|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 1, 2023 15:22:17 GMT
This neglected film is from 1950.
Killer on the streets
This film found ‘new life’ a few years ago when the pandemic hit. Someone uploaded a copy of it on YouTube, and it quickly reached 100,000 views in the first month that it was available for viewing. If a worldwide health epidemic had not occurred, the film might have continued to slip into obscurity.
It wasn’t the only film of its kind. Columbia Pictures, the studio that produced this classic noir, also released CITY OF FEAR in 1959. In CITY OF FEAR Vince Edwards plays a robber who steals a metal canister that he thinks has heroin inside. However, it contains Cobalt-60, a deadly radioactive substance that is slowly leaking out, poisoning him and all those around him.
In THE KILLER THAT STALKED NEW YORK, Evelyn Keyes– taking her last assignment at the studio before freelancing– is the one who is infected and is infecting others. She is not doing this willingly. At first, she thinks she has a common virus, but when she doesn’t get well after an expected period of time, she begins to realize just how sick she really is.
Before she figures out that she is dying and in need of medical attention, we have seen her roaming throughout the city touching many objects including a public drinking fountain, and interacting with a slew of people. In short, she has unwillingly spread germs, which means the population at large is at risk of catching the deadly and highly contagious virus she has.
In these scenarios, the tension is upped greatly, because the main character becomes a public menace. We’re not talking a James Cagney type public enemy here, but someone just as dangerous.
We know that the character played by Keyes hasn’t led an exemplary life, but she does not want to kill a bunch of other people. The horror of her situation and how it affects those in her orbit, rippling out to harm others, is profound.
One thing I have always admired while watching this film is that Miss Keyes isn’t afraid to get ‘down and dirty’ with the role. A beauty who played one of Scarlett O’Hara’s sisters in GONE WITH THE WIND, she has no apparent qualms looking more haggard as the story goes on.
This is no glamorous Hollywood part. She’s wonderful, of course, and her performance underscores the panic and paranoia that grabs hold of the city when an outbreak occurs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Mar 1, 2023 16:02:26 GMT
I watched this one for the first time near the height of the Covid pandemic and wrote the below comments at that time.
The Killer that Stalked New York from 1950 with Evelyn Keyes, Charles Korvin, Lola Albright and an underused Dorothy Malone as a mousy nurse, but look closely and you'll still see her flash those famous come-hither eyes (above left) from the classic bookshop pick-up scene in The Big Sleep.
Movies can walk and chew gum at the same time - tell two stories at once - but it does take some skill to seamlessly knit the separate threads together. In The Killer that Stalked New York, the writers and director Earl McEvoy failed to complete the knitting, so this overall solid movie suffers from being a bit of a bifurcated effort.
The main tale is one of New York City on the brink of a smallpox outbreak with eerily similar overtones to today's Covid pandemic. But it is also the story of Treasury Department officers tracking stolen diamonds smuggled in from Cuba to be fenced in New York. The connection between the two stories is diamond "mule" Evelyn Keyes who knowingly brings the gems into the city while unknowingly bringing in smallpox.
The knitting problem is mainly one of tone and style. The smallpox story is told kinda like a public service announcement film with a resonating-voiced narrator guiding us through how a city organizes its resources to prevent a pandemic. Conversely, the diamond-heist story has a traditional noir vibe of bad people doing bad things to both their friends and foes.
With Keyes as the link between the two tales, we see her arrive in the city already feeling sick and, thus, spreading the disease. She immediately tries to connect with her husband, Korvin, who is going to sell the gems.
Yet unknown to her, while she was away, he was having an affair. And upping the noirness, he wasn't just cheating on Keyes with another woman, but with her sister - damn, people can do really bad things to each other. Pause on that for a moment, while Keyes is down in Cuba getting the stolen diamonds and risking arrest smuggling them into the country for her husband, he's banging her sister, ouch.
And if that isn't enough, while Keyes lies sick in bed, hubby takes the diamonds and whatever money she has and, employing a scorched-earth policy, skedaddles on both of the sisters. Keyes, with the sickness advancing to the point where her skin is showing the blisters - she's a bit frightening to look at now - is hellbent on finding her, no other word for it, scumbag husband. But all this noir stuff plays on in the background as the movie mainly focuses on the politicians' and healthcare community's efforts to stop the spread of the disease.
