|
|
Post by topbilled on Nov 10, 2023 16:41:21 GMT
This neglected film is from 1932.
Polly want a crack-up
Marion Davies plays a trapeze artist who comes to a small conservative community with her circus troupe. Not only does she face opposition from the town’s more prudish denizens over her racy costume, she gets off on the wrong foot with a local pastor (Clark Gable).
The night her big performance occurs she misjudges part of her routine, loses her balance and plummets 50 feet. Upon crashing to the ground (no safety net was in place), she is severely injured.
Conveniently she is taken to the home of the very single pastor to recuperate. This development is most unrealistic, as a hospital would be the best place for such a recovery. We must endure her initial anger, taking the mishap out on Gable.
MGM adapted the story from an old stage play; and in fact, it had already been filmed fifteen years earlier as a silent picture in 1917. It’s not that Miss Davies comes across slightly miscast, it’s that I don’t think she really connects with some of the material. It might have been better if the story had been revised to make her a glamorous actress, maybe hit by a car and hiding out from her adoring public and loved ones.
Because the premise is rather hokey and because Miss Davies lacks gravitas as a serious dramatic actress, her character’s convalescence doesn’t really resonate with great emotional impact. At least not until the end, when the story has her contemplate suicide. By comparison, the crippling that is experienced by Irene Dunne’s character in LOVE AFFAIR is done with much more resonance, finesse and daresay skill.
We know Davies and Gable will eventually find happiness as a married couple, regardless of what the people in such a narrow-minded town may think. There is no surprise in them overcoming all odds. But at least the two leads share good rapport in their scenes together. They’d team up again in 1936’s CAIN AND MABEL.
Adding to the picture’s entertainment value is C. Aubrey Smith as Gable’s well-meaning uncle, who’s another man of the cloth. Plus we see a variety of circus performer types when our heroine returns to life under the big top. The final portion of the narrative has her attempt a grand comeback that may prove fatal, if she falls again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Nov 10, 2023 17:06:12 GMT
Polly of the Circus from 1932 with Marion Davies, Clark Gable, C. Aubrey Smith and David Landau
Not every precode was about unbridled lust, some just used the freedom of the brief precode window to explore themes in a way that wouldn't be allowed once the Motion Picture Production Code was all but fully enforced.
In Polly of the Circus, a trapeze artist, played by Marion Davies, while performing in a small town, is injured during her routine and taken to the nearby minister's house for medical attention because the hospital is far away.
Davies and the minister, played by a very young Clark Gable, had a modest confrontation earlier when she accused him of forcing her revealing posters to be covered up, but he denied it.
So her now staying in his house is just a take on the romcom trope of two antagonists being forced to live together. In this version, Gable is genuinely likable, while Davies fumes a bit too much because, surprise, surprise, she really likes the handsome, single minister.
She's difficult; he's easy going; she's circus liberal; he's Bible. As she recuperates, though, they have a couple of heart-to-heart moments and soon they are married. But neither his congregation nor his stern bishop uncle, played by C. Aubrey Smith, like the marriage.
Gable, who had been a rising star in his parish, is let go from his church. Because of his wife, he's also been quietly blackballed from all the churches. Now, it's tough going for the newlyweds as Gable won't let Davies return to the circus to earn money.
He also only looks for "church" like jobs in missions or selling Bibles as religious work is in his soul. Davies pings from being supportive, "we'll find a way," to anger, "I'm sick of you and your church," but we know, deep down, she loves the guy.
The climax (no spoilers coming) has a very 1930s "dramatic" sacrifice and too-easy resolution. But Davies, Gable and Smith, with an assist from Davies' surrogate father and boss at the circus, played by David Landau, are all talented enough to pull it off.
What helps this fast, professional effort is Davis playing a bit against type as she tries to be tough. Gable, too, plays against type as he shows none of the "machismo" here he'd later be known for. This "reversal" helps both actors come across as being more genuine in their roles.
It's also enjoyable to see a pro-religious movie willing to upbraid the Church for being narrow-minded. That took some guts as America was a very Christian country at the time.
Today, most Hollywood movies that touch on religion are either arrantly anti-religion or pro-religion, but have small-budget and are treacly. Precodes better understood the value of balance and nuance.
