Noir Watch: Tension (1949)

Watched:  04/26/2025

Format:  TCM

Viewing:  lol

Director:  John Berry

Whoops, I watched Tension (1949) again.

In my defense, it stars both Audrey Totter and Cyd Charisse and I really had no choice.

Noir Watch: The Set-Up (1949)

we always stan Totter and Ryan

Watched:  04/21/2025

Format:  Noir Alley on TCM

Viewing:  fourth?  fifth?

Director:  Robert Wise

It's been years since I watched The Set-Up (1949), and while reading Eddie Muller's new book, an updated Dark City Dames - a collection of bios of several stars of the noir movement, I was pondering rewatching it when TCM's Noir Alley showcase went ahead and programmed the film for last weekend.  

It's no secret we're fans of stars Robert Ryan and Audrey Totter, or director Robert Wise.  But because Robert Ryan and Audrey Totter aren't really household names, and it's a grimy boxing picture of its surface, I'm not shocked if you haven't heard of or seen this one.  

The film comes in at a taught, trim 73 minutes.  And, novel for its era, the movie unspools in an approximation of real-time - taking place in one night of crisis for an aging boxer and his wife, who can't take watching him get beaten every night.  Not anymore.

Noir Watch: The Steel Trap (1952)

Watched:  04/19/2025

Format:  Noir Alley on TCM

Viewing:  First

Director:  Andrew L. Stone

This one is a wild ride.

Look, I just like Joseph Cotten.  The man is a movie star, but also can be an everyman like no one's business.  And he was absolutely the right choice to be our lead.

He plays a sort of middle-management salary man at a bank, knows all the in's and out's, and is married to Teresa Wright (who played his niece in Shadow of a Doubt).  They have an adorable moppet of a daughter.  All is post-war happiness.  Or is it?

Cotten begins realizing how easy it would be for him to rob his own bank.  There's no femme fatale pushing him to do it - he just realizes he's clever enough to pull it off, and people trust him enough that he won't be found out til he's already out of the country.  It's basically asking the question of "why am I playing by the rules if the rules aren't doing me much good to really get ahead?"

And, so he waits til no one is looking at the end of a Friday and clears out the vault.

What follows shows up in movies like Quick Change where the heist just will not play by your carefully sorted rules.  So for about an hour we're watching every conceivable foul-up get in his way as he has to gaslight his wife (who he is taking with him, telling her he's on a business trip) to get them both on a plane.  In a way, it's almost painful as the issues mount up.

By nature, I'm a planner.  Jamie is well aware, my least favorite thing is a surprise, maybe even a good one, if it's going to throw off my schedule.  I am *much* better about this now than I was ten years ago, where I'd just lose my shit if things got off schedule.  So in a way, this movie seems designed to make me crazy.

We were warned by Eddie Muller in the intro that the writer/ directors of this movie are famous for having some bizarre and far-fetched set-ups, and this is certainly one of them.  There's no ticking clock at the outset of the movie - our hero just decides he needs to rob this bank NOW instead of just planning it out and re-working the plan until he's got a clean getaway planned.  

Ie: for a movie all about planning the perfect heist, what actually occurs is nothing of the sort.  And we get to watch Cotten spiral into being a real jerk as the walls he created close in.

Anyway, it wasn't my favorite movie.  But it did have a unique ending - that ends just before I'm pretty sure the whole thing would have blown up in his face, anyway, so - as they say - you get a happy ending depending on when you leave the story.

This Saturday Night: "The Set-Up" on TCM's Noir Alley

Hey!

This Saturday (and with a replay Sunday morning), TCM is playing The Set-Up from 1949 on their signature film showcase Noir Alley.  

Why watch?