Here, the parallels to today's Covid pandemic are jarring: an initial test and trace efforts fails; a public education outreach includes discussion of how the virus is transmitted through the air and by touch; once available, a huge public campaign ensues to convince everyone to get vaccinated; at times, there is not enough vaccine and, finally, we see a push by others against the vaccine who believe it is some sort of conspiracy. I know, it's frighteningly similar to today.
Both stories are good and are, at the end, connected, once again, through Keyes because the Treasury officers and healthcare officials eventually team up to find her as the latter are now looking for her as patient zero. Unfortunately, the distinctive style and arc of the two stories leaves the viewer feeling as if he or she is almost watching separate movies at the same time. The combined effort is worth it, but you just can't help wishing the two narratives had been harmonized better.
A double N.B. for this one. One, the 1950 on-location footage of New York City is time-travel heaven. And, two, in the opening scene, Keyes wears a houndstooth wool suit with a hat and coat lined in the same fabric (see below, it's the best pic I could find, but it doesn't do it justice). She looks impressive; she's a woman to be reckoned with, but that outfit must have cost a small fortune and probably explains why she needed to steal the diamonds in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 1, 2023 16:23:34 GMT
Great review Fading Fast. Love the attention to detail, in terms of the exteriors and clothing that you mentioned.
I wouldn't be surprised if they started with a routine smuggling plot then decided to add in the smallpox story, and couldn't decide which one was supposed to be subplot. The result is two mostly separate story strands that eventually coalesce into one finale.
Keyes made some very good pictures in the noir genre. Among them-- this film, MR. SOFT TOUCH, THE PROWLER and 99 RIVER STREET.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Mar 1, 2023 16:27:29 GMT
Great review Fading Fast. Love the attention to detail, in terms of the exteriors and clothing that you mentioned.
I wouldn't be surprised if they started with a routine smuggling plot then decided to add in the smallpox story, and couldn't decide which one was supposed to be subplot. The result is two mostly separate story strands that eventually coalesce into one finale.
Keyes made some very good pictures in the noir genre. Among them-- this film, MR. SOFT TOUCH, THE PROWLER and 99 RIVER STREET.
I like your idea that they started with one story and then added in the other and never decided which one to make the subplot. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 1, 2023 16:30:32 GMT
Great review Fading Fast. Love the attention to detail, in terms of the exteriors and clothing that you mentioned.
I wouldn't be surprised if they started with a routine smuggling plot then decided to add in the smallpox story, and couldn't decide which one was supposed to be subplot. The result is two mostly separate story strands that eventually coalesce into one finale.
Keyes made some very good pictures in the noir genre. Among them-- this film, MR. SOFT TOUCH, THE PROWLER and 99 RIVER STREET.
I like you idea that they started with one story and then added in the other and never decided which one to make the subplot.
After finishing a month on Gene Raymond, I think maybe I will make Evelyn Keyes the focus of a performers spotlight in March. There are quite a few gems in her filmography. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Mar 1, 2023 16:52:04 GMT
I've really come to appreciate her more as an actress over time. I love her performance in "Mr. Soft Touch."
I like you idea that they started with one story and then added in the other and never decided which one to make the subplot.
After finishing a month on Gene Raymond, I think maybe I will make Evelyn Keyes the focus of a performers spotlight in March. There are quite a few gems in her filmography. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 12, 2023 14:32:19 GMT
This neglected film is from 1952.
Crawford publishes news and makes news
In some ways this film is a lot like 20th Century Fox’s DEADLINE U.S.A., which was also released around the same time. In Fox’s version of hard news versus tabloid journalism, Humphrey Bogart is caught between giving the public what they want (i.e. sensational stories involving murders or scandalous affairs) and a board of directors led by Ethel Barrymore, who are angling to get out of business and cease production.
With SCANDAL SHEET, we have Columbia’s take on the subject matter using a story by Sam Fuller called ‘The Dark Page.’ Fuller who was just starting to cut his teeth as a director had spent years working as a journalist.
Here, Brod Crawford, not long after his Oscar win, is cast in the lead role as a crusading editor. Like Bogart, he is up against a board of directors. Only in this case, they don’t want to sell...they just want him to go back to what they consider good old-fashioned news, even if it means decreased circulation and less money in their next dividend checks.
The head of the board, played by Kathryn Card, insists they do not want a depraved style of reporting splashed across the front page. Another board member complains that an upcoming Lonely Hearts Ball sponsored by the New York Express is just more cheap sensationalism and titillation, not real news.
