Showing posts with label Film-Noir. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film-Noir. Show all posts
Thursday, January 29, 2009
D.O.A. -- 1950 -- NR
This is a 1950 film noir movie that was remade several years later. It involves a man who was unknowingly poisoned giving him only a week to track down the guy who killed him. Like a lot of old thrillers, this was a fun ride. I think it skirted some believability when the main character (who is little more than a banker) was at home with a gun in his hand and chasing the unknown bad guy through an abandoned warehouse only to have him escape. He also as observant as Sherlock Holmes in nearly everything that went on. Some of this can be put down to the fact that he knows he's dying, so he has nothing to lose. This aside, like I said, it's a fun movie to watch, and kicks off real quick for the short attention spanners.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
M -- 1931 -- NR
Germany's first talkie from 1931 stars Peter Lorre as a serial child killer with Fritz Lang (one of the top German film directors of the time) at the helm. Naturally, I was watching it with subtitles which didn't help the experience, but overall, the film is paced well and told a solid serial killer thriller.
It has a lot of good points. The relation between the police and the crime underworld, for example was wonderfully done with simultaneous, intercut meeting between the two organizations. The police ar becoming a laughingstock having not cuaght the killer for 8 months, but the crime syndicates are getting walled in by the police raids looking for the killer which hurts their "business." Both groups set out to catch the killer at the same time. The police take the more cerebral route of looking for psychological profiles, while the underground just hires beggars to watch every child in town. Both group find him at about the same time, but while the cops wait at his house, the underground captures him and holds him on "trial."
It is this trial that makes a statement about justice and the criminal justice system. It says that a criminal is safer in the system than with regular people, a fact that is all too often painfully clear. No matter what the crime or how unfair or how brutal that crime was, the system always endeavors to treat the criminal with respect and dignity.
The biggest weakness, in my opinion, was an attempt to bring sympathy for the killer during this trial. This attempt was completely in vain since a guy who kills children will rarely gain sympathy of any kind, no matter how fictional the story. Another problem this script had was a lack of familiarity with the characters. A lot of characters were introduced throughout the film and only a handful managed to get names. We got some knowledge of some of them, but most of the characters remained 2 dimensional cutouts of cops or crimelords.
The only confusion was some sort of cerebral tag on the ending that made no sense in context with the rest of the film. I don't know what that was.
It has a lot of good points. The relation between the police and the crime underworld, for example was wonderfully done with simultaneous, intercut meeting between the two organizations. The police ar becoming a laughingstock having not cuaght the killer for 8 months, but the crime syndicates are getting walled in by the police raids looking for the killer which hurts their "business." Both groups set out to catch the killer at the same time. The police take the more cerebral route of looking for psychological profiles, while the underground just hires beggars to watch every child in town. Both group find him at about the same time, but while the cops wait at his house, the underground captures him and holds him on "trial."
It is this trial that makes a statement about justice and the criminal justice system. It says that a criminal is safer in the system than with regular people, a fact that is all too often painfully clear. No matter what the crime or how unfair or how brutal that crime was, the system always endeavors to treat the criminal with respect and dignity.
The biggest weakness, in my opinion, was an attempt to bring sympathy for the killer during this trial. This attempt was completely in vain since a guy who kills children will rarely gain sympathy of any kind, no matter how fictional the story. Another problem this script had was a lack of familiarity with the characters. A lot of characters were introduced throughout the film and only a handful managed to get names. We got some knowledge of some of them, but most of the characters remained 2 dimensional cutouts of cops or crimelords.
The only confusion was some sort of cerebral tag on the ending that made no sense in context with the rest of the film. I don't know what that was.
The Maltese Falcon -- 1941 -- NR
A decent noir film following the investigation of the murder of a private detective's partner after he is put on the trail of a man that a woman suspects knows about her sister. The woman is more than she seems as she spins one lie after another putting the private dick on the right trail...sort of before her story changes again. It's got some nice twists as the story goes along, and really the only complaint is that the pacing runs a little slow in some areas.
Some modern audiences might not like it because it is very talky and cerebral like a lot of the older movies are, and it would help if the lead actress were able to...well...act. Compared to Bogart and two other actors who would go onto Casablanca the following year, one of whom is Peter Lorre, who I watched in M from ten years earlier in Germany, her dialogue delivery was consistently flat until very near the end when she finally came close to being in character. Perhaps, since her character made a habit of lying, it was part of that, but for me, the charade didn't work.
Other than this, it was a good film, and worth the time to watch it. It contains the lines, "Hey, what's this?" "It's the stuff that dreams are made of."
Some modern audiences might not like it because it is very talky and cerebral like a lot of the older movies are, and it would help if the lead actress were able to...well...act. Compared to Bogart and two other actors who would go onto Casablanca the following year, one of whom is Peter Lorre, who I watched in M from ten years earlier in Germany, her dialogue delivery was consistently flat until very near the end when she finally came close to being in character. Perhaps, since her character made a habit of lying, it was part of that, but for me, the charade didn't work.
