This is an effective noirish suspense drama. The acting, direction, and cinematography are typical of 1950s low-budget productions but there are plenty of good scenes. After a slow start, the plot evolves into a modern morality tale where a scheming villain gets his payback. The print is inferior (Classic Film Noir, Volume 2) but the soundtrack is satisfactory.
John Bromfield delivers a convincing performance as an unscrupulous gold-digging gigolo who seduces and marries a wealthy widow (Martha Vickers) who is seriously ill with only a few months to live. Much to his dismay, the marriage works wonders for her health and she improves so much that he is forced to hatch a diabolically clever plan to murder her.
Of course, things quickly go wrong and lead to a terrific plot twist and surprise ending. Not classic noir, but a decent little movie with redeeming features.
The career that James Mason had before being discovered by Hollywood was quite prolific. Thanks to TCM, audiences have had the opportunity to see some of his British films. This one, "They Met in the Dark," is a 1943 noir, and has both elements of drama and humor.
The film begins with a trial, after which, found guilty of treason, Richard Heritage (Mason) is stripped of rank and thrown out of the Navy. He sets out, with one of his crew who believes in him, to prove his innocence. He backtracks, repeating his actions from the day he was arrested.
He finds one woman (Patricia Medina) dead, another woman (Joyce Howard) positive that he had something to do with it, and a talent agent (Tom Walls) who has some interesting acts on his roster as well as a sophisticated singer (Phyllis Stanley).
Mason is handsome, elegant, and vital in the lead role. He handles the lighter moments very well and has lots of charm. It's easy to see why he eventually went to Hollywood. Stanley does some nice singing, and Ronald Chesney plays a great harmonica.
Different and enjoyable, with a good plot and British atmosphere that will keep the viewer interested.
Male reviewer Robert Temple
This is an entertaining if uninspired wartime espionage yarn. It contains a fine and energetic performance by James Mason, full of vigour and fully believing in what he is doing. He even manages to deliver convincingly the inane line to Joyce Howard, the heroine, 'I love you', despite the fact that he barely knows her and could not possibly love her. The romantic elements of this story are too ludicrous for comment.
This is the third and mercifully the last of the story ideas of Basil Bartlett which were filmed. (His 'Secret Mission' was so terrible it was one of the worst films ever made.) Sir Basil was the stepfather of my friend Annabel. Sorry, Annabel.
There is a strong Czech component to the film. The director, Karel Lamac, was a Czech refugee, and apart from Mason, the main performance is by the talented Czech refugee actor, Karel Stepanek, who does extremely well, as usual, and raises the tone considerably.
Joyce Howard's fluttery helplessness and bone-headed character may have been typical of women in 1943, but God have mercy on us poor viewers.
A spectacular element in this film, which makes it worth seeing, is the incredible harmonica playing by Ronald Chesney, who only appeared in three films and is featured a lot here. Larry Adler eat your heart out (if Larry were still here, that is).
Alvar Liddell, the famous wartime radio announcer, makes his first film appearance here, for all of ten seconds. At least Finlay Currie got 20 seconds.
Someone savagely cut this film prior to release, as chasms occur in the continuity of fairly mammoth proportions. It is 95 minutes and must have been 110 when the director delivered it. This will keep an undemanding viewer entertained on a rainy afternoon.
I had to get the DVD from Germany (where it is known as 'Spionagering'), turn off the dubbed German soundtrack, and listen to the original, which is preserved. The things one does to see these rarities!
Whilst a low % recommendation by Rotten Tomatoes is usually a sign of a good film, it’s not always so. IMDb’s rating is much higher … encouraging … but still mixed. The ggl blurb:
“Kleptomaniac Dorothy Lyons is paroled from prison in custody of her sister June, secretary to reform political candidate Frank Jansen. Ben Grace, associate of crime boss Sol Caspar, sees this as a way to smear Jansen's campaign. But after falling out with Caspar, Ben tries to help June, who he begins to fall for. Sexy Dorothy also has a yen for Ben.”