Of course Crawford gets all huffy and says he will continue putting out the paper the way he sees fit, and if they don’t like it, they can stuff it. In other words, he’ll quit. At the same time that he’s having a standoff with the higher-ups, Crawford is grooming a young reporter (John Derek) who has strong instincts but is as overzealous as they come. Crawford is also functioning as a father figure of sorts to an office gal (Donna Reed) who’s romantically involved with the ace reporter.
Directing the film is Phil Karlson who would go on to helm several very good film noir pics at Columbia in the 1950s, including TIGHT SPOT and THE BROTHERS RICO. Karlson elicits dandy performances from the cast, and he manages to keep the tangled plot humming along. Though one does wonder how the film would have turned out if Fuller had been given a crack at directing it.
A performance that really stands out in the picture is the one rendered by Rosemary DeCamp, who plays a lovelorn woman jilted by Crawford. Her screen time is not too lengthy, but she makes a huge impact. There is a searing rejection scene that plays out in her apartment on the night of the ball between her and Crawford.
We witness Crawford losing his temper and causing her accidental death. This moment is on par with anything in a Hitchcock film, as the violence is unexpected and very shocking.
Since Crawford does not want to become the target of an intense police investigation, he tries concealing his involvement in the poor woman’s death. Of course, this makes matters worse for him. But ironically, the mystery surrounding the ‘Lonely Hearts murder’ only boosts circulation of the paper. So while the incident is his own personal downfall, it is also the making of his greatest professional success.
In the end, Crawford feels the proverbial walls closing in on him, and he decides to do the right thing. He will give himself up, but first will ensure that Derek’s career gets a noteworthy boost from the confession story.
Then, in one final dramatic sequence, Crawford pulls a gun on everyone before committing suicide by cop. The role played by Crawford had been suggested for Orson Welles, but I think Welles would’ve tried playing it with too much flair. Crawford gives his character’s troubling situation just the right amount of gravitas and dignity.
|
|
|
|
Post by LiamCasey on Mar 12, 2023 15:08:58 GMT
This neglected film is from 1952.
Crawford publishes news and makes news
This particular movie is currently available on Amazon Prime and your review intrigued me enough to add it to my watchlist on that service. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 12, 2023 15:20:14 GMT
This neglected film is from 1952.
Crawford publishes news and makes news
This particular movie is currently available on Amazon Prime and your review intrigued me enough to add it to my watchlist on that service. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Mar 12, 2023 15:26:30 GMT
This neglected film is from 1952.
Crawford publishes news and makes news
This particular movie is currently available on Amazon Prime and your review intrigued me enough to add it to my watchlist on that service. |
|
|
|
Post by LiamCasey on Mar 19, 2023 17:43:46 GMT
This particular movie is currently available on Amazon Prime and your review intrigued me enough to add it to my watchlist on that service. Had some unexpected free time so I caught this one this morning. And, after doing so, I can easily thank you for putting it on my radar. Don't really have much to add to your review. Not the first movie where the editor did it. And the plot did rely on a couple of coincidences in order to reach its Code-required conclusion. But, at just under 90 minutes, it moved along nicely and was well acted. Considering the popularity of noir on these classic movie boards, I suspect most members would readily enjoy this one. Of course, the biggest coincidence is the fact that Broderick Crawford's character has the same name as a real-life murderer who wasn't even born yet when this movie was made. In light of your ongoing thread regarding M*A*S*H, I'm surprised you didn't give a shout out to Harry Morgan as the news photographer (whose name escapes me at this point) in your review. But, then again, his character appeared to be there primarily to add color to the story without having major impact upon the plot itself. Didn't even recognize Henry O'Neill as the alcoholic ex-reporter Charlie Barnes in this until they cut to his photograph on the wall which represented his character's much less seedy days. Not the usual type of role that I have seen him in previously. On the other hand, I've watched so many horror movies in my time that I instantly recognized Matt Willis as the groom-to-be at the Lonely Hearts Club event (and who can be seen in the third photo posted in your review) from his appearance as the cursed Andréas in Columbia's The Return of the Vampire (1943). |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 19, 2023 20:48:08 GMT
I am really glad. Thanks for the feedback. A good print is also currently on YouTube. Please let us know what you think of SCANDAL SHEET after you have had a chance to watch it. Had some unexpected free time so I caught this one this morning. And, after doing so, I can easily thank you for putting it on my radar. Don't really have much to add to your review. Not the first movie where the editor did it. And the plot did rely on a couple of coincidences in order to reach its Code-required conclusion. But, at just under 90 minutes, it moved along nicely and was well acted. Considering the popularity of noir on these classic movie boards, I suspect most members would readily enjoy this one. Of course, the biggest coincidence is the fact that Broderick Crawford's character has the same name as a real-life murderer who wasn't even born yet when this movie was made. In light of your ongoing thread regarding M*A*S*H, I'm surprised you didn't give a shout out to Harry Morgan as the news photographer (whose name escapes me at this point) in your review. But, then again, his character appeared to be there primarily to add color to the story without having major impact upon the plot itself. Didn't even recognize Henry O'Neill as the alcoholic ex-reporter Charlie Barnes in this until they cut to his photograph on the wall which represented his character's much less seedy days. Not the usual type of role that I have seen him in previously. On the other hand, I've watched so many horror movies in my time that I instantly recognized Matt Willis as the groom-to-be at the Lonely Hearts Club event (and who can be seen in the third photo posted in your review) from his appearance as the cursed Andréas in Columbia's The Return of the Vampire (1943).