• People tend to think of film noir as detectives and trenchcoats and dames in slinky dresses.  This movie is the opposite of all that, and is still decidedly noir.  A working class story about a washed-up boxer and the woman who loves him.  
• An older boxer is losing fights, and on the night of what could be his final bout, his own manager has taken a pay-off to throw the fight, but hasn't told our man.
• Robert Ryan, a noir staple and dynamite as an actor, stars as the boxer who can't close the door on his career.  
• Audrey Totter is at her best in this movie.  Usually cast as the bad girl - and terrific in that position - this time she plays the tormented wife.  She's absolutely heart-breaking.
• The movie is directed by Robert Wise, who did every genre in Hollywood and always brought in a great picture.  

I don't usually make recommendations, but this one is a favorite.  If you have a chance to see it via Noir Alley on TCM or otherwise, now's the time to give it a watch.

Noir Watch: The Narrow Margin (1952)

Watched:  04/06/2025

Format:  TCM Noir Alley

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  Richard Fleischer/ William Cameron Menzies

I've only mentioned this movie twice on the blog from what I can tell.  Once in 2010, and once in 2018.  That seems nuts, because I'm sure this was more like the 5th or 6th time I'd seen The Narrow Margin (1952).  

Personally, I love this movie.  I'm shocked I didn't get to it during the podcast.  I think SimonUK and I talked about double-billing it with the Gene Hackman-starring remake, which I still haven't seen.

The movie is pretty straightforward.  It's an RKO flick, so it's a bit more rough and tumble, a bit sexier and sassier, and the sense of danger a bit higher.  There's a whole backstory to the movie that stars Howard Hughes being out of his mind and thinking Jane Russell should really be in everything and also not getting how his own movies work.  You can look it up.  Today is not the day I make this a film history blog.

Noir Watch: The Window (1949)

Watched:  04/02/2025

Format:  TCM on DVR

Viewing:  First

Director:  Ted Tetzlaff

Noir meets The Boy Who Cried Wolf when a 10 year old kid, sleeping on a balcony in a NYC tenement, sees his neighbors murder a guy through a crack in the blind.  

It's a simple premise, but with the age of the protagonist - ably played by Disney star* Bobby Driscoll - the set up is deeply effective.  The carefree/ consequence-free world of childhood collides headlong into the powerlessness of childhood when everyone wants to explain away what you saw with your own eyes, and your own past misdeeds are coming home to roost as your parents think they're enforcing tough love after your newest lie/ story.

The parents are played by Arthur Kennedy, who was no slouch of an actor (you likely saw him in Lawrence of Arabia and other films), and Barbara Hale, who would go on to household-name fame as Della Street on Perry Mason.   Our killers are the dead-eyed "that guy" actor Paul Stewart (good in so many things, here's his IMDB) and Signal Watch fave, Ruth Roman.  And if Ruth Roman killed someone, I'm sure it's not that wrong.  

It's a tight, short movie, moving through some predictable beats - including what's an effective final chase sequence through darkened, abandoned tenements.

It's kind of amazing how many movies used to be based on the idea of living on top of each other in apartment situations, or had major plotpoints that require people live in multi-family set-ups, and it's just kind of gone away. But certainly the cramped quarters of New York City and what your neighbors could be up to was part of more than one decent movie over the years.

I think it's gutsy they did this with a kid, and I wonder what it would look like in a modern context.  This is 1949, so this movie relies on the standard "mom and dad are busy, go play in abandoned buildings" living that hasn't seen the light of day in this century.  But even back in the 1940's, I'm not sure any studio but RKO is putting this movie out. 

This one has aired a few times, and I've avoided it as I often roll my eyes at things kids do in movies that are otherwise grounded, but this one feels buyable.  Our lead kid isn't a super detective or genius - he's mostly relying on adrenaline and the fact he knows the buildings.  

I see why this one gets brought up, which it does, because it's well-directed, edited and shot, and the story is lean and clean.  It's maybe not my favorite, but it gets the job done.

*and cautionary tale

Neo-Noir Watch: Collateral (2004)

Watched:  03/30/2025

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Michael Mann

There's half of an amazing character driven neo-noir in this film, and then half of an okay thriller.