Review
“I am a trained psychotherapist, so when I watched "Slightly Scarlet", I saw things some others might not see. I mention this because one of the main characters, Dorothy (Arlene Dahl), is a psychological mess. She's a compulsive thief and a girl who craves excitement...all in the worst way. Today, she'd almost certainly be diagnosed with a Borderline Personality...meaning she possesses many qualities of a variety of personality disorders. Antisocial behavior, addictive behaviors and highly volatile mood swings...these are typical of such an individual...and Dorothy is very clearly dealing with these issues.
The film begins with Dorothy being released, yet again, from prison for shoplifting. Her enabling sister, June (Rhonda Fleming), tries her best to help Dorothy but it's clear Dorothy doesn't want saving....she's hell-bent on self destruction, good times and chasing men. Sadly, June is an idiot when it comes to Dorothy and she makes excuses for her wayward sister...and in many ways she enables and encourages Dorothy's actions. How far will all this go? And, how long will June put up with her sister's horrible behaviors? And, how long does Ben (John Payne) fit into all this?
This is a very exciting film that you'll either love or hate. Dorothy's behaviors and June's reactions to them can feel very frustrating....and I could see viewers hating BOTH sisters. But, if you can look past this, the film is fun to watch and worth your time. In some ways, it's like film noir...but the color cinematography make it hard to call it noir. Still, I enjoyed it despite its shortcomings.”
Night Editor is directed by Henry Levin and adapted to screenplay by Hal Smith from the radio program of the same name - by Hal Burdick - and the short story, Inside Story, written by Scott Littleton. It stars William Gargan, Janis Carter, Jeff Donnell, Coulter Irwin and Charles D. Brown. Cinematography is by Burnett Guffey and Philip Tannura, and music is credited to Mischa Bakaleinikoff, though it's believed that Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco did the work.
"You are just no good for me. We both add up to zero"
A raging "B" pic out of Columbia? Absolutely! This is something of a film noir lovers delight. There is no getting away from the fact it has one of those endings that has proved to be divisive, so how it stacks up for first time viewers now may make or break your opinion of it...
Story finds copper Tony Cochrane (Gargan) having a love affair with viper like Jill Merrill (Carter), this in spite of the fact he has a gorgeous loving wife and a son who worships him. During one of the illicit couple's love trysts they witness a violent murder, and fearing scandal Cochrane fails to uphold the law. From such decisions does life often spiral out of control...
Okies. So we got hot and sweaty scenes, flashbacks, wet streets lit by lamps, alleyways, barely lighted rooms - particularly the station offices - symbolic and metaphorical sequences (oh my those crashing waves), but it's the barbed dialogue, the blend of sex and violence, and a femme fatale of considerable greatness, that ultimately makes this soar.
Personally I hate the ending, but as stated before, I do know noir lovers who find it cheeky and enjoyable. Yet even with my irritation at the finale - and of Carter's hair style (which pushes Phyllis Dietrichson for most unflattering look), there's just so much good here for noir lovers not to enjoy greatly. 7.5/10
Although it's two hours long and there is nothing much resembling today's blood and guts-action-a-minute thrillers, this 1960s crime story still entertains, thanks to an interesting cast.
Sure, they could have chopped off 15 minutes of this to make it a bit tighter but watching Glenn Ford, Lee Remick, Stefanie Powers and Ross Martin isn't all bad, especially Remick, a gorgeous woman with one of the sweetest, softest voices I've ever heard. Powers, 19 when she filmed this, was easy on the eyes, too. Martin is effectively creepy as the asthmatic killer and Ford is good as the no-nonsense FBI man after him. I look at Ford as one of the better and underrated actors of his generation.
The DVD also shows off some nice film noir-type photography to its best. The clothing, cars and hairstyles might be a little out-of-date but the dialog isn't, and it's refreshing to watch a crime film without today's profanity laced through it.
The film itself is reviewed below the video. My interest, other than the film, is why the reviews were so wildly divergent in tone … I’m intrigued in fact … just who are the dismissers and detractors? Why? And those extolling the film … just what connects them? This is one of the main reasons I plan to watch this.
It might be … not saying it is but it might be … American versus European watchers. Or it might be the big conspiracy to build back better … if the baddies are nazis, then it is lefties reviewing and dismissing. If the opposite … well … the opposite. One thing for sure is there is quite some disagreement over the movie … or is that film?