Harry Morgan turns up in a lot of old classic films. Fun character actor. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 21, 2023 15:13:08 GMT
This neglected film is from 1959.
City in danger
Vince Edwards appeared in a series of modestly budgeted crime flicks for Columbia in the mid-to-late 1950s. One of the later entries, CITY OF FEAR, is among the best. It starts with a jolt. Edwards and a cohort are traveling down the road, having just stolen a canister of what they think is heroin. The pal is burning with fever and soon slumps over in the passenger seat, dead. This means more money for Edwards, who keeps on driving.
What Edwards does not realize and will eventually learn is that they haven’t lifted a canister of heroin, they took a canister of Cobalt-60. For those who don’t know, Cobalt-60 is a dangerous radioactive substance that kills people who come into direct contact with it. The canister is emitting high levels of radioactivity and causes anyone near the substance to become ill. Edwards starts to figure out how fatal the contents of the canister are after he becomes sick like his pal.
However, this is not just a story about the medical ramifications of radiation sickness. It is a story about how one man’s greed and stupidity not only puts himself at risk but a whole city. Along the way, he has encounters with several other people who also are exposed to the radioactive substance he’s carrying. They are all doomed.
It becomes a matter of public safety to stop Edwards and retrieve the contaminant in his possession. But because he often travels wearing a disguise, the task to apprehend Edwards is considerably difficult for a lieutenant (John Archer) and his men.
The film’s screenplay, by Steven Ritch and Robert Dillon, expertly weaves a tale of danger with increasing paranoia. The jazz on the soundtrack is imbued with somber tones to suggest the fate of these characters.
In some ways the picture reminds me of Columbia’s earlier hit THE KILLER THAT STALKED NEW YORK (1950). That time poor Evelyn Keyes was roaming around a large metropolitan area, dying from a deadly virus, exposing everyone she met to the same horrible outcome.
These types of scenarios are great at increasing tension and involving us as viewers. We can certainly imagine, in a world recently affected by Covid, what it means for a society to be at risk…struggling to remain safe. The other thing I find interesting about these types of stories is how through tragedy, people unite. A single threat ripples across a wide community, and it causes everyone to band together and take action.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Mar 21, 2023 16:44:55 GMT
⇧ That's a smart comparison to another really good movie "The Killer that Stalked New York." And you're right, Covid made both of these movies feel relevant again.
Also, there's this: I simply liked this movie more than I think I should have. It's got a ton of problems, but I enjoyed it.
City of Fear from 1959 with Vince Edwards, Patricia Blaire, Lyle Talbot, Joseph Mell and Sherwood Price
The late 1950s saw many low-budget noirish crime dramas like City of Fear that, to this day, still have an entertainment value even if the writing, directing and acting are uneven and the production quality, often, equal to nothing more than a TV crime drama of that era.
Vince Edwards, who had a mini career in low-budget noirs before famously playing TV's Ben Casey, here plays a murderous drug dealer who breaks out of prison with what he thinks is a sealed container of $1 million worth of heroin.
Unfortunately for him and everyone else, what he really has is a container of the highly radioactive Cobalt-60, which if released, could poison the population of a major city.
Edwards makes his way to Los Angeles to find his girlfriend/moll, played by Patricia Blair, and his antagonistic business partner and front, Joseph Mell. Edwards plans to sell the heroin and, then, "disappear" with Blair for a life of ease.
