without actually realising just how cared for they are. Simply stated, you can’t help but be pulled into this lovely film in all its moving and specially magic glory.

James Stewart is what truly makes It’s a Wonderful Life such a favourite of many. His intrinsic ordinariness and relatability are ideally found in the part of George Bailey, along with the nagging self-doubt that plagues him. Stewart excels at making the part one of humility and altruism, yet never falls into soapy melodrama because of how grounded he makes the role. We can all relate to someone like George, who has worked hard and had to sacrifice to help others, and Stewart’s heartfelt delivery is the winning key to it. Donna Reed stunningly supports him as the caring and giving wife, who sticks with him through thick and thin. For this kind of story of the individual making the difference against something, you need a good villain and Lionel Barrymore more than fits that bill. His part of Potter is a nasty piece of work in the boo/hiss variety and the presence of Barrymore infuses him with the villainy needed. Thomas Mitchell and Henry Travers practically light up the supporting characters; Travers in particular is ideally cast as the guiding angel sent to help George in his time of need.

A film that will warm the heart and soul, as well as make you laugh, cry and be happy, It’s a Wonderful Life encompasses such a range of feelings and messages that it can’t be forgotten because of its care and deep soul. And who doesn’t love breaking this movie out for Christmas time?

The Big Sleep

Tags

1940's, Charles Waldron, Crime, Dorothy Malone, Elisha Cook Jr, Film Noir, Howard Hawks, Humphrey Bogart, John Ridgely, Lauren Bacall, Martha Vickers, The Big Sleep, Thriller

Film Title

The Big Sleep

Director

Howard Hawks

Starring

• Humphrey Bogart as Philip Marlowe
• Lauren Bacall as Vivian Rutledge
• John Ridgely as Eddie Mars
• Martha Vickers as Carmen Sternwood
• Charles Waldron as General Sternwood
• Dorothy Malone as Book Shop Girl
• Elisha Cook Jr. as Harry Jones

A film noir thriller at its most complex and convoluted, The Big Sleep is cryptic but endlessly entertaining stuff. With a real feel for the dark material shown by director Howard Hawks and the sultry chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall, The Big Sleep keeps you glued.

World weary and intelligent private detective Philip Marlowe is summoned to the home of the old General Sternwood. The elderly and frail man is concerned about his youngest daughter Carmen, who has a reputation for being loose. She has had compromising photos taken of herself and someone is using the sordid images to blackmail Sternwood. The person that appears to be behind the blackmailing is a man named Geiger, whose book store doubles as a crime racket. The General also wants Marlowe to locate Shawn Regan, a confidante close to the family who has disappeared strangely. While at the house, Marlowe also encounters older sister Vivian, a more cool and collected lady who knows how to flirt with him, yet keep something of a distance. Investigating further into muddy waters, he finds that the blackmailing crime racket ties with the missing Shawn Regan, though Marlowe is bewildered by how they could possibly do so. Just as he gets close, Geiger is murdered, complicating matters even more. Yet it also transpires that Vivian may also have some involvement in the sinister activities as nearby shady casino owner Eddie Mars appears to have a strange hold on her that she desperately attempts to remain hidden. Quickly, Marlowe is sucked into a seedy world of corruption and double crosses where he is desperate to find answers, as everything is spun in a web of underhand tricks and cloak and dagger activities.