Polly of the Circus is just another Marion Davies star vehicle, but with up-and-coming Clark Gable as a costar, a fun take on the romcom formula and a reasonably honest look at Church politics, it has held up pretty well.
N.B. While tame by today's trapeze-routine standards, the ones performed in the movie, by stunt doubles, are entertaining and even harrowing a few times owing to some very well-done camera work. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Nov 14, 2023 17:58:22 GMT
This neglected film is from 1958.
A place they can call home
THE PROUD REBEL was made in the late 1950s by Samuel Goldwyn Jr. It came along at a time when TV westerns were quite popular, but it offered something that could only be found on the big screen– a sweeping story about post-war life told in Technicolor. At this stage in their careers, the two stars were no longer playing young romantic leads, and what develops is essentially a mature romance.
Alan Ladd is cast as an ex-Confederate soldier heading north to Minnesota after the Civil War. Except for his pride, he has lost much of what he once had. Traveling with him is a young son (Ladd’s own real life son David) who is now mute.
Due to traumatic shock, the boy hasn’t uttered a word since the end of the war. It is the elder Ladd’s hope that they might find a doctor in the Midwest with a cure. But when they speak to a physician (Cecil Kellaway), they’re told the boy’s inability to speak might be psychological, not physical.
Outside the doctor’s office, they get into a fight with some men trying to steal the boy’s dog. This leads to an arrest and quick trial. A judgment is rendered against the Ladds, and a $30 fine is imposed…but they have no money to pay it.
A solution presents itself when a farm woman (Olivia de Havilland) steps forward. She will provide lodging for both of them, if they do jobs on her land to pay off the fine. Soon tender feelings are shared between the adults while the woman forges a special bond with the boy.
The film presents several unique character studies, and the situations are simple but realistic. We watch southerners exposed to prejudices in Midwestern territory, and we also see a conflict escalating between Miss de Havilland and a neighbor sheep baron (Dean Jagger).
In addition to this, there is hope the boy’s voice might be restored if he undergoes an operation. As the story unfolds, it is clear the Ladds have found more than just a temporary refuge with de Havilland. They’ve found a place where they belong, a place they can call home.
|
|
|
|
MGM
Nov 15, 2023 14:07:13 GMT
Post by NoShear on Nov 15, 2023 14:07:13 GMT
This neglected film is from 1957.
Post-war malaise and adventure
Robert Taylor’s first appearance in an MGM film occurred in 1935, over two decades before this picture was released. He would remain with the Lion for a few more years, so this wasn’t the end for him. Part of Mr. Taylor’s long-term success was his ability to adapt to different trends in the motion picture industry.
He headlined films in all sorts of genres, though MGM execs were reluctant to feature him in musicals. Interestingly, he has a short musical number here with costar Dorothy Malone at the piano…proving he has a fine singing voice.
As for Miss Malone, she was coming off a recent Oscar win for her role as a sultry schemer in Universal’s WRITTEN ON THE WIND. She is not a sexual predator in this picture, but she’s still quite a siren and suitably glamorous. Dorothy Malone once told an interviewer she preferred working in westerns, maybe because those roles complemented her down-to-earth Texas manner. But she’s great in sudsy melodramas.
TIP ON A DEAD JOCKEY is a mixture of romantic melodrama, post-war malaise and adventure. Taylor and Malone are on the verge of divorce when the story begins. She leaves Reno, deciding to give the union another try and hurries off to Madrid where he’s living as an expatriate with a comical roommate (Marcel Dalio).
There is also a handsome neighbor (Jack Lord) who flew with Taylor in the war.
Complicating matters is Lord’s European wife (Gia Scala) who is pregnant and happily married to Lord…but still an object of desire, or at least considerable affection, for Taylor.
When Malone arrives, she initially keeps the truth about their marital status from Taylor, who believes the divorce was finalized. In fact, he’s been celebrating his “freedom.” One thing I really like about the script is how writer Charles Lederer drip-feeds pieces of information about the characters’ pasts and their present-day motivations. As a result, we gradually get more absorbed in the goings-on of the group and become part of their conflicts and struggles to be happy.