Foreign Intrigue (1956)
An underrated transition film, a low budget affair that is pure European color and style. Visually, it almost presages the Euro-American "Charade" which was decidedly more up budget. Here, the director, an unknown Sheldon Reynolds, takes advantage of all the empty spaces and long pauses the pace required. The lighting is flat, almost anti-noir, with widescreen grandness and yet an oddly impersonal intimacy. Not to be contradictory--the scenes are generally quiet, with close conversations, but everything is filmed from a certain, and constant, distance.
It is this steady, quiet pace that makes the film work. And Robert Mitchum. He needs no explanation. The first of the two or three main women he connects with is a bit false, but the main one is a caricature of the Nordic beauty, and with sincere energy and charm. At times it really does look like she is smiling at Mitchum, not his character, as if she can't believe she's touring Stockholm, etc., with this famous man, and the movie gets away with it. Mitchum for his part keeps his cool, except for the necessary fist fight once or twice.
It's 1956, and international intrigues like this are slowly rising into a genre of their own. People come and go, scenes are not what they seem at first, people have false identities and foreign accents. The big theme (too big to believe, but that's okay, it's supposed to be) is that realignment of global power after WWII. The real thing, made up of shadowy individuals who seem to be above nationality, and only know about intrigue, money, and winning at any cost.
I don't want to pump this up too much. It's slow at times, and the acting not always right on. The effects (the atmosphere, the fights, etc) are sometimes so archly false you can't quite accept it even as theatrical, but just a cheap. But that's the exception. Fall into the pace of it and it's not bad at all.
"Husbands can get lost so easily," someone tells Jeanne Crain's character in the 1953 Fox thriller "Dangerous Crossing," and boy, do those words ever prove prophetic!
Here, Crain plays Ruth Stanton, a wealthy heiress who departs on a honeymoon cruise after a whirlwind courtship. When her husband (Carl Betz, who most baby boomers will recognize as Dr. Alex Stone from the old "Donna Reed Show") disappears from the ship before they even leave the NYC harbor, Ruth becomes distraught...especially since no one on board, including the ship's doctor (sympathetically played by Michael Rennie), will believe the story that her husband ever existed!
What follows is a tale of escalating suspense and paranoia, with no one on the ship seemingly worthy of Ruth's--or our--complete trust. While not precisely a film noir, "Dangerous Crossing" certainly does have its noirish aspects, and the scene in which Ruth searches the boat for her husband at night, in a dense mist, the only background sound being the intermittent blare of the ship's foghorn, is one that all fans of the genre should just love.
Jeanne, very much the star of this film and appearing in virtually every scene, looks absolutely gorgeous, of course (the woman had one of the most beautiful faces in screen history, sez me), and her thesping here is top notch. She is given any number of stunning close-ups by veteran cinematographer Joseph Lashelle, who years before had lensed that classiest of film noirs, 1944's "Laura."
In one of the DVD's surprisingly copious collection of extras, it is revealed that the picture took only 19 days to produce, at a cost of only $500,000; a remarkably efficient production, resulting in a 75-minute film with no excess flab and a sure-handed way of delivering shudders and suspense. Very much recommended.
Not the Loren/Quinn vehicle but more a formulaic mystery ... the one and only copy available on YT was poor vision ... the second version below, there in case of emergency.
Why bother? Because it's not a bad film, though predictable. And I quite like the sister.
Review
Black Orchid (1953)
A smart, crisp, and very British kind of drama with a touch of murder thrown in. It has a flavor of a classic whodunit, but it's never quite seen from the point of view of someone who has to solve the crime. Rather, we are wrapped up in this upper class world (at one point a woman says, as an apology, that she has just one gardener), and the crossed loves of two or three or maybe four of the characters becomes the meat of it. It is a deceptively noir titled movie, directed by British workaday director Charles Saunders, but it's not a noir one bit.
For movie buffs there is the wonderful Leslie Howard's son, Ronald, who has an amazing resemblance (and something less of a presence) on the screen. Ronald Howard had a middling career, and many less than stellar performances on stage, and then screen, and then lots of telly, including a series of 39 episodes as Sherlock Holmes.