I think it's the schizm of the two that makes for a frustrating viewing experience where one would be a delight and the other a pleasant enough film, but when the film shifts gears back and forth - and I usually don't mind tonal changes - it just feels like there's missed opportunity on that character study and the better film.  Collateral (2004) does get to sail on Michael Mann's slick directing and visuals (look, you can hire whatever DP, but it's Mann), and stellar performances from Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise and a kick-ass set-up that feels rooted in some classic noir.

The movie also co-stars a wide array of names.  Jason Statham appears for about twenty seconds.  Debi Mazar as well (in our book, there's never enough Mazar).  Jada Pinkett-Smith appears.  Mark Ruffalo plays an LA cop uncovering what's going on in real time.  Javier Bardem.  Bruce McGill.  Peter Berg.  

Our set up is that Jamie Fox plays Max, a cabbie, who picks up a fare, who seems like a charming guy but is actually an assassin, Vincent (Tom Cruise) flown in from points unknown to take out a series of people.  Max just wants to squirrel away money for his dream of starting a limo company.

At the first hit, Fox is waiting in his cab for Vincent when he's suddenly involved in the proceedings.  Under threat by Vincent, he begins driving him from hit-to-hit.  And that could have been enough.  The relationship building between the two could have made for a taught thriller driven by the desires and motives of each - and the movie plays with that as they reveal more about themselves and get real about the weaknesses of the other.  

Neo-Noir Watch: A History of Violence (2005)

 

Format:  Max?

Viewing:  First

Director:  David Cronenberg

Watched:  03/01/2025

Back when A History of Violence (2005) was in theaters, I was scheduled to see it as it’s based on a comic from a briefly lived DC Comics adult-oriented imprint. I’d read and quite liked the comic, but at showtime, one of us got sick, and we didn’t see it. And then, I never got back to it.

And that’s a shame, because 20 years later I liked it. But had I seen it back then, I doubt I would have understood how much this movie reads like a 1940’s film noir, maybe something like The Killers or a Goodis novel or movie.  It kind of reflects some of that post-War noir grit where we didn't slot people into "good guy" and "bad guy" so readily.

SPOILERS  

Viggo Mortensen stars as the smalltown café owner, Tom Stall, married to Maria Bello. The pair share kids aged around 16 and 5. Like many noir films, it’s about what happens when the unbridled viciousness of organized crime intersects with the mundane lives of ordinary people - and what happens when someone among the normal people isn't so average. 

 In a different decade, the William Hurt role is played by Raymond Burr in a B picture or Richard Conte if they had more money. Ed Harris would be played by Robert Ryan, and you can imagine Burt Lancaster in the lead role.

Michael Mann Watch: Heat (1995)

Watched:  02/25/2025

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  at most, my third viewing

Director:  Michael Mann

I saw Heat (1995) in the theater, and I am pretty sure I watched it again the next year on VHS.  But, friends, it's a three-hour movie - I have not watched it at all in this century.  Fortunately, Jamie had never seen it and was up for it this week.  

It's a 90's film nerd's star-studded affair, famous upon release for having both Robert DeNiro - riding high on Scorsese at this juncture - and Al Pacino - still hot from his Scent of a Woman* Oscar win (hoo-AH!).  But it also has Val Kilmer, Jon Voigt, Ashley Judd, Amy Brenneman, Wes Studi, Mykelti Williamson, Ted "Buffalo Bill" Levine, William Fichtner, Henry Rollins, Dennis Haysbert, Tom Noonan, Tom Sizemore, Danny Trejo, Hank Azari and a tweenage Natalie Portman.  With a sprawling cast and not a ton of exposition, it doesn't hurt to be able to identify all of the characters easily by which actor we're looking at.