The adventure portion of the drama kicks in when a mysterious tycoon (Martin Gabel) offers Taylor a job to retrieve a locked box from Cairo and transport it back to Madrid. Taylor is told that only cash is inside the box. But there are also drugs.
At first Taylor turns down the risky assignment and Lord signs on instead. But when it becomes too dangerous and Lord nearly dies, Taylor steps in and takes over. This allows Taylor’s character to be heroic and exorcise some demons, since he cracked up in Korea and hasn’t flown since that time.
The flight sequences are impressive. The psychological angle about Taylor’s inability to fly seems like a metaphor for Taylor being sexually impotent. Hence, his need to separate from Malone…before he regains his mojo. Fortunately, he completes the mission and reunites with Malone before the final fadeout.
As for the meaning of the title, there is a jockey who appears midway during a racetrack sequence. Taylor originally refuses to haul the smuggled goods, because he thinks he will win big on a horse he owns at the track. Gabel has the jockey killed during the race, so Taylor will lose on the bet and need to fly the man’s plane.
I enjoyed the story so much, I watched the film again a short time later. It contains shades of corruption and the threat of heartbreak, before last-minute redemption. TopBilled, I ran across this year-old review of yours - thank you - and found myself wishing this was scheduled for T CM this week. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Nov 15, 2023 14:23:30 GMT
TIP ON A DEAD JOCKEY a really good, neglected film. Some of these motion pictures fly under the radar for years and you wonder why.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Nov 22, 2023 15:06:30 GMT
This neglected film is from 1951.
Go all the way
The film begins with a preface that tells us how the War Department organized a unit of Japanese-American soldiers. This was done after F.D.R. had signed an order to relocate over 100,000 Japanese Americans in 1942. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, anyone of Japanese descent was regarded as a potential enemy.
Of course the War Department’s decision to round-up loyal Nisei (second generation Japanese) seemed to be some sort of political damage control. Was this because F.D.R. and other high-ranking Democrats had realized the inherent discrimination in sending all Japanese Americans to internment camps…especially when a large number of them were very loyal law-abiding U.S. citizens? Some of them wanted to fight for the country, and now they were given a chance to do so as part of the 442nd Regimental Combat team.
We are told these soldiers had an impressive record in battle from 1943 to 1946. They were involved in seven European campaigns. They received over 18,000 decorations and medals, as well as seven presidential citations. They also had a high rate of casualties– leading one to think they were put in more dangerous situations, possibly without reinforcements.
These men were heroic and MGM’s new head of production, Dore Schary, wanted to make a film about them. Of course, the studio was basking in the glow of its previous war flick BATTLEGROUND, which had won the Best Picture Oscar for 1949.
BATTLEGROUND featured studio favorite Van Johnson and he was chosen to star in this picture as well. Other Caucasian actors at the studio were added to the cast such as Warner Anderson and Don Haggerty. But the majority of Mr. Johnson’s costars would be Japanese American men, and some of them had been part of the 442nd unit.
Robert Pirosh, who had written the Oscar winning screenplay for BATTLEGROUND was recruited by Schary to write the script for GO FOR BROKE! In addition to this, Pirosh was allowed his first chance to direct. He and Schary agreed to hire Lane Nakano for the second most important role in the story.
Nakano was a Nisei who had been relocated to Wyoming then allowed to join the military. He had a career as an actor and singer after the war.
GO FOR BROKE! was a hit for the studio, but it was never given televised broadcasts during the late 1950s and 1960s when so many old films found new life on TV. In fact the studio ultimately let its copyright lapse in 1979, which is when it finally appeared on the small screen.
Dore Schary was well-known as a Hollywood liberal, and I would say his commitment to telling this story was risky. It’s a shame that something like GO FOR BROKE! didn’t get put into production during wartime. It might have helped ease domestic tensions and increasing xenophobia on American soil. I wonder if ongoing racism and prejudice against Japanese Americans in the Eisenhower era is what caused this film to become neglected by MGM.
On screen we glimpse a rare display of multicultural patriotism. The honest depiction of Japanese American fighters challenges the prejudice of white audiences and gives us another definition of what it means to be American.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 2, 2023 13:31:37 GMT
This neglected film is from 1939.