More impressive by far is his wife, played by Mary Laura Wood, an even lesser known actress of mostly 50s era dramas and some t.v. Here she is sharp and alive, so taut you are never sure what she's about to do or say next. And she was in almost nothing else you can get your hands on, so enjoy her for what she's worth. There are several good secondary performances, as well, and indeed, if anything lifts this movie up a bit, it's the committed, convincing acting all around.
To paraphrase ole Walt Whitman ... do I repeat myself?Very well then I repeat myself,(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
As one reviewer pointed out: “ This is very much the sort of quintessential forties film noir that fanciers of the genre get nostalgic for, with just the right balance of grit and glamor, low-budget ambiance and surehanded Hollywood artistry.”
It’s not easy getting the casting right, the director et al … it’s a balancing act, not always coming off, trying to make that twist just that bit more twisted in the trope. Personally, I prefer relatively ego-free Bs … they’re not Zs by any means and not blockbusters where you have to dress up and go to the cinema to see A listers “starring” and knowing it.
Featuring the softer sider of Dan Duryea, a satisfyingly menacing Peter Lorre, and a bunch of other people I never heard of before.
No seriously, you have Broderick Crawford here in a very bit part as a cop, and everybody else is pretty obscure. And Universal really had to limp along in that state from 1936 when the Laemmles lost control and took virtually everybody with name recognition working for the studio with them, into the 1950s. And yet this one works.
Martin Blair (Dan Duryea) is a songwriter who has been on a drunken jag since his wife singer Mavis Marlowe found fame and dumped him. One night, on what would have been their wedding anniversary, he attempts to see her, is bounced out of the building by the doorman, gets plastered, and is taken home by his good friend Joe, and locked in his room. As he is thrown out, Martin sees a mysterious character (Peter Lorre) admitted to see Mavis by the doorman.
Later, Kirk Bennett, who has had an affair with Mavis, comes up to her apartment to tell her he can't pay her blackmail anymore (to keep quiet about his affair). He finds her body, manages to touch everything, and then panics and leaves but is spotted by Mavis' maid as she returns from her night out.
Bennett is arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced to die for Mavis' murder. All the while his cheated-upon wife Catherine stands by him. Then - rather late it seems - she goes to confront Martin, whom she thinks is the killer. When she finds that Martin was locked in his room, out stone cold drunk at the time of the murder, she relents.
The two oddly decide to pair up, present themselves as a musical team, and try to investigate shady nightclub owner Marko (Peter Lorre) and solve the murder and save Kirk.
The thing is, while Catherine and Martin are posing as a musical team, they actually start making beautiful music together. Martin is on his longest dry stretch in years, and with Catherine rather ambivalent, you can't help but wonder, given Duryea's usual screen persona, is he really that motivated now to find the real killer and send Kirk Bennett back into his wife's arms?
Watch and find out. This one has an ending worth waiting for - I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it. Don't let the somewhat slow middle deter you. Highly recommended.
Edward G. Robinson doesn't want his adopted daughter to go near "The Red House" in this 1947 film which also stars Judith Anderson, Lon McAllister, Allene Roberts, Julie London and Rory Calhoun. Robinson is Pete, who lives with his sister Ellen (Anderson) on a self-sufficient farm. They have a daughter they both adopted, Meg, who is now a teenager with a crush on Nath (McAllister) so she arranges for him to work for Pete. Nath is interested instead in the gorgeous Tibby (London), a tramp in training who flirts with a randy local (Calhoun). When Nath decides to go home via the woods, Pete becomes very agitated and tries to dissuade him. Meg and Nath decide to find out what's in those woods and start investigating. What they uncover is life-changing.
Directed by Delmer Daves, "The Red House" is one scary noir with lots of night scenes that take place in the woods and a haunting ending. The story is also an allegory for growing up and going out into the world, which Meg and Nath are determined to do. Nath urges his mother to marry her long-time boyfriend and go north with him because it's time he was independent, and Meg wants to be treated like a young woman - not only by a young man, but by the people she sees as her parents. The more Pete tells her not to go into the woods, the more she rebels.