Other than this, it was a good film, and worth the time to watch it. It contains the lines, "Hey, what's this?" "It's the stuff that dreams are made of."
Friday, January 16, 2009
Sunset Blvd -- 1950 -- NR
This one came out of 1950 and showed a dark underbelly of Hollywood in forgotten stars. It was made into a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber which was nothing more than an attempt to sing the film. I found it clever and very film noir, although it took a little while for the Betty Schaefer subplot to come into play. We were halfway through the movie before her character, introduced briefly in a producer's office as she unknowingly insulted our main character, finally came in with any kind of force. Once she got rounded out and this bit of conflict was put into motion, the film ended really well.
Really, the backstory of the film's actors was as interesting as the film itself. Gloria Swanson played Norma Desmond, a has-been silent film star. Gloria Swanson was a silent film star who was a has-been by the time this film was made. The film talked about a return for Norma Desmond, and this was a sort of return for Gloria Swanson, although her career never continued for more than a couple movies beyond that. Erich von Stroheim played Max von Mayerling, a has-been movie director who directed all of Norma's early pictures. Erich von Stroheim was a has-been director who directed Queen Kelly, a silent film starring Gloria Swanson when she was a silent film diva. She called her lover, JFK's father, during the production to complain that the idiot they hired as a director was screwing up the movie. Ms. Swanson once noted that she could have been Norma Desmond for real if her life had turned badly. Seems the casting was spot-on.
Really, the backstory of the film's actors was as interesting as the film itself. Gloria Swanson played Norma Desmond, a has-been silent film star. Gloria Swanson was a silent film star who was a has-been by the time this film was made. The film talked about a return for Norma Desmond, and this was a sort of return for Gloria Swanson, although her career never continued for more than a couple movies beyond that. Erich von Stroheim played Max von Mayerling, a has-been movie director who directed all of Norma's early pictures. Erich von Stroheim was a has-been director who directed Queen Kelly, a silent film starring Gloria Swanson when she was a silent film diva. She called her lover, JFK's father, during the production to complain that the idiot they hired as a director was screwing up the movie. Ms. Swanson once noted that she could have been Norma Desmond for real if her life had turned badly. Seems the casting was spot-on.
Touch of Evil -- 1958 -- PG-13/NR
I watched the restored (and rated) director's cut of this film.
A poignant social commentary on the prejudicial climate of the United States/Mexican border in Texas. An influential businessman is murdered via car bomb; the bomb was set in Mexico, but blew up in the US. The detective in the Texas border town sets himself on the case to find the person who did it, and he's sure the person is a Mexican. A Mexican agent accompanies the investigation (not the detective, because he won't allow it). When the detective discovers dynamite in a place where the agent already looked, the agent becomes suspicious that the detective is planting evidence to win cases.
While moving at a cerebral pace, this film is really interesting to watch and unfold. Even when the truth comes out, it stays interesting right up to its conclusion and even a bit of a thought and discussion provoking twist once the story is all over. Overall, a very good and worth watching film from the mastermind of Orson Welles, who plays the prejudicial detective along with Charleton Heston as the Mexican agent (?!).
A poignant social commentary on the prejudicial climate of the United States/Mexican border in Texas. An influential businessman is murdered via car bomb; the bomb was set in Mexico, but blew up in the US. The detective in the Texas border town sets himself on the case to find the person who did it, and he's sure the person is a Mexican. A Mexican agent accompanies the investigation (not the detective, because he won't allow it). When the detective discovers dynamite in a place where the agent already looked, the agent becomes suspicious that the detective is planting evidence to win cases.
While moving at a cerebral pace, this film is really interesting to watch and unfold. Even when the truth comes out, it stays interesting right up to its conclusion and even a bit of a thought and discussion provoking twist once the story is all over. Overall, a very good and worth watching film from the mastermind of Orson Welles, who plays the prejudicial detective along with Charleton Heston as the Mexican agent (?!).
The Third Man -- 1949 -- NR
A man goes to visit his friend in war-torn Vienna, but when he gets there, he learns his friend died in an automobile accident. As he asks around, he is initially told that two men carried his friend's body off the road, but upon talking to a porter who saw what happened, he learns there was a third man on the scene.
The movie flows like a classic noir thriller until the identity of the Third Man is revealed. From there, it answers a bunch of whys and then a big chase to the end. I liked the build to the reveal, but for me the second half couldn't measure up to the first. It did have an exciting underground chase scene and the final showdown was well-conceived. Also, the characters are good, the plot is solid, and it has some great pacing, but the ending has got to be better than the beginning, and that didn't happen here.
The movie flows like a classic noir thriller until the identity of the Third Man is revealed. From there, it answers a bunch of whys and then a big chase to the end. I liked the build to the reveal, but for me the second half couldn't measure up to the first. It did have an exciting underground chase scene and the final showdown was well-conceived. Also, the characters are good, the plot is solid, and it has some great pacing, but the ending has got to be better than the beginning, and that didn't happen here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