Florence Rice as Florence Nightingale wannabe
Opening shots consist of stock footage that has already been seen in a Dr. Kildare movie. So it’s no surprise when four nursing interns arrive at a facility where they’re enrolled in a rigorous training course, that it looks a lot like the Blair Hospital set from the Kildare series.
Except Doctors Kildare and Gillespie are nowhere to be found. In their place, we have a handsome surgeon (Alan Marshal) as well as a few other nice looking doctors (Tom Neal and Phillip Terry) who treat patients. Marshal’s character serves as a mentor to nearly everyone on staff. He will also be a love interest for the most important nurse trainee (Florence Rice).
Typically, MGM cast Miss Rice in romantic comedies with Robert Young, who speaking of medical stories, would later become known for his role as Marcus Welby M.D.
It’s all pretty formulaic as far as these things go. The studio’s usual polish is in evidence, even if this is for all intents and purposes just a glorified “B” picture. The titular four are basically archetypes, constructed and performed in way that will keep us engaged for 73 minutes.
We are told that the “girls” are enrolled for different reasons. (No male nurses are included.) One of them is here for love of the profession. One (Mary Howard) is here because she needs a stable career to support her infant child. One is here to serve others. And one– Rice’s character– is here for reasons of her own. At first we don’t know what her purpose or agenda might be. But then it is made clear that she’s here to snag a man, a rich handsome one.
Besides Miss Rice and Mr. Marshal, several other notable stars have key roles. Una Merkel appears as down-home type gal studying medicine. Plus we have a sister for Rice, also intending to be a nurse, played by Ann Rutherford, who must have been on a break from all those Andy Hardy pictures.
In charge of the nursing students is MGM character actress Sara Haden. And then there’s a crusty old-timer (Jessie Ralph) who is essentially the female version of Dr. Gillespie. She barks orders from dawn till dusk.
Providing comic relief is Buddy Ebsen as a wacky orderly. He’s paired up with Miss Merkel, since she is not going to be given the film’s most important romantic plot.
In some ways the main quartet functions like a group of new recruits in a medical army. We learn their program of study will last three years. Not all of them will make it to graduation day. And for those that do survive and become licensed nurses, their achievement will occur after constant spills, mistakes and near catastrophes.
Most of the subplots are punctuated with humor. But halfway through the story, there are a few startling developments…such as an altercation with a violent patient; and a train wreck in which passengers’ lives must be saved. The makers of the film do try to convey the idea that nursing is a noble profession. The character played by Florence Rice is no Florence Nightingale, but she tries to do her best and ultimately she succeeds. Just as she planned, she becomes an R.N. as well as an M.R.S.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 5, 2023 12:29:56 GMT
This neglected film is from 1931.
In possession of her heart
The film is based on a Broadway production, and it stars MGM contract player Robert Montgomery as the title character. He appears opposite Irene Purcell, a leading lady who preferred stage work and didn’t make many motion pictures. MGM later remade this story just six years later with Robert Taylor and Jean Harlow, called PERSONAL PROPERTY (1937).
While I think the remake benefits from slightly better production values than this talkie version, I feel Robert Montgomery gives one of his best performances here, and for that reason, the picture is certainly worth seeing. He exudes the perfect combination of glibness and charm, both infuriating and endearing. I guess you might say he’s a posh trickster.
The main conflict involves Montgomery’s recent release from prison, which caused considerable embarrassment to his well-off parents (C. Aubrey Smith & Beryl Mercer). Montgomery was sent to Cambridge when he was younger, given all the finest advantages in life, but made some bad choices that led to his temporary incarceration. Now that he’s out, father and brother (Reginald Owen) want to send him away, far away, so there will be no more scandal. Mother and housekeeper (Maude Eburne) want him to stay, but there’s too much arguing.
Montgomery ultimately leaves the nest and gets a job as a sheriff’s assistant. He shows up with a head bailiff (Forrester Harvey) at the opulent home of Purcell. She’s a woman over-extended on credit, about to lose all her most valuable possessions including the house.
Montgomery’s boss has him spend the night to watch over the property and its contents, which Montgomery takes to mean watching over the lady of the manor as well. Ironically, she turns out to be the fiancee of Montgomery’s brother (Owen).