There are several unsettling things in this film - the secret Pete is keeping, for one, as well as very unhealthy obsession with Meg. That is handled subtly for the most part, but is still there. That may seem an ambitious subject for 1947, but it is also an obvious part of the plot of "In This Our Life," as an example. We learn as the film continues that Ellen had a chance at having her own home and happiness with the local doctor, but because Pete would not allow her to take Meg with her, she never married and stayed on the farm. The fact that she wasn't willing to leave Meg alone with Pete is quite telling. As Pete becomes more unbalanced at the thought of anyone trespassing in the woods, we can understand her motives. Another interesting feature of the film is the blatant sexuality of Tibby as opposed to the naiveté of Meg.
All the performances are good, but Robinson is a standout. He could be convincing as both a villain and a lovesick fool, a great man or a coward. Here he slowly fleshes out his character from that of a nice, gentle man to one who is becoming unhinged to complete disintegration in a truly frightening performance. Judith Anderson, so menacing in "Rebecca" underplays beautifully here and is perfectly convincing as Pete's sister. It's a sign of a great actress when she can be at home in Shakespeare and as a farmer's sister. London is stunning and does well as a gal trying to hedge her bets. Roberts and McAllister are appropriately young and have the necessary naive quality.
The best way I can describe "The Red House" is to call it unsettling. The undertones and the end of the film are disturbing, and one can see the beginnings of the psychology and dark feelings that surfaced in film after World War II.
The Madonna's Secret follows the life of a tortured artist as he faces accusations of multiple murders. His beautiful models seem to meet with unfortunate endings and the cops all think they point to the painter. Perhaps they do, as he hears voices, has bad dreams and forgets chunks of his life.
Not sure if this is strictly a noir film as it runs as a mystery as well. Some evidence of film noir would be the dramatic cinematography, a character that is somewhat of a Femme Fatale, a feeling of hopelessness in the current status quo, and of course, the criminal element that pervades most scenes. Against it being noir would be that this film is not about the average man, but a well to do artist. Also, the [helpless] fate angle doesn't seem as pronounced here. The acting is great throughout with special kudos for Francis Lederer and his creepy accent. The cinematography is uniformly superb. Of course, any film shot by John Alton is special. This is a rare film and currently only shown at film festivals. Hopefully it will show up on DVD someday.
Other comments:
# Strange and hypnotic noir
# A sea of moods balances sanity and madness
# An artist persecuted by his models being murdered, and he doesn't know if he is doing it himself
This review could only have been written by a woman:
"Glenn Ford is Mike Lambert in "Framed," a 1947 noir also starring Janis Carter, Barry Sullivan, and Edgar Buchanan. Ford plays a man who takes a job driving a truck that ends up having no brakes. Once at his destination, he enters a bar/restaurant called La Paloma and comes to the attention of waitress Paula Lambert (Carter) - and vice versa.
Turns out she's been waiting for someone like Ford to come along. Well, hasn't every woman? Paula and her boyfriend, Steven Price, need someone to be identified as Price in a car accident/explosion so that she and Price can take off with the $250,000 Price has embezzled from his bank. Unfortunately for them, they're pretty sophomoric, and Mike gets suspicious.
I can't share the deep thrill others have expressed about this film, though I love Glenn Ford's combination of gentleness, toughness, and sexiness. He had really just hit big stardom around the time of this film.
As beautiful, slender and accomplished a Broadway performer as Janis Carter was, I thought her acting was - well, awful is the only word for it. This is a Lizabeth Scott/Ann Sheridan type of role - smoky, mysterious, ambiguous as to motive. Carter had none of these shadings, offering instead wooden line delivery with nothing going on underneath. A better actress would have made this a much stronger film."
Just in case we've had the William Powell movie ... this one. Griff seems a naughty boy to me:
"Shockproof" is a 1949 Douglas Sirk film starring Cornel Wilde and Patricia Knight. Wilde is Griff Marat, who gets a paroled prisoner, Jenny Marsh (Knight) on his caseload. She refuses to give up the bad acquaintances that got her into trouble in the first place; this includes her old boyfriend, Harry (John Baragrey) whom she continues to meet secretly.