Howard Hawks majestically gets the hard-boiled aura of this Raymond Chandler adaptation, coating everything in a shadowy and seedy vibe as Marlowe journeys into a corrupt underworld of suspicion and classic noir. The black and white cinematography is employed in a pretty amazing way with chiaroscuro taking precedent here and making the atmosphere tangible to the audience from the smoky opening titles. Now I must talk about the plot of The Big Sleep, as it is one mystifying and at times very confusing puzzle. This is actually far from a criticism of this film noir thriller, because it grasps the attention, gets you to pay attention and often moves at such a blistering pace, you won’t realise certain things that don’t add up. Sure everything is pretty cryptic and has you scratching your head, but oh what fun there is to be gained from this movie because of its pace and sexual tension, that are kept on high from start to end. What really brings a film like The Big Sleep to life is the scintillating screenplay, that practically bursts with repartee and innuendo that is some of the most sexual dialogue to be found in a movie from the 40’s, when the censors where usually on full patrol to eliminate anything suggestive . The script takes full advantage of the Bogart/Bacall relationship on and off-screen and serves up some double entendre laden exchanges that push the boat out on risqué (be sure to check the scene between Marlowe and Vivian in which she uses horse-riding and saddles as a reference to another physical activity.) As dark and mysterious as the film is, heck it brings new meaning to the word confounding, there is a playful spirit tone gleaned among all the dodgy dealings, blackmail and sleazy events that are usually hinted at rather than shown. Max Steiner is on score duties and transfers every ounce of tension and stunning sexiness to the viewer, matching the dark yet enticing underbelly The Big Sleep has to offer.

Humphrey Bogart heads up things with a fine performance as the iconic detective Philip Marlowe. Bogart impressively injects the part with cynicism, a quick talking attitude and weariness from all the years on the job. You couldn’t have asked for anyone better than Bogart to essay this part, which he plays with charm, dashes of dry humour and smarts that tell him to keep looking for the outcome of a most baffling case. He is simply on point during the whole run of this movie and makes it look effortless. Lauren Bacall practically oozes confidence and enigmatic sexuality as Vivian, whose feisty encounters and suspicious behaviour form a lot of the proceedings, particularly as Marlowe finds himself falling for her. Bacall was only in her early 20’s in this film, yet she has the innate ability to project the impression of a young woman who has seen a lot, seems to be in control and is adept at being secretive. Having already showed their undeniable chemistry in To Have and Have Not, Bogart and Bacall pretty much set the screen ablaze here, as they once more trade innuendos and tantalizing dialogue that flows from their lips like vintage whiskey. You simply couldn’t have asked for a better pairing than Bogart and Bacall, as they where exceptional together, both on film and in reality. John Ridgely has enough slimy energy and enigmatic ways to keep the shady Eddie Mars memorable in the long run. Martha Vickers features as the childlike and coy sister whose extracurricular activities are the start of Marlowe’s investigation into the unknown. A stately presence is to be found in the work of Charles Waldron as the old General calling upon the skills of Marlowe to eliminate the scandal surrounding his daughter. Popping up in small but still memorable parts, there is Dorothy Malone as a coquettish book shop worker and Elisha Cook Jr. as a very tragic fall guy who comes off badly within the darkness in doomed fashion.

As mystifying and mysterious as it all is, The Big Sleep earns its status as a classic noir due to the hard-boiled style and the iconic partnership of Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall.

Gaslight

Tags

1940's, Angela Lansbury, Charles Boyer, Gaslight, George Cukor, Ingrid Bergman, Joseph Cotten, May Whitty, Mystery, Thriller

Film Title

Gaslight

Director

George Cukor

Starring

• Ingrid Bergman as Paula Alquist Anton
• Charles Boyer as Gregory Anton
• Joseph Cotten as Brian Cameron
• Angela Lansbury as Nancy Oliver
• May Whitty as Miss Thwaites

A mystery thriller from Hollywood’s Golden Age, Gaslight holds up thanks to strikingly eerie direction, outstanding sets and superb acting, that add up to a film of chills.