There’s an uproarious sequence where Montgomery’s family comes to dinner, and they help keep Montgomery’s real identity a secret. At the same time Montgomery doesn’t let his relatives know the brother’s fiancee is broke.
A few additional characters are seen. Charlotte Greenwood, who gets second billing over Purcell, plays a maid who tries her best to help Purcell keep up appearances. And Alan Mowbray plays one of his typically smarmy roles as a millionaire who’s fond of Purcell and may bail her out financially.
Of course Montgomery and Purcell fall in love after a night of premarital precode sex that involves the ripping of undergarments. The physical consummation of their affections is confirmed when he makes breakfast the next morning and arranges slices of bacon on the plate to spell out “love.”
These developments spell trouble for Purcell. Her engagement to Owen is called off, and she must refuse any advances from Mowbray since she knows the one truly in possession of her heart is Montgomery. It all somehow works out in the end, and the two lovebirds get a chance to start a life together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 5, 2023 13:01:49 GMT
The Man in Possession from 1931 with Irene Purcell, Robert Montgomery and Reginald Owen
With a silly story, a pre-code risqué undertone and two quite-engaging leads, The Man in Possession all adds up to a fun, quick romp.
Robert Montgomery plays an upper-class Englishman who was just released from prison over a "misunderstanding" about the payment for an automobile. His snooty father and brother offer to pay him off to leave the country and spare the family more shame, but Montgomery wants to stay in “good old England,” so he finds a job as a "sheriff's bailiff," a repo man for the Crown.
For his first case, Montgomery is assigned to spend the weekend at the house of a young society woman, played by Irene Purcell, to ensure nothing being repossessed "disappears" before it can be taken away on Monday. Adorable Purcell has been living over her head to keep up appearances as she's close to marrying, get ready for it, Montgomery's brother, played by Reginald Owen.
Owen thinks Purcell is rich and that a marriage to her will bring him up in the world both socially and financially, but she's only willing to, what in her opinion is, "marry down" because she's desperate to hook someone with money, even someone as boring and idiotic as Owen.
Complicating matters, Montgomery, whose job requires him to try to be accommodative when staying on someone's premises, agrees to act as Purcell's butler for a dinner party she's having that evening for her fiance and his parents, the fiance being, as noted and unbeknownst to Montgomery and Purcell, his brother
Thrown into this silly and crazy mix is both Purcell's old paramour and benefactor, whom she's currently on the outs with and Purcell's saucy maid who has no truck with Montgomery's antics. Purcell needs to either get back in good with the old lover or marry Owen as the repo man is, as we know, past being at the door.
With that set up, the movie is a 1930s style romcom where Purcell and Montgomery, initially, irritate each other, while a bunch of silly coincidences and awkward situations come up.
Montgomery's family is shocked to find its prodigal son is now the butler for the other son's fiancee. Montgomery, already feeling something for Purcell and always happy to flummox his phlegmatic brother, sabotages the dinner. He also undermines Purcell's attempt at a reunion with her old lover.
Then, of course, Montgomery and Purcell have a night of passion. In pre-code land, they don't show you their knees knocking, but there is no doubt these two went at it. It's enjoyable to see adults being adults and doing stupid adult sexual things, as in only a few years, with the enforcement of the Motion Picture Production Code, sex out of (and, often, even in) marriage all but disappeared from the screen.
Purcell is embarrassed she slept with Montgomery, but is also falling in love with him. Montgomery, though, is hurt that Purcell is treating their night together as a one-off meaningless thing. Pause for a moment on pre-code moral nonchalance: casual sex is being treated, well, casually by the woman, while it's the man whose feelings get hurt.
Purcell knows, regardless of her feelings, she has to choose one of the other men to keep her lifestyle. Even though he is hurt, Montgomery keeps sabotaging her efforts with the other men, while trying to make some grand gesture to win Purcell over.
That sets up the perfect romcom climax. Will Purcell choose love with Montgomery or money either by marrying Owen or going back with her former lover? Will Montgomery do something spectacular to win over Purcell in time?