Griff has taken Jenny into his home to care for his blind mother (Esther Minciotti), and over time, they fall in love. Though she's still pulled toward Harry, she balks when Harry wants her to convince Griff to marry her, a clear violation of his job ethics and her parole. Because Griff has political ambitions, they will then have them where they want him. Gradually Harry realizes that Jenny is not going to cooperate, and he ends up gravely injured. Griff and Jenny go on the run to avoid her arrest.
This is a pretty good noir with two heavyweights attached, Sirk, the director, and Sam Fuller, who co-wrote the script. Unfortunately, the characters aren't fleshed out enough so that we understand their sudden turnarounds - a man on the side of the law with political ambitions decides to throw it all out the window, marry a client secretly, and go on the run riding in boxcars and living in shacks because though the shooting was accidental, Griff feels Jenny won't be believed. That's just Griff - in reality, all three of the main characters do complete reversals during the course of this film with little or no justification.
Wilde does a good job here, and Knight, a new actress to me, is beautiful and has good chemistry opposite her then husband Wilde. She didn't work much longer, as after their divorce, her career dried up.
"When a patrol cop is shot and killed, small time crook Frank Wiecek is tried for the crime and promptly sentenced to life imprisonment. Some 11 years on, tough cookie reporter P.J. McNeal gets involved with the case, the further he delves, the more he believes that Wiecek is innocent, but can he find evidence to back up his belief?
Filmed in semi-documentary style by director Henry Hathaway, this James Stewart led noir thriller oozes realism from start to finish. It's actually the lack of gloss and glamour that is the film's trump card. Based on the real story of the Joe Majczek case in 1933, it's filmed perfectly on location in Chicago {where the actual events happened}, gloriously mood emphasised by Joe MacDonald's superb black & white cinematography, and scored with tonal adroitness by Alfred Newman.
As intrepid Chicago Times reporter McNeal {based on real reporter Jim McGuire who was a Pulitzer Prize winner for his investigative efforts on this case}, James Stewart lays down a marker for the more edgier character roles that would follow for him in the 50s. Here he plays it perfect as McNeal shifts from mere cynical newsman to an outright crusader of justice; and it's riding along with McNeal that this human interest piece lifts itself to great crime thriller heights.
Along the way we find problems are encountered and police procedural techniques are scrutinised. All may not be as it first seemed, and this mysterious element ices what was already a delightful docu-drama based cake.
There is not much else to say, it's a film I personally highly recommend, a fascinating story that is given top care and attention from all involved, mean, moody and yes, magnificent. 8/10"
Thinking there might just be one … see what I can find:
A review:
"Husbands can get lost so easily," someone tells Jeanne Crain's character in the 1953 Fox thriller "Dangerous Crossing," and boy, do those words ever prove prophetic!
Here, Crain plays Ruth Stanton, a wealthy heiress who departs on a honeymoon cruise after a whirlwind courtship. When her husband (Carl Betz, who most baby boomers will recognize as Dr. Alex Stone from the old "Donna Reed Show") disappears from the ship before they even leave the NYC harbor, Ruth becomes distraught...especially since no one on board, including the ship's doctor (sympathetically played by Michael Rennie), will believe the story that her husband ever existed!
What follows is a tale of escalating suspense and paranoia, with no one on the ship seemingly worthy of Ruth's--or our--complete trust.
While not precisely a film noir, "Dangerous Crossing" certainly does have its noirish aspects, and the scene in which Ruth searches the boat for her husband at night, in a dense mist, the only background sound being the intermittent blare of the ship's foghorn, is one that all fans of the genre should just love.
Jeanne, very much the star of this film and appearing in virtually every scene, looks absolutely gorgeous, of course (the woman had one of the most beautiful faces in screen history, sez me), and her thesping here is top notch. She is given any number of stunning close-ups by veteran cinematographer Joseph Lashelle, who years before had lensed that classiest of film noirs, 1944's "Laura."
In one of the DVD's surprisingly copious collection of extras, it is revealed that the picture took only 19 days to produce, at a cost of only $500,000; a remarkably efficient production, resulting in a 75-minute film with no excess flab and a sure-handed way of delivering shudders and suspense. Very much recommended.