The movie follows a group of  professional heist-men performing a string of robberies in Los Angeles, starting with an armored car robbery that goes sideways when a new member of the team decides to shoot one of the security guards because he doesn't like his face.  This turns the heist from a robbery into murder charges (not wanting witnesses, they take down all three guards) and gets the attention of Pacino's relentless crusader of a cop.

70's Noir/ Parker Watch: The Outfit (1973)

Watched:  02/22/2025

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  Second

Director:  John Flynn

I'd watched The Outfit (1973) back in 2016.  But recently I re-read the book it's based on - an early Parker novel by Richard Stark - and decided it was time to watch the film again.  

Most of what I say in my original write-up from 9 years ago is true.  The movie is a pulp-crime movie fan's movie.  It's based on a famed series of books, and features appearances from 50's-era noir mainstays like Robert Ryan, Timothy Carey, Marie Windsor, Jane Greer, Elisha Cook Jr. - and even singer Anita O'Day.  This generation is paired with the 1970's stars like Robert Duvall in the Parker-role, Karen Black as his galpal, Joe Don Baker his buddy, Richard Jaeckel as a supplier, and Joanna Cassidy as Ryan's trophy wife.  And, of course, more.  Army Archerd even has a walk-on as a butler.  

The story does loosely follow *parts* of the novel, but The Outfit is the third novel in a series (of something like 24 books), and the story wraps up the events of the first two books.  So, pulling it out and making it it's own thing is kind of an odd choice.  Further, the point of the novel is to show the world of thieves versus the world of the overly organized mob.  Spoilers on a 60 year old novel - Parker directs all his heist-buddies to start hitting all the Outfit-owned places at once, essentially draining the mob of resources overnight and not letting them know where to direct their attention.  It's pretty good, fun stuff.

This isn't what the movie does.  To keep things simple and linear, the movie foregoes a lot of what would become Richard Stark staples in shifting POV's - all in third person, but caring a great deal about who we were now tracking.  We're sticking with Duvall through most of the film, giving he and Joe Don Baker all the heists instead of introducing a flock of crooks, thieves and heist-men who would appear across the Parker novels for the next thirty years.

Nor does it contain the passionless inner workings of a mob that feels like it was designed by an MBA, where the boss's removal  can be negotiated - this isn't the Corleones.  And I kinda wish it had.  Stark has a sense for what it takes to actually find closure, and this movie supposes everything is over with the murder of a single guy.  Stark would know - no, that's bad for business for the mob.  They're going to keep going at you - and it eventually does come to a head in the novel Butcher's Moon, that is kind of the opposite of the happy ending of The Outfit as both novel and movie.  

I like the movie in its way.  It's cool to see all these faces on the same screen.  In general, I like seeing the book to screen, but the pacing is a little deadly at times, and since its just our Parker stand-in and Cody, it seems less likely they'd pull all of this off.  I dig the back-roads feel of the movie, and that Duvall seems to get that his character is maybe wired unlike more sympathetic characters.  But I just don't think it's easy to love this movie.  It's absolutely a product of 1970's filmmaking, but it's also not making connections for the audience as well as it could - and feels meandering.

Lupino Noir Watch: They Drive By Night (1940)

Watched:  02/06/2025

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  Second

Director:  Raoul Walsh

I watched They Drive By Night (1940) about ten years ago now, and had only vague memories of the film.  My write up of it is so brief, it did not help when it came to trying to remember more than a few snips of it.

But somewhere on the internet I saw someone mention it starred Bogart, Ann Sheridan and Ida Lupino in one movie, and that seemed like a darn good reason to watch it again as I've certainly become more familiar with all of their work in the ensuing years.  The film stars George Raft, and, to be honest, George Raft is not my cup of tea.  I think this movie was, even 10 years ago, when I decided "I just don't think that guy is much of an actor".

The movie is almost two separate movies - the first half being about the dangers of being a truck driver pre-WWII America, driving produce from Northern California to LA.  There's lousy management that will try not to pay you, guys trying to seize your truck because that manager won't pay you, and the less than stellar pre-Eisenhower road system.  And so being married seems like a dumb thing to do, because you're never home.  