It's 1931 and Hollywood had already perfected the romcom formula. It works in The Man in Possession for the same reason it works today: Montgomery and Purcell are cute as heck together, so you enjoy their flirt fighting as a bunch of stupid obstacles come up that you are pretty sure will eventually get pushed aside so that true love can win out.
N.B. Ten minutes into this movie, I realized the odd déjà vu I felt was because I had seen the 1937 remake of The Man in Possession titled Personal Property (comments here: "Personal Property" ). Personal Property is a good Code Era glossy screwball comedy, but it lacks the sexual verve of the original. Plus, while 1937's stars, Jean Harlow and Robert Taylor, are good, they don't have the fun on-screen chemistry that Purcell and Montgomery do. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 10, 2023 14:18:01 GMT
This neglected film is from 1958.
“I always thought they were nice quiet people.”
Relatively wholesome 1950s dialogue punctuates this MGM thriller, where everyone’s almost too polite, even the main villain (Rod Steiger). There’s little menace or hardness in the way most of these characters speak when lives are threatened, no real fluctuation or emotion in the line readings…even at the beginning when a plane is nearly bombed.
James Mason, at 51, looks ten years younger than his actual age. He has the slimmest waistline this side of a studio commissary buffet table. As for Steiger, he’s a bit heavyset, though he doesn’t throw his weight around in a role that could easily use it.
Despite the introductory sequence involving a bomb that is quickly defused, the basic setup takes time to establish the individual characters and their motives. When Steiger shows up at Mason’s suburban home, it takes too long for him to get Mason and Mason’s family out of there and on to a separate location. Which made me wonder, why not just hold them hostage inside their own home? Why risk going out and arousing suspicion?
Angie Dickinson is fine as a vampish member of the gang, yet one can’t help but wonder what Gloria Grahame might’ve done in the role…how much more heat she’d have brought to the proceedings. Quincy M.E., I mean Jack Klugman, is also on hand as one of Steiger’s other cohorts; and so is Neville Brand who puts his own brand of villainy into the mix.
Without a doubt James Mason is the film’s best actor. He does a brilliant job with the facial expressions and general reactions of a man caught in a nightmarish quandary.
He has unwittingly become the brains behind the device that Steiger is using for nefarious purposes, to wreak havoc on airlines. Steiger promises to blow up random aircraft if ransom demands are not met. We want Mason’s character to thwart the gang and to overcome this unfortunate set of circumstances.
At one point there’s a strange conversation between Steiger, Klugman and Dickinson about whether they should put Mason’s innocent wife (Inger Stevens) under the watchful eye of creepy drug-addicted Brand. As if they’d have any sort of moral conscience…
Later Stevens has to fight off Brand’s unwanted sexual advances, which ensures some more cliched victimization and female hysterics.
For a film with a sensational title, there doesn’t actually seem to be much terror until the last few minutes. Stevens has been used to collect the ransom and is fleeing from Steiger. In a gripping scene she tosses a pan of hot scalding water into Steiger’s face.
She takes off and winds up in an underground subway area. It is rather preposterous that Steiger is able to follow and keep up with her. Shots of his face show no burn marks or scarring from the hot water, and he has no trouble seeing.
There is an obligatory chase along some train tracks, with Steiger eventually getting electrocuted. Stevens comes close to being struck by an oncoming locomotive, until Mason shows up, sweeps her up in his arms and carries her off.
Earlier in the film there’s a news segment on a TV screen. One of Mason’s neighbors is interviewed about the disappearance of him and his wife. The neighbor says: “I always thought they were nice quiet people.” They still are. Despite everything that’s happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 10, 2023 14:27:26 GMT
And now for a different opinion of Cry Terror!.
Cry Terror! from 1958 with Inger Stevens, Rod Steiger, Angie Dickinson, Jack Klugman and James Mason
Cry Terror! is a gripping crime-drama story of the "home invasion" type with engaging character development and outstanding acting that keeps this low-budget effort moving along from tense scene to tense scene right up to the last minute.
Rod Steiger plays the leader of a gang that dupes Steiger's former army buddy, played by James Mason, into building small but highly explosive time bombs for him under the ruse that it could lead to a military contract for Mason's company, but Steiger's real plan is to use them to blackmail an airline with the threat of blowing up a plane in flight.