This casts Robert Lowery as a truck driver who gets himself into a jackpot as police authorities think he might be responsible for a string of accidents including two fatalities, one of those being the daughter of the president and founder of the company.
When insurance investigator Dan Seymour clears him, Lowery becomes Seymour's operative to replace the one he lost as the other fatality was an undercover man, hired by Michael Whalen, widower of the daughter.
This is a pretty decent noir thriller from Lippert with an interesting array of suspects including Seymour himself who is always playing slimy characters. Maris Wrixon who is usually some kind of femme fatale herself in movies runs true to form here as the personnel manager for the trucking company. A short term involvement with her jeopardizes Lowery's relationship Pamela Blake who works at a truck stop garage run by Uncle Clem Bevans and Aunt Mary Gordon.
As you can see, it does have a nice assortment of character players which really lifts this Lippert film into decent entertainment. Remember the casting because the villain in the end will surprise you more or less.
With Zelensky in Capitol Hill, and with Ukraine aid hanging in the balance, Kevin McCarthy has failed for a second time to advance a bill funding the Defense Department, which keeps the government on a path toward a shutdown on Oct. 1. This tweet by Mitch McConnell captures the essence of the raging disagreement and debate...
16. Matinees etc.
There’s a good film, an episode of a brief, two series 70s Brit sitcom, plus a Ripping Yarn. The US film has too much grit for a Sunday, quite noir, but the sitcom has too much female curvature … but at least that will pacify Torquaymada. Think maybe the film around 1600, sounds about right … the other two tomorrow.
15. TDS
14. Quora had this
That’s easy … instead of just passing the bottle across the table after taking a swig, instead, he/she gets out the hanky and wipes the neck first.
13. Backtracking on Net Zero and Ulez
As one of the globo remainers, you might expect Nick Drew to be down on Sunak for backtracking but no:
Without the slightest doubt, every nation will be forced to rein back its 'net zero' plans - because with the technology available right now, they are infeasible, never mind costly. That's even before we factor in the eventual but inevitable electoral unpopularity of the 'politics of compulsion'.
The questions, therefore, are of timing and tactics. Sunak has decided to make it a General Election dividing line. The ULEZ fiasco speaks in favour of this judgement, but as Chris Dillow is wont to say - but, but, but ...
That’s how it starts … suggested by the book. It’s not Basil and Nigel … is it worth it? Methinks so, if you can forget it’s a Holmes mystery as we know it and more an old noir:
Theo Winthrop at Imdb:
Sherlock Holmes became such a quick fixture in motion pictures that it is possible to write studies on the various movies and actors centered on that character.
This particular film was an early Hollywood take on Holmes in the sound period. It is interesting to note that it came out only three years after Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1930. By the time this had come out Hollywood had done silent and sound films about Holmes with William Gillette, John Barrymore, and (more recently) Clive Brooks. But the three best Holmes' of the sound period were still to come along: Arthur Wontner in Great Britain, Basil Rathbone in Hollywood, and Jeremy Brett (on television). Holmes in this version was Reginald Owen, best remembered for his "Ebenezer Scrooge" in the 1938 version of "A Christmas Carol". Owen was a very good character actor (villainous in films like "The Call Of The Wild", but funny as anything in "The Good Fairy"). He had played Watson already, so he was one of the few actors to essay both friends parts. But he seemed too laid back to be a good Holmes.
"A Study In Scarlet" appeared in December 1887 in "Beeton's Christmas Annual", a long forgotten magazine in Great Britain, which is only now recalled because of Conan Doyle's novella. If you are lucky enough to stumble onto the Beeton's of that month and year (and it is the original) than hold onto it - it's worth many thousands of dollars.
It's in two parts. The first half is "The Lauriston Gardens Mystery", wherein Dr. John H. Watson (our narrator) introduces us to his friend and roommate Sherlock Holmes, and then to the adventure (set in April 1881) where he first became aware that Holmes was a consulting detective, and was consulted by Scotland Yard's Detectives Tobias Gregson and "G." (no further name ever given) Lestrade (not "Lastrade" as the movie's cast of characters named him). Lestrade would be the best known of the detectives in the saga who would consult Holmes (and would be most memorably played by Dennis Hoey in the Rathbone films). Here he's played by Alan Mowbray - not badly but with little electricity.
