Russell Rouse. Starring Jack Palance and
Barbara Lang.
A taut prison break movie. Tight script
with little wasted time. Jack Palance plays
dual roles at a pair of brothers (though
oddly enough.. the film doesn’t
acknowledge them as twins even though
they're identical). The dual role special
effects are pretty good especially for the
fifties. It's also not overused. Because this
is a tight little movie, there are some flaws.
They probably could’ve used some of the
characters more (such as prison guard
who is the next door neighbor). Even so,
the film as a whole was satisfying. The
prison break preparation and the break
itself are well-done. It’s suspenseful but
not overdone. The ending is not a happy
one.
Filmy Noir Rating: 3.5 out of 5.
Robinson, DeForest Kelley (minor role), and Jayne
Mansfield.
This is included in a noir boxed set but that might be
an inappropriate move It is not visually dark by any means.
Plot wise, yes, it has the theme of corruption but doesn’t
really delve deep into it.
Edward G. Robinson plays a D.A. who sends an
innocent man to the chair. He actually finds out the guy is
innocent minutes before the guy is strapped in.. and
needless to say, he doesn’t call in time. This sends him
into a crisis of conscience and he spirals into being a
scummy defense attorney and eventually starts to work for
a high level gangster. This is closer to a gangster flick
from the 1930s or 40s than a typical noir. I can’t heartily
recommend it but if you are bored, it’s not that much of a
waste of time. (And the poison scene is actually pretty
damn clever). BTW, Jayne Mansfield is not an attractive
woman.
Filmy Noir Rating 2.5 out of 5.
Orson Welles, uncredited). Starring Joseph Cotton and
Orson Welles.
Well-filmed espionage noir. Though not directed by Orson
Welles, his hand was probably in it and he also makes an
appearance as the head of the Turkish secret police (?).
Joseph Cotton plays the main character. He also wrote the
screenplay. Though I enjoyed the movie with its dark
corridors, shadowy staircases, and quirky hit-man, I couldn’t
help but just dislike Cotton’s character. Because of that, I
couldn’t really get behind him completely. Plus (spoiler) it was
just too convenient for Orson Welles to come in and help
save the day. The movie starts with narration of Cotton’s
character writing a letter to his wife and ends the same way.
But it just doesn’t add anything to the plot. It was just
unnecessary and annoying. Also, it suffers from studio
butchering during post-production and it shows. Still, it’s
worth seeing if you want to enjoy some nice-looking noir
cinematography but there are a lot of movies better plotted.
FIlmy Noir Rating: 3 out of 5.
and Robert Keith.
A tough little film about drug smuggling. Since this came out of
the late 1950s, one can make the debate that it isn't even a
noir film but rather just a crime flick. The criminals aren't hidden
in the shadows and there is no femme fatale. There is no
protagonist who is lured to destruction by a woman or by greed.
Instead we meet two quirky psychos who work for a drug
syndicate. There job is to pick up heroin that is smuggled in the
souvenirs of unsuspecting tourists who have vacationed in the
far east. These hitmen (played by Wallach and Keith) have lost
some of the shipment and are on the hunt for it.
Wallach plays Dancer, a hot-headed psychopath and Keith
plays Julian, a seemingly sophisticated criminal who likes to
write down the last words of Dancer's victims. Now, I've read in
a few places that there is a possible homosexual undertone to
their relationship. Honestly, I didn't pick that up in the film but
it's quite possible.
If the only noir films you are familiar with are from the 1940s,
you'll be in for a big surprise. This is a far cry away from those
melodramatic movies. This is brutal and realistic. There's some
pretty nifty violence including a particularly shocking death in a
skating rink. There's also a good car chase. Something for
everyone. (Okay there's no romance..but who cares? There
are enough film noir flicks that have that.)
Basically this is a pretty enjoyable take on hitmen and heroin
smuggling. Recommended.
Filmy Noir Rating: 4 out of 5.
Crawford and Ernest Borgnine. Includes a small role by Charles
Bronson (!).
A cop (Crawford) goes undercover as a dock worker in order to
get to the bottom of the mob problem. Well, of course this little
waterfront adventure comes with a lot of danger. The whole
movie is filled to the brim with corruption and tough-guy talk. It's
a combination of the old classic gangster film and the realistic
crime films of the 1950s. There is a twist at the end that is
actually pretty good and unexpected.
Even though I enjoyed it, I wouldn't say this was one of the best
I've seen. I wouldn't say you should run out and hunt down a
copy of this movie. If it's on television, however, there are worse
ways to spend 87 minutes.
FIlmy Noir Rating: 3 out of 5.
Starring Kevin McCarthy and Edward G. Robinson
A remake of the 1947 film Fear in the Night. Both
movies are based on a Cornell Woolrich story.
Woolrich is probably best known for writing the
story that was made into Rear Window. Generally
his stories are pretty dark and pessimistic (and
very, very good).
This movie starts out pretty nicely with our main
character dreaming of being in a mirrored room
where he seemingly kills a man and stuffs the body
into a closet. When he wakes he realizes that he
has the key to that very closet in his hand. Well this
all leads to some mystery, paranoia, and anxiety
with the main character sweating A LOT. All in all
this is a nice little film that also stars Edward G.
Robinson as a (you guessed it!) detective and
brother-in-law to the main character.
This isn’t a noir masterpiece by any means but the
suspense and mystery are entertaining and the
dream sequence is actually pretty cool (or maybe I
just like mirrored rooms. They freak me out). It also
was shot on location in New Orleans so you get
some nice scenery as well as some jazz.
Recommended for people who don’t want the
typical noir. It's a low-budget but entertaining little
film.