It is Victorian times in London and a renowned opera singer Alice Alquist has just been found strangled in her home. Her young niece Paula, who found her body, is sent away to recover from the shock. Years later in Italy, Paula is a vibrant lady who has been training in music, but doesn’t quite have the passion for it. Her thoughts are elsewhere as the suave composer Gregory Anton has taken a shine to her and they have begun a relationship. Before too long, the couple are married and contemplating where to live. Gregory insists on going back to London and while Paula is obviously apprehensive of returning to the house where the horrific events unfolded, she agrees. Once back in the house is when strange happenings begin to happen, especially for Paula. Gregory informs her that she is forgetful and implies that she has been stealing things, of which Paula has no memory of. The new maid Nancy is impertinent and saucy around Gregory, while seemingly holding disdain for the mistress of the house. At night, the gaslights in her room dim mysteriously and she hears noises coming from the locked up attic. It is here that we learn that Gregory is the one orchestrating these events in order to drive Paula over the edge, while he searches for something that remains in secrecy. Little by little, Paula becomes withdrawn, paranoid and terrified of what she will become as her frail hold on events withers away and Gregory’s cruel plan begins to have results. But she may just have an ally in Brian Cameron, an Inspector for Scotland Yard begins to take an interest in Paula, as he smells a rat and isn’t convinced that Paula is going insane. It all boils down to whether or not he can help Paula or she can deduce the sinister plot afoot.

Meticulous craftsmanship is employed in every sense of the word by the great George Cukor, who wrings out the suspense in teasing suggestion as well as getting to the female heart of the story of manipulation. His hand is most definitely sure in his painterly brush strokes to suggest the menace that will engulf Paula slowly and cruelly after a deceptively sunny opening. Cukor’s biggest success is his hold on the tension and threatening shadows of the story, as Paula is slowly slipping into paranoia in accordance to the nefarious plans of Gregory, which he cloaks in significant mystery. All of it leads to a very satisfying conclusion that bubbles with menace and reversal of fortunes. There are a few little foibles in the film, like some dates stretches and leaky plot points, but in the long run, these skirmishes are of the minuscule variety that can be easily forgotten when considering the taut effectiveness of the overall movie. Gaslight is also a splendid evocation of Victorian London with rolling banks of fog and billowing candles is strikingly rendered, plus there are the expressive and well-designed sets to admire. This is the kind of movie where the visuals and story are largely of a stellar standard, in the tradition of MGM, who at the point of this film where churning out pictures of splendor and excellent, of which Gaslight qualifies easily. The cinematography is simply a marvel of spooky atmosphere, with certain shots bringing a flickering and shimmering malice and creepiness to the film in reference to the title. A supremely grand score begins with quiet and haunting notes of encroaching terror and then switches things up to heighten the spiraling descent of Paula.

The great Ingrid Bergman is the star attraction of Gaslight, contributing a thoroughly sensitive and strong portrayal of a woman being driven to near madness by her husband’s schemes. Bergman’s role is an emotional one that she plays wonderfully and that immediately gets you to sympathise with her. Bergman gets across a clarity, radiance and wrenching vulnerability that fit the part admirably, it really isn’t a surprise that she won an Oscar for her tortured and exquisite role here. It has to be one of her finest parts in an illustrious career of greatness. Charles Boyer is nastiness and insidious charm personified, emerging as an oily wolf in sheep’s clothing that is doing everything in his power to convince both his wife and everyone else that she is mad. There is something just very eerie about Boyer and his work here, which is perfectly employed within the character as the niceness of his personality slips into a more cruel being of malevolence and subterfuge. In what is probably what you’d call the hero role, Joseph Cotten makes for a very moral and good-hearted presence as the inspector who could be Paula’s saviour in all of this underhandedness. Angela Lansbury made her debut here at the age of 17 and boy does she have fun with the role of the sassy and rude maid, who sneers and flirts her way through the house with a glint of mystery in her eyes. May Whitty is on delightfully dotty form as the nosy next door neighbour who is always after a bit of scandal or gossip.

Some elements aren’t what they once where, but these are minor things that are papered over in the creeping mystery and excellence of Gaslight. An old-fashioned chiller, it’s a rewarding exercise in tension and ambience.