Chabert Lifetime Noir Watch: Imaginary Friend (2012)

Watched:  01/19/2025

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  First

Director:  Richard Gabai

After running through something like 10 Lacey Chabert movies during the holiday season, Amazon is now offering up additional Chabert content - which has not helped when I pondered "what if I drove everyone nuts by making 2025 the year I watch and discuss *every* Lacey Chabert movie?"  Because, friends, she has 183 credits already, and is, like, 42.  That's not 183 movies - she's voiced several cartoons (including Supergirl on Harley Quinn), and been on a few TV series.  A glance at her IMDB suggests she's doing like 10-12 projects every year - and a heap of those are 90 minute TV movies.

Anyway - I'm not going to cover all of that.  But I'm also not going to not do it.  Who else will be the chronicler of Lacey Chabert's career arc?

Imaginary Fried (2012) is about eight years after Mean Girls.  It's a Lifetime movie, and part of the "someone close to me is trying to kill me" fantasy that characterized a lot of Lifetime's programming at one point.  Lifetime is a weird bastion of noirish programming that gets overlooked, but if these movies were black and white and the characters spoke with Mid-Atlantic accents, we'd just shrug and include them in the category as maybe B's.

Totter/ Noir Watch: FBI Girl (1951)

Watched:  12/08/2024

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  Second

Director:  William Berke

I'd watched this movie years ago, and saw it available at a low price on DVD.  In my quest to have a decent collection of Audrey Totter movies, I picked it up.  

FBI Girl a 1951 release, and some post-WWII, pro-FBI propaganda.  The entire set-up is about the fingerprint files and a Governor who is not who he seems with a prior life as a criminal, whose prints are in the FBI files.  No one can hide from their past and elected leaders are clearly held to the highest standards of the law!  This is what the people want!  (cough cough)

The mob's attempts to retrieve those files leads to murder!  

The whole movie is a story about the importance of good file management, provenance of documents, and the power of a good look-up system.  And that speaks to me.  I have no idea how having fingerprints on file if there's 50,000 people named "John Williams" or how millions f inky stains help anyone if they can't digitally sift through the files, but they could do it somehow!  And now I want to know how this works in an analog world.

The movie is a weird huddle of second-tier stars of the era.  Caesar Romero and George Brent play FBI men.  Raymond Burr as (shocker, if you watch noir) a mob boss.   Tom Drake from Meet Me In St. Louis appears as Totter's beau and a K-Street guy.  For reasons I cannot begin to guess, the movie stops for Tom Noonan of Gentlemen Prefer Blondes and his comedy partner to do their bit on TV, that our characters watch.

Speaking of blondes, not only does this movie star Audrey Totter, but Joi Lansing makes an appearance as one of her roommates.  And who can be mad at a Joi Lansing appearance?

The movie is *marginally* better than I remembered.  Totter is pretty great as the girl who is caught between love and country, and working against the shady Perry Mason.  Files are managed, duplicates are made, dopey paper pushers save the day.  Totter looks smashing, and it's a tight 74 minutes.  In one scene we see what kind of tough noir this could have been with Burr and Totter, but... nope.

Is the movie good?  No.  Is it fine?  Yes.  

Noir-adjacent Watch: Hangover Square (1945)

Watched:  11/25/2024

Format:  Kino BluRay

Viewing:  Second?

Director:  John Brahm

We previously watched this movie.

If I were going to program a series of movies and those movies were *about* (at least in part) music, I'd feel compelled to include Hangover Square (1945).  And I think I'd really manage to freak out the squares with this oddball character study/ thriller.  

Apparently the movie had a long road from book to screenplay to how it was finally shot and made.  It was also the final movie of Laird Cregar, one of the most promising actors of the 1940's, who died before this movie was released - a heart-attack brought on from a speed-fueled crash diet, intestinal issues from his attempts to lose weight, and other factors.  He was only 31.