Once the plan is in motion and the airline knows it's being extorted, Steiger's gang takes Mason, his wife, played by Inger Stevens, and their daughter hostage to keep them from going to the police.
From here, the movie is Steiger trying to keep the intricate, precisely timed plan working, which includes using Stevens to pick up the extortion money, while the police and FBI work to solve the crime.
It's a good story, but it only fully engages you, and it does, because it has outstanding character development. Steiger plays the psychotic genius mastermind behind the plan with a menacing calm that only cracks when he realizes, but can't fully accept, that his big brain is being defeated.
His gang, equally well developed, includes Angie Dickinson, surprisingly as a brunette, playing a gunmoll with plenty of brains and greed, but no humanity.
Rounding out the gang is Neville Brand playing a psychotic sexual deviant hopped up on Benzedrine and Jack Klugman playing an amoral henchman clearly cowed by both Steiger and Dickenson.
But this is Inger Stevens' movie and she is more than up to the task as she shows a range of emotion and screen presence, even in one-on-ones with acting force-of-nature Steiger, that convinces you a much-bigger career was hers if not for the personal challenges in her life.
Her scene with sweating-from-drugs Brand, trapped alone with him in his small, filthy and claustrophobic house, where she learns he was arrested once for raping a girl at knifepoint, has blonde and beautiful Stevens convincingly pinging back and forth between crumbling in sheer terror and employing cunning survival instincts that keeps you on edge throughout.
Playing on, initially in the background, is the FBI, whose methodical investigation - including using a discarded piece of gum to trace Dickinson's bitemark through her dental records - ultimately leads to the climatic scene as the plan begins to break down and the gang realizes it's every man or gunmoll for him or herself.
Surprisingly, James Mason as the husband and dupe, all but disappears in this one until the end, but even then, he doesn't pop off the screen the way he usually does. Maybe that's not his fault as Steiger, Klugman, Dickinson and, most impressively, Stevens have the bigger and better roles, with each one creating a memorable and captivating character that you love or hate, but regardless, are deeply vested in.
Cry Terror!, filmed in beautiful black and white and with some wonderful location shots (confusingly, though, with some mixing up of Los Angeles for New York) punches way above its modest budget and by-the-numbers story. Andrew L. Stone's writing and directing, which doesn't waste a moment of screen time, creates a tension-filled and highly engaging movie from the first scene to the last.
N.B. Check out this eerily foreshadowing exchange the airline executives have when they realize the threat they are facing:
Airline executive #1: "A bomb this small could be planted anyplace."
Airline executive #2: "We can't search every passenger, every inch of the plane, every piece of luggage."
Airline executive #3: "He could paralyze the whole system."
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 10, 2023 14:39:32 GMT
Yes, I think it is really a vehicle tailored for Inger Stevens' dramatic talents. She was the only one under a long-term contract at MGM during this time...all the others were freelancers brought in to support/assist her, including James Mason. However, Mason does have a good scene near the end where he threatens to knife someone if they don't reveal where his wife's been taken.
The wiki page says this was Mason's way of transitioning from lead roles to character roles...but I don't quite agree with that statement. He's still the male lead. If anything, Steiger is the character actor in this one, like he usually is in full-on villain mode.
I expected sizzle from Dickinson...I felt her talents were wasted and any ingenue could have done her part. Though as I said, if someone like Gloria Grahame had been used for the role, there would've been a bit more heat.
Overall, I found CRY TERROR satisfactory but I certainly expected more from it. I don't think the cast was the problem, as they were all quite capable. I think the script was weak in spots. You can hide a B-budget with stunning black and white visuals. But you can't hide a B-budget with a mediocre script...a bit more money should have been put into polishing and tightening the script.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 10, 2023 14:56:05 GMT
It felt to me like Mason disappeared for much of the movie, but Steiger's presence was always felt. As the husband and "hero," I agree, Mason was the male lead is theory, but Steiger had the much more impactful role and interesting character.
I liked that Dickinson played not quite against type, but not as overtly sexual as Hollywood usually made her. For me it showed she had more range as an actor.
I saw the plot flaws, too, but they didn't bother me much in this one. A lot of movies, even great ones have plot flaws, but for me, the characters and overall story worked.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 30, 2023 13:47:28 GMT
This neglected film is from 1945.