The plot of the first portion of the novella is about the murder of two men, one by poison and one by a knife wound in the heart. Holmes traces the story back to the old west, where in the second half (entitled "The Country of the Saints") it is linked to the Mormons in Utah.
Most (if not all) was jettisoned, into a story about murder for insurance, centering around Anna May Wong and Alan Dinehart. Dinehart's character Thaddeus Merrydew, is based on a single line of writing in the four novels and fifty six short stories that were written by Conan Doyle. In "The Adventure of the Empty House", when reading a list of people with "M" in their name (he is searching for the biography of Colonel Sebastian Moran), he finds a reference to "Merrydew of abominable memory." That's it! No "Thaddeus Merrydew", just "Merrydew". Somebody concocting the script remembered that one reference. I may add, this was also the last time in movies there was any villain named Merrydew against Mr. Sherlock Holmes.
As an early talkie film about Holmes, it is worth seeing - but it is not among the best Holmes movies.
As one reviewer pointed out: “ This is very much the sort of quintessential forties film noir that fanciers of the genre get nostalgic for, with just the right balance of grit and glamor, low-budget ambiance and surehanded Hollywood artistry.”
It’s not easy getting the casting right, the director et al … it’s a balancing act, not always coming off, trying to make that twist just that bit more twisted in the trope. Personally, I prefer relatively ego-free Bs … they’re not Zs by any means and not blockbusters where you have to dress up and go to the cinema to see A listers “starring” and knowing it.
Featuring the softer sider of Dan Duryea, a satisfyingly menacing Peter Lorre, and a bunch of other people I never heard of before.
No seriously, you have Broderick Crawford here in a very bit part as a cop, and everybody else is pretty obscure. And Universal really had to limp along in that state from 1936 when the Laemmles lost control and took virtually everybody with name recognition working for the studio with them, into the 1950s. And yet this one works.
Martin Blair (Dan Duryea) is a songwriter who has been on a drunken jag since his wife singer Mavis Marlowe found fame and dumped him. One night, on what would have been their wedding anniversary, he attempts to see her, is bounced out of the building by the doorman, gets plastered, and is taken home by his good friend Joe, and locked in his room. As he is thrown out, Martin sees a mysterious character (Peter Lorre) admitted to see Mavis by the doorman.
Later, Kirk Bennett, who has had an affair with Mavis, comes up to her apartment to tell her he can't pay her blackmail anymore (to keep quiet about his affair). He finds her body, manages to touch everything, and then panics and leaves but is spotted by Mavis' maid as she returns from her night out.
Bennett is arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced to die for Mavis' murder. All the while his cheated-upon wife Catherine stands by him. Then - rather late it seems - she goes to confront Martin, whom she thinks is the killer. When she finds that Martin was locked in his room, out stone cold drunk at the time of the murder, she relents.
The two oddly decide to pair up, present themselves as a musical team, and try to investigate shady nightclub owner Marko (Peter Lorre) and solve the murder and save Kirk.
The thing is, while Catherine and Martin are posing as a musical team, they actually start making beautiful music together. Martin is on his longest dry stretch in years, and with Catherine rather ambivalent, you can't help but wonder, given Duryea's usual screen persona, is he really that motivated now to find the real killer and send Kirk Bennett back into his wife's arms?
Watch and find out. This one has an ending worth waiting for - I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it. Don't let the somewhat slow middle deter you. Highly recommended.
There's something rewarding about discovering a solid but unknown film from the past... like finding $50 in the pocket of a suit you haven't worn since last summer. This British gangster exploitation flick is such a film. THE SHAKEDOWN is so much better than it ought to be that it's kind of amazing. It's hardly even listed in any major movie review books. Still, I'm not ashamed to say this is without question a minor low budget UK noir gem and absolutely worthy of any crime drama (or 50s British cinema) fan's time. I saw it last year at the American Cinematheque Film Noir festival in Los Angeles and it was the wrong print! They meant to screen the American noir called SHAKEDOWN, but the audience and myself are forever grateful for the error as this movie is edgier, pulpier and just plain better.