Along the way, the book - which took place in modern London - was changed into a gaslight-era story about a composer, and almost nothing of the source material remained except the title.  Part of me is horrified for the original author, part of me knows this is basic studio mechanics, and part of me quite likes the final result.  So....

It's a bit of an odd movie because I'm not sure it has a "hero".  It has a protagonist you follow, but out of morbid curiosity.  After all, we know he is a killer in the first 30 seconds of the film - it's that no one else knows or wants to believe it.  So what happens when he's left free?  And gets cross-wise with a conniving songbird who is a walking red flag in the shape of Linda Darnell?

The score of the film is phenomenal, culminating in a diegetic performance of the concerto Cregar's character has been working on since before the film's start, The Concerto Macabre.  

The concerto is worked into the film throughout, as is the use of fire, pits, and other signs of Cregar's character's madness.  I really don't know how to talk about Bernard Hermann's work without gushing, or this one in particular.

And Cregar, himself is pretty terrific.  This may be his finest role in a very brief, very impressive slate before his untimely death.  He's sympathetic, even while you're screaming at the other characters to knock it off or stop him.  

I also think Darnell is at the height of her powers here.  Gorgeous, crafty, acting for the benefit of other characters while the audience knows what's up, and not making it cheesy...    And, ultimately, iron willed about what she wants and how to get it...  

oh no.  I've accidentally posted a pic of Linda Darnell.

Anyway - it's a dated portrait of mental illness that treats it a bit like a magical curse, but is pretty good nonetheless.  And manages two of the best scenes I've seen in a movie in recent years, with the Guy Fawkes sequence, and the finale, which I think is how real filmmakers should end a movie (more fire, you cowards).

At a tight 77 minutes, it's a complete story that rides like a roller coaster, ending in a huge twist and turnover at the end.  

I guess my pitch is this:  If the factors in a movie are imagery, sound and performances - they surely line up incredibly well in this movie.  That it stars two actors who died young and tragically, and that this likely got lost a bit in the shuffle as the war wrapped up may be why it's chattered about with a subset of film nerds, but not more in the conversation.  It was also not universally beloved when it came out - so maybe it just hits my sensibilities particularly well.

De Palma Watch: Blow Out (1981)

Watched:  11/21/2024

Format:  Criterion 4K

Viewing:  third

Director:  Brian De Palma

De Palma is a fascinating subject himself in so many ways.  He bows at the alter of Hitchcock, he works within frameworks that are uniquely his own - and *boy howdy* are they on display here.  He seems to think the only way to get people to show up for the movie on time is a surplus of nudity before the action begins.  I'm not sure he writes great characters, but he does keep you engaged with plot and ideas.

Here in 2024, I don't know if I like watching his movies because I like a thriller, or if I like watching De Palma do his thing and try to puzzle it out.  Why not both, I guess?

I've started getting 4K discs, and... holy cats, was this a good movie for that.  Shot by Vilmos Zsigmond (check out this IMDB page), and with a healthy dash of De Palma's weirdo split focus (via bioptic lenses) and split screen stuff...  but, the depth of field, the gorgeous lighting, wild camera angles...  

Noirvember Watch: On Dangerous Ground (1951)

Watched:  11/20/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  Second

Director:  Nicholas Ray - w/ Ida Lupino

It's a Noirvember to Remember, and I am way behind on my noir intake.  I am also way behind on my Ida Lupino intake, in general.  

I'd watched this one previously on Noir Alley, and liked it pretty well.  On a second viewing, I think I appreciated it more - likely because I knew where and how Lupino was showing up, and I wasn't halfway through a movie wondering where the hell the co-star was.