The police, fully aware that Edwards has Cobalt-60 with him, and wanting to avert panic in the city, engage in a quiet city-wide manhunt neatly using geiger counters and a grid search to look for Edwards.
Ramping everything up even more, the Cobalt-60 is so deadly that, despite being sealed in a steel container (unfortunately, not lined with lead), close contact with it will still make someone sick.
With that setup, most of the movie is Edwards getting sicker, he thinks he has a cold, and more desperate to sell what he believes is heroin, as the police, led by pre-code-era heavy, Lyle Talbot, slowly get closer to Edwards.
The story has so many holes that you just have to run with it, which you can do for a few reasons. Edwards is compelling as the sociopath getting sicker but only thinking about all the money he'll get selling his "heroin."
In Hitchcockian terms, he literally carries the macguffin around with him the entire movie. You never root for him - he's psychotic - but you can't help being fully engaged with him even as he becomes all but unhinged when it becomes obvious to him that he's going to fail, but he still can't quit trying.
His gun-moll girlfriend Blair, looking appropriately hot and sordid, is enjoyable as she repeatedly tells the police to "eff off" even as she begins to suffer the ill effects of close exposure to the Cobalt.
Also enjoyable in a sleazy way is Mell - he runs a high-end shoe store and has 1950s movie-era hints of being gay. He also, in engaging scenes, goes toe-to-toe a few times with Edwards as each crook tries to dominate the other. Rounding out Edward's shady circle is Sherwood Price playing a slimy hood who tries to glam on to Edward's "big score."
Shot on location all over Los Angeles and with the police having a TV's Dragnet get-the-job-done vibe, City of Fear is fun time-travel to mid-century LA. Also, the camera work is ahead of its time with realistic shots that "bounce around" with the action.
Despite its low budget, challenged production quality and some cringe-worthy dialogue and moments, at only eighty-one-minutes long and with several enjoyable performances, plus a bumpy but engaging story and a wonderful 1950s LA noir vibe, City of Fear proves to be more entertaining on screen than it sounds like it should be on paper.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Mar 28, 2023 16:07:29 GMT
This neglected film is from 1945.
My name is not Marion Hughes
Film critic James Agee was never one to heap lavish praise on a B-film, unless it was something made by Val Lewton. But his comment that this Columbia noir is “a likeable, unpretentious, generally successful attempt to turn good trash into decently artful entertainment” suggests he enjoyed it.
I enjoyed it too, and frankly what’s not to like…the picture grabs the viewer right from the start. As the opening credits appear, we glimpse storm clouds over London, then a sudden downpour of rain.
We are pulled into a situation involving a young woman named Julia Ross (Nina Foch) who is about to be evicted by a boarding house owner (Doris Lloyd). She goes out on a job interview and meets an elderly woman (May Whitty) at an employment agency. The woman and her son (George Macready) claim they are looking to hire a secretary, when of course they are looking to do something much more sinister.
Mr. Macready was usually assigned villainous roles at Columbia. We know the minute he appears on screen that our heroine will be in trouble. And sure enough that’s exactly what happens, because when Miss Foch’s character travels to the family’s country home, she learns she’s expected to pose as Macready’s dead wife.
Macready has a slightly scarred face, which adds to the more menacing aspects of his character. Foch becomes terrified of him, when she figures out– and so do the viewers– that he killed his recently deceased wife. Only there was no alibi for him, so mother is going to have this lookalike killed in a way that will exonerate her son. It’s a highly twisted and suspenseful tale.
We are anxious for Foch to escape the nest of vipers. She tries several times, but of course her attempts to flee are thwarted, because Whitty is just too smart for her. There’s an interesting shot where she looks out through the barred up window in her bedroom. She has virtually become a prisoner.
Everyone in the village thinks she is crazy…and all her schemes to convey the truth seem like lies. A sequence where she hides in the back of the car to leave with some guests is very well played. Nina Foch does it so remarkably, it’s easy to become wrapped up in the story and sympathize with the character’s plight.
As for Dame Whitty, she has remarkable range as a performer. This character is so unlike the cozy dignified roles she was given to play at MGM. It’s a bit startling at first.
The film’s relatively short running time makes it better than it probably would have been if they had padded the scenes and stretched it out to 90 minutes. Sharply written and edited, there are no wasted moments, no extraneous filler scenes. All films should be made so economically and efficiently.
|
|