To Have and Have Not

Tags

1940's, Adventure, Hoagy Carmichael, Howard Hawks, Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, Marcel Dalio, Romance, Thriller, To Have and Have Not, Walter Brennan

Film Title

To Have and Have Not

Director

Howard Hawks

Starring

• Humphrey Bogart as Harry Morgan
• Lauren Bacall as Marie ‘Slim’ Browning
• Walter Brennan as Eddie
• Hoagy Carmichael as Cricket
• Marcel Dalio as Gerard

An exciting romantic adventure thriller from the Golden Age of Hollywood and loosely based on(but heavily rewritten here) the novel by Ernest Hemingway, To Have and Have Not still has a whole lot to enjoy within it. Chief among these is the excellent direction from the legendary Howard Hawks and the sizzling chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and a debuting Lauren Bacall, that would lead to sparks flying off the screen as well as on.

The year is 1940 and it is wartime. In the island of Martinique, which is now controlled by Vichy, cynical Harry Morgan is the owner of a fishing boat which he charters to tourists in return for money. Along with his right-hand man Eddie, a bumbling, alcohol-guzzling but genial man, Harry has no interest in politics or the tense situation that is occurring around him. That is until he is approached by Gerard who is one of the Free French and comes to him with a proposition. He asks that Harry help secretly transport two members of the French Resistance onto the island. In the beginning and thinking more of his own neck, Harry refuses to help because of the implications it could have. Yet while mulling it over, he encounters the sultry Marie Browning, who he refers to as Slim. An attractive traveler and pickpocket, Slim wants to return to America but doesn’t have the sufficient funds. Quickly attracted to the sensual young woman, tired of seeing people pushed around and in need of money himself after being owed a large sum, Harry accepts the offer of Gerard in helping the Resistance members get on the island. What follows is a dangerous adventure, tinged with romance and thrills as Harry knows that him being caught could end in very dire circumstances as the authorities on the island are investigating everywhere.

Iconic director Howard Hawks is at the peak of his powers here, directing To Have and Have Not with brilliant flourishes of excitement and tense adventure. The movie itself crosses genres, but with Hawks behind the camera, all the elements slip together nicely and compliment each other. He keeps your attention and there may be the odd lull here and there, but due to his sterling handling of the film, and in particular the undeniably sexy romance, To Have and Have Not is nothing short of a success. Which brings me on to the script that emphasizes the growing attraction between Slim and Harry and peppers it with memorable moments of sparky dialogue. Double entendres and sly innuendo form the core of their courtship and the chemistry between Bogart and Bacall is palpable from the very first moment they meet and Slim inquires “Anybody got a match?” It’s such a classy but sensual side that it adds to the film and not forgetting probably the most iconic scene in the movie. In it Slim seductively tells Harry( who she playfully refers to as Steve), that if he needs anything he just needs to whistle. This is followed by the classic line “You know how to whistle, don’t you Steve? You just put your lips together and blow”. And it’s not hard to see why the line has become so iconic, because of its playful sexual undertones and husky delivery. Even today with more sexually explicit movies about, the sizzling chemistry and passion between both the characters and the actors is still hot stuff. A suitably jazzy score has the right amount of adventure to it and features some wonderful songs too, sung with charm and deep-voiced sensuality by Lauren Bacall.

The talented cast is what really brings life and character to this already exceptional movie. Humphrey Bogart is excellent with his portrayal of the initially reluctant Harry, who is more concerned about himself in the beginning, but eventually joins the fight. Bogart invests Harry with a wise guy charm, tough strength and resourcefulness that you can’t imagine anyone else in the part. And in her movie debut, a 19-year-old Lauren Bacall announces herself as a major talent. With her large eyes, curled hair and husky voice, Bacall is a marvel to watch. Playing Slim with a smart but sensual core, she exudes star quality and threatens to set the screen a flame with her stunning presence. As previously mentioned, she has genuine sparks with Bogart that really add to the experience of the movie. Walter Brennan exhibits kind-hearted but none too bright antics as the character of frequent drinking partner Eddie, who is the main sidekick of Harry. Singer Hoagy Carmichael shows of his immense talent as the main man in the band of the hotel that Harry and Slim frequent. Marcel Dalio does a good job as a member of the Resistance who asks the cynical Harry for help thus drawing him into a dangerous plot.