I can't always account for how some movies stick with you, but certainly the imagery in this movie has come back to me in ways I wasn't really expecting from the first time I saw the movie.  The film moves between a post-war noir setting of urban squalor to the snowy mountains of Colorado, shot on location.  Ryan in his city-cop coat chasing down our killer in two sequences against the natural backdrop is something.  As is the darkened cottage where where Lupino lives, with her tactile posts to guide her through her own home.

It doesn't hurt that both Ryan and Lupino are memorable in almost any role.

Noir Watch: The Sniper (1952)

Watched:  11/18/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  Third

Director:  Edward Dmytryk

Watched Sniper (1952) again.  I re-read my second write-up of the movie, and it says everything I would say about it now.  It's a social-issues crime movie, and a pretty good one.  And beautifully shot, imho.  Looked great on Criterion.

Here's my first write-up of the movie.  

I mostly just always get irritated that they bump off Marie Windsor so early in the movie, but that's a me-problem.  And it does land exactly how it should in the movie.  Poor Marie.

Noirvember Watch: Pickup Alley (1957)

Watched:  11/7/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  John Gilling

It's Noirvember, so I'm trying to get a few of ye olde Noir films in.  Luckily, Criterion is here to offer up the goods with three separate categories of noir.  I got lazy and picked the category "Columbia Noir" which includes some Brit Noir.  

I will be 100% honest and say, I was just like "Victor Mature.  Sounds good."   I knew nothing about this movie until the credits started crawling by.  Had I seen the poster, I would have known THIS IS A PICTURE ABOUT DOPE!  I might also have noticed this is European film - and, in fact, a pretty British film.  Directed by a Brit and produced by one of the Bond-famous Brocolis (Cubby) and Irving Allen, who worked in both England and the US.  

The cast is anchored by Victor Mature, who looks mildly upset the whole time, but who has no character to work with or speak of.  He's just the relentless hero.  I assume this movie really got in the way of his European golfing vacation.

Anita Ekberg plays The Dame, and is... fine?  If you wonder what the big deal was with Ekberg and why you've heard her name, his movie is a pretty good argument for why.  Lastly, the movie stars Trevor Howard, who was in sort of everything - but Superman nerds will flip out realizing this is the guy who told Jor-El to be reasonable in Superman while the planet was set to explode.

And Trevor Howard is *great* in this as a mastermind drug kingpin.  Reviews at the time mostly agree.

What surprised me watching this, with the name Broccoli floating around in my head, is that there's certainly some Bond DNA here.  It's very light, but it's about a relentless government fellow pursuing an established mastermind across Europe, treating each place as an exotic locale and the locals as scenery.  There's, of course, a beautiful woman wrapped up with our villain who is doing his dirty work and doesn't like it.

It's not a 1:1, but once the idea is in your head, it's hard to shake.  

The idea is:  Mature's sister was about to finger Trevor Howard for the NYPD when he figured it out and killed her.  Since, Mature's been a mad-bull on the streets hoping to punch his way to the mysterious McNally.  They get a lead and he's sent to England to work with InterPol (the International Police, not the band).  Shenanigans happen and Mature and Co. get Ekberg's fingerprints and begin tracking her to get to Howard.  Soon, they're in Lisbon.  Then in Rome.  Then Athens.  It's sort of one long, continent-wide chase.  

It's not a great movie, but it gets the job done.  Lots of action, some amazing locations, camera work, and a score that does tons of heavy lifting.  

It is noir?  Sort of.  Close enough.

Noirvember Watch: Desert Fury (1947)

Watched:  11/1/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Lewis Allen

Well, I'm not sure I started Noirvember 2024 with a bang, but I did finally check this one off the list.

First - yes, this thing is in color, and maybe worth seeing a 1947 crime film shot in vivid, even lurid, color.  See Lizabeth Scott's golden locks!  Marvel at the color of Mary Astor's pants!  (No, really, it's a pretty movie and maybe worth a watch just for that.)  But the minute people start talking in what is supposed to be snappy crime-drama dialog, you kind of know you're in trouble.  It's mostly non-sequiturs and stern declarations.