FIlmy Noir Rating: 3 out of 5.
Franz.
This is one of the earliest American movies to deal with a sex
criminal in a serious and somewhat sympathetic manner.
The film starts off with this disquieting message written in bold
white print against a black background: “High among the police
problems is that of the sex criminal, responsible last year alone
for offenses which victimized 31,175 women. Adequate and
understanding laws do no exist. Law enforcement is helpless.
Here, in terms of of one case, is the story of a man whose
enemy was womankind.”
There is no mystery here in terms of who is committing the
crimes. We are introduced to the sniper in the first scene. A
man fiddles with a gun and paces around the room, looking out
the window. The man is obviously disturbed. He sets his gun
sights on a woman across the street as she kisses her beau.
From this point we know we are in for a film where we will get to
know the mental disturbances of the criminal. Throughout the
film we also get to understand and even pity him. He is not an
evil monster. He’s a man who has been damaged and after
reaching out for help (and getting insufficient help) feels he has
no way to cope but to kill. This man struggles to stop himself.
He makes efforts to tame the violence inside but alas, they
don't help.
At times, there is a lot of preaching about what constitutes
legally insane and what society should do with sex criminals.
They also mention Albert Fish (!) which adds some reality to the
proceedings.
This is a well-directed film with great acting especially by Franz.
It is a movie of obsession, rejection, murder, and psychological
torment that culminates in violence. Recommended. (This would
make a good companion piece to the film While the City Sleeps.)
Filmy Noir Rating: 3.5 out of 5.
Starring Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis.
Wow.
I always sort of put off seeing this even though I’ve heard good
things about it. I think it was because Tony Curtis is in it and the only
thing I’ve ever seen him do were really bad introductions to some
Alfred Hitchcock DVDs. In those introductions, Curtis fumbled his
lines (which were often filled with errors) and so I assumed he was
the worst actor in the world. I should kick myself.
This movie is not only one of the best “noir” films I’ve seen but one
of the best movies I’ve ever seen PERIOD.
It's included in the noir category despite it not being a crime drama
at all. The reason for this is it's shadow-filled cinematography and its
theme of corruption. According to this movie, human beings are
bleak, cold-hearted creatures.
It’s about a Broadway columnist (played by Burt Lancaster in one of
his best roles) who manipulates everyone he comes in contact with.
He is one of the vilest, cold-hearted bastards I’ve ever seen in a
movie because he’s just so real. This isn’t a noir hit-man in a fedora
hat. This guy could be real and I’m sure some of us have met or will
meet someone like him. Tony Curtis plays a bastard publicity agent
though you sort of feel bad for him even despite his faults. He’s the
“protagonist” and we are told the story through his eyes. There are
a couple of characters who have integrity and are not so corrupted
but they only count as victims of the manipulation.
The acting is top-notch. Both Lancaster and Curtis had me in awe
throughout the whole movie. Usually movies about “show business”
don’t interest me all that much but this movie was fascinating. This is
dark look at NYC life in the 1950s. I recommend it with every noir-
loving bone in my body.
Filmy Noir Rating: 5 out of 5.
Rogers, Edward G. Robinson, and Brian Keith.
Ginger Rogers plays a tough but sexy convict who is going
to be a potential witness against a gangster acquaintance
of hers. Most of the movie takes place in one apartment
yet it’s entertaining as hell. Edward G. Robinson is in it..
playing the role of a good guy who doesn’t really give a
crap about the witness just as long as he gets his
conviction.
Brian Keith plays Vince Striker (what a cool name) the cop
who is assigned to protect Ginger. The movie isn’t that
unique. Since the year it was made (1955) we’ve seen
similar movies: A sexy witness being protected by a
grumpy, cynical cop who is married to the job. Add lots of
sexual tension. The movie is a step-above because of the
performances from Rogers and Keith. The dialogue
(especially from Ginger Rogers) too, is sharp, smart, and
entertaining.
I recommend this movie though I know fans of the harder,
more brutal crime films may be disappointed. Again, this is
a movie that is often considered a “noir” yet I know purists
may debate the fact.
Regardless, this is an enjoyable movie.
FIlmy Noir Rating: 4.5 out of 5.
Holden and Barry Fitzgerald.
For the first third of this movie, I was starting to get
disappointed. I guess it was because I expected a “noir” and it
was playing like your typical “cops hunt kidnapper” movie. Then
it took a turn for the better. I’m telling you.. Train station police
officers in the 1950s were brutal as hell.
I will say that William Holden’s character is probably the
most uninteresting cop I’ve ever seen. It’s a cliché. The tough
no-nonsense cop that’s married to the job. I won’t go as far as
to say Holden overacted but the character just seems too much
like a caricature of a cop. It might have been appropriate in a
movie that was made five or ten years earlier. Also, the old Irish
cop (played by Barry Fitzgerald) was the most annoying
character I’ve ever seen. It was like listening to a know-it-all
leprechaun.
The head kidnapper played by Lyle Bettger was the
highlight of the movie. The character is well-written and
believable (not to mention one cold son-of-a-bitch).
Oh, the plot. Yeah. A rich man’s blind daughter is
kidnapped and held for ransom. The cops at Union Station are
in charge of the investigation. That’s about it.
Anyway, the last half is better than the first but overall it’s
about average. I’ve seen a lot better crime/cop movies from this
time period so I wouldn’t go out of my way to recommend this
especially since William Holden’s character is so disappointing.
One last note of interest: This is probably the only noir that
features death-by-cattle-stampede.
Not bad but not really that great either.
Filmy Noir Rating 2.5 out of 5.