Brimming with wit, romance and adventure of the highest, To Have and Have Not is a classic picture that is iconic for a lot of many excellent reasons.

 

 

The Letter

Tags

1940's, Bette Davis, Film Noir, Gale Sondergaard, Herbert Marshall, James Stephenson, Melodrama, Sen Yung, The Letter, William Wyler

Film Title

The Letter

Director

William Wyler

Starring

• Bette Davis as Leslie Crosbie
• Herbert Marshall as Robert Crosbie
• James Stephenson as Howard Joyce
• Gale Sondergaard as Mrs. Hammond
• Sen Yung as Ong Chi Seng

A tautly directed melodrama, with the shadows of Film Noir covering it, The Letter boasts atmosphere and a terrific performance by Bette Davis.

In Malaya, the calm of a moonlit night on a plantation is disturbed by the sound of a gun. Out of the main house stumbles a wounded man, followed by a woman with a pistol in hand. She unloads the rest of the chambers into his body and calmly watches him die. The woman is Leslie Crosbie, the wife of the plantation owner Robert. The man she shot dead was Geoff Hammond, a respected friend of Robert’s with whom she was having an affair. Robert returns to his wife, who begins to formulate a story to save herself. Playing the act of demure and vulnerable wife( when the reality is that she’s a master manipulator), she tells her attorney Howard Joyce that Hammond made repeated advances on her and she shot him in self-defence. While Robert believes his wife’s alibi, Joyce is more suspicious, even though he is the one representing her in the inevitable trial. Matters become complicated when Joyce’s clerk Ong Chi Seng comes to him with information that could change the outcome of the trial. It seems that Leslie wrote a letter to Hammond on the night she killed him asking him to come and see her as Robert would be away. This evidence could alter the case and imprison the conniving Leslie. The letter has fell into the hands of Hammond’s exotic widow, who demands money for it or she will turn it over to the court. Building tension and sweltering atmosphere combine as Leslie’s lies continue and the intense drama reaches its heights.

William Wyler masterfully directs with deft skill, creating a stifling ambience of lies, murder and the manipulative mind of one woman. Although the story can be seen as melodrama, it does have a certain edge that doesn’t let it slip into tosh, this is mainly down to the excellence of Wyler’s direction and the way he crafts this deceptive tale of murder and lies. The striking use of black and white highlights the Film Noir aspects of the story, with shadows and strange camera angles capturing the rising suspicion and inevitable drama. The score provided is a valuable asset to The Letter, cloaking it in an exotic and menacing aura that rises and falls along with the heated emotions and dark deception at play. The costume design is simply exemplary, especially in the gowns worn by the sly and cold-hearted Leslie. Most of them are white which makes her appear angelic to those around her, but the audience knows that there is a dark heart that lies beneath this masquerade.

Bette Davis is one fine form portraying Leslie, clearly relishing the sly, ruthless and calculating nature of the character. This is a character that Davis plays so well and always in control, but she also lets us see the panic that begins to appear when the existence of the eponymous letter comes to light. The film is Davis’ and she brings her all to the part. Herbert Marshall is suitably naive as Leslie’s husband, who sees her as a virtuous angel. James Stephenson excellently plays Howard, the attorney who is the first to see through the deception of Leslie, but is bound by law to remain silent of his knowledge of this. Gale Sondergaard brings silent, feline menace to the role of Hammond’s exotic and unsmiling widow, whose stare alone gives new meaning to the term ‘if looks could kill’. Sen Yung is used well as Joyce’s informative clerk, who becomes the first to discover the letter and what it could do to the case.

William Wyler’s The Letter brings drama to Film Noir and succeeds with aplomb, thanks to stylish direction, excellent score and central performance from Bette Davis.