To me, Desert Fury (1947) is a bit of a melodramatic slog, and hinges on a protagonist hurling herself into bad ideas so often, while offering no sympathetic or redeeming qualities (other than a stellar wardrobe), it's hard to get, here in 2024, what we're supposed to like about her.  The motivation of the criminals in the movie is murky - and why they're even in the little desert oasis just feels like incompetence on someone's part.  

The set-up is that a clearly mid-20's Lizabeth Scott (playing 19 here and looking 32) returns home from quitting another finishing school.*  She wants to come work at her mother's casino so she can make a ton of cash and lord it over the judgey people of her hometown.  Not a bad plan.  On the way into town, she comes across John Hodiak and Wendell Corey, a pair of crooks.  A very young Burt Lancaster plays the town Deputy and soda bottle seller?  I never figured out what was happening.

Mary Astor, who looks like an older cousin to Scott (only 15 years older but looking maybe 7), plays her mother.  She's obviously the best actor in this by a country mile, playing a tough-girl from a rough background who made it big out west.  They live in an amazing mansion.  But Mary Astor basically wants for Scott to marry a nice-boy and join polite society and get away from her frankly very awesome-looking life of running a casino.

Hodiak and Corey have returned to the small town to sort of lay low and do some gambling at Mary Astor's casino.  Why?  It's unclear.  Hodiak is still recovering from the death of his wife that occurred in this one-horse-town.  So why they came back is anyone's guess.

Scott falls for Hodiak for absolutely no reason other than everyone tells her not to.  Just as she does everything just because someone told her not to - no matter how stupid that thing appears to be.  Men fall for her because she's the only sexually available woman in the movie, so Lancaster thinks she's swell, and Hodiak hurls himself at her.

Very, very clearly Hodiak and Corey are supposed to be in a gay relationship, and we learn that Hodiak was previously married to a woman - Scott's doppelganger - who wound up dead under mysterious circumstances.  And STILL Scott is like "I don't care!  I love his tiny mustache!".  

Things come to a head because everyone in this is kind of dumb, and the movie ends as you'd expect.

I'm just not a Lizabeth Scott fan.  She's fine.  She's not annoying when playing a well-written character.  But in an era littered with other actors I like, she doesn't move the needle for me as a plus for watching a film.  My understanding is that producer Hal B. Wallis was deeply in love with her, it ended up destroying him, and there's probably an interesting movie in there.

The movie was... okay.  From a "what's actually happening versus what we got past the censors" this movie is pretty amazing.  From a "do I like these characters or care about what's happening?" the movie was a bust for me.  I can take convoluted plots and characters making mistakes, even walking right into a bad idea for money or sex, but I'm not sure this one pulls it off enough that I care.  

*I finally read up on what finishing school was, and the past is a fascinating and foreign land

Noir/ Joan Watch: Female on the Beach (1955)

Watched:  09/18/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Joseph Pevney

Y'all know I'm all in for Joan Crawford, and I think Jamie's a fan, too.  So, we put this one on from Criterion.  

There have to be papers written about Joan in this era and who her movies were aimed at.  She'd been kicking around since the Silent Era, was a huge star for a spell in the 1930's, then lost her box office mojo and was declared "box office poison", then had a massive come back in the mid-1940's with Mildred Pierce (recommended).  She came back around aged 39 - something to cheer for.  And she really is great in that movie.  And then she enjoyed real work for some time - including into 1955, when this movie came out.

I am sure there was an audience that knew and loved her from their youth and identified with her as they aged.  Further, she kept managing to play the very-much-desired woman here at age 49, when Hollywood still thought once you hit 28, you might as well be a grandma in movies.  But women attend movies, and I suspect - based on the female-forward stories (but still very much of the politics of the 1950's) - that her audience were women, and these thrillers served that loyal fanbase.