Criminal mother and her family
When I watched MAIN STREET AFTER DARK recently, I realized five minutes into the movie, that it was MGM’s version of the Ma Barker story. The film has glossy production values which gives it a saccharine quality. In Paramount’s QUEEN OF THE MOB (1940) and Warner Brothers’ subsequent WHITE HEAT (1949), the felonious mother is not glamorous at all. She is seedy and commonplace which helps get across the idea that these are destitute people, struggling financially and they are desperate to enjoy the ‘good life.’
In MGM’s version, the corrupt matriarch (Selena Royle) and her daughter (Dorothy Morris) are interested in taking expensive jewelry and other fine things that will make them look prettier. The mother certainly wouldn’t use a gun unless she had to, and before the end of the movie she does. She’s a far cry from the pistol packing mama that was in charge of the real-life Barkers.
MGM makes this seem like the family isn’t much different from the Hardys, except that they steal to get ahead. Having the bulk of the action filmed on the backlot where all the Andy Hardy movies were made gives it an additional sense of upper-middle class deja vu.
Despite the contrivances, I do think the cast is quite exceptional here. Selena Royle is convincing, and so is Dan Duryea who plays one of the crooked sons…as well as Audrey Totter as Royle’s daughter-in-law. This was Totter’s motion picture debut and having her play ‘bad’ alongside Duryea is a lot of fun to watch. Ma’s other son is played by the mostly unknown Tom Trout, who appeared in several pictures at the studio, before doing television work in the 1950s and heading off into obscurity.
The star of MAIN STREET AFTER DARK is Edward Arnold. He plays the local police lieutenant. He is on a crusade to help straighten out this thieving woman and her brood. But try as he might, they just won’t listen to reason. Since crime does not pay and they refuse to turn from a life of crime, most of the family end up dead or in the hoosegow at the end of the story.
There is a subplot involving a pawn shop owner (Hume Cronyn) who buys items that are lifted off visiting soldiers. This aspect of the film gives it a more contemporary mid-1940s feel.
Edward Arnold delivers a speech in the middle of the film, telling the soldiers that they need to be careful of devious women in nightclubs who will pickpocket them or scam them in ways they may be unwise to…clearly, this is Arnold speaking directly to the men in uniform that are in the theater watching this very movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jan 1, 2024 16:07:08 GMT
This neglected film is from 1954.
Nobody’s left standing
It’s always interesting to watch Robert Taylor at almost any phase of his 28-year association with MGM. In this film, they decided to shake things up a bit and cast him against type. Instead of the usual nice guy hero, this time he’s a shady lawman.
We learn his character was once a good cop, during the early days of his career on the force. His family was proud of him back then. But Pop is now dead and the years have seen him agree to one too many payoffs from the mob. How else can he afford those nice suits and fancy wrist watches..?
Taylor couldn’t go straight now even if he wanted to. He owes the local syndicate too many favors. The mafia kingpin is portrayed by George Raft with total panache and believability. Raft is really great in these kinds of roles, and he makes the most of his screen time as a second lead. There are memorable bits with him and his screwed up moll (Anne Francis).
She is part sass part hanger-on. She’s a whole lot of trouble for Raft, trouble he doesn’t need. After awhile he decides to get rid of her and you know what that means!
In addition to the main stars, we also have Janet Leigh as a nice gal with a sketchy past who happens to be dating Taylor’s kid brother (Steve Forrest). Oh yeah, Forrest is a cop, too– the new fresh variety, still good. He looks up to Taylor, not realizing how crooked his older sibling is.
The drama escalates when the mob wants Forrest bumped off, since he won’t change his testimony in a big case. His eye witness account of a crime will bring the heat down on Raft and Raft’s cronies. When Taylor fails to convince the kid bro to go on the take with him and recant his story, it means certain death.
ROGUE COP is a noir version of one’s chickens coming home to roost. In the best production code tradition, Taylor has to pay for his evil ways. And so does Raft.
There’s a climactic shootout at the end. It’s rather spectacular as far as these things go. After the last shot has been fired, nobody’s left standing.
|
|
