Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Hibi said:

I'd seen Where the Sidewalk Ends once before, but I'd forgotten a lot of the plot. While I was watching this time,  it slowly fell into place. I agree it deserves to be better known. Of course, due to the code Andrews has to pay, but they gave it a somewhat hopeful ending. (for a  noir anyway). What's on the rest of this month? (after The Racket, I mean).

10/17 Destination Murder

10/24 Macao

10/31 The Seventh Victim

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

10/17 Destination Murder

10/24 Macao

10/31 The Seventh Victim

I looked up Destination Murder on Wikipedia and remembered having seen it a long time ago.  Same with The Seventh Victim.

On the other hand, Macao is one of my favorite movies.  Robert Mitchum, Jane Russell, William Bendix. Gloria Graham  in the Far East.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked it up too. Haven't seen it. Have the other two, but I'll probably watch them again. At least the 7th Victim, which I havent seen in awhile. I just saw Macao again over the summer. Might skip that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2020 at 7:34 PM, kingrat said:

While we're saying good things about Dana Andrews

He's pretty good in one of the last studio Noirs called Brainstorm (1965) starring Jeffrey Hunter, Anne Francis,  and  Viveca Lindfors

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, cigarjoe said:

He's pretty good in one of the last studio Noirs called Brainstorm (1965) starring Jeffrey Hunter, Anne Francis,  and  Viveca Lindfors

Yea,  Dana Andrews is good in this film (but it wasn't until the second viewing that I really understood what was going on).    

As for who was in more noirs \ who is the bigger iconic noir actor;   Andrews or Mitchum.

While Andrews is know as an iconic noir actor he doesn't have the film legacy to support that when compared to other actors from this generation.    

Andrews noir films:   I say there are only 6.       

For Mitchum there would be 12.     That doesn't include the two noir-westerns or the 3 neo-noirs (two where Mitchum played Marlowe) and The Friends of Eddie Coyle.

Of course what one counts as "noir" is subjective but even taking the most conservative approach Mitchum has over twice as many noir films in his legacy as Andrews.

I guess one could say the fact that Andrews is viewed a iconic noir actor is because in the few noirs he is in,  his looks and screen persona just really communicates NOIR to viewers.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Yea,  Dana Andrews is good in this film (but it wasn't into the second viewing that I really understood what was going on).    

As for who was in more noirs \ who is the bigger iconic noir actor;   Andrews or Mitchum.

While Andrews is know as an iconic noir actor he doesn't have the film legacy to support that when compared to other actors from this generation.    

Andrews noir films:   I say there are only 6.       

For Mitchum there would be 12.     That doesn't include the two noir-westerns or the 3 neo-noirs (two where Mitchum played Marlowe) and The Friends of Eddie Coyle.

Of course what one counts as "noir" is subjective but even taking the most liberal approach Mitchum has over twice as many noir films in his legacy.

I guess one could say the fact that Andrews is viewed a iconic noir actor is because in the few noirs he is in,  his looks and screen persona just really communicates NOIR to viewers.

 

 

What are the 12 for Mitchum.  I have found different numbers.  Ranker has 19 noirs by Mitchum.  Mainly curious as The Big Steal is probably my favorite movie, but never been sure if it is a noir or not.  Mystery or crime for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ElCid said:

What are the 12 for Mitchum.  I have found different numbers.  Ranker has 19 noirs by Mitchum.  Mainly curious as The Big Steal is probably my favorite movie, but never been sure if it is a noir or not.  Mystery or crime for sure.

I deliberately  undercounted Mitchum noirs since the point was to just show that Mitchum was in way more noirs (2 to 1),  over Andrews.   Here are the 12:

When Stranger Marry,  Undercurrent,    The Locket,    Crossfire ,   Out of the Past,   The Big Steal (I say just noir enough since visually little noir here),  Where Danger Lives,   His Kind of Women, The Racket, Macro,  Angel Face,  Night of the Hunter,  Cape Fear.

 Like I said I didn't include the 3 neo-noirs,   and the 2 noir-westerns.    

What films did you view as "noir" that I didn't include?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I deliberately  undercounted Mitchum noirs since the point was to just show that Mitchum was in way more noirs (2 to 1),  over Andrews.   Here are the 12:

When Stranger Marry,  Undercurrent,    The Locket,    Crossfire ,   Out of the Past,   The Big Steal (I say just noir enough since visually little noir here),  Where Danger Lives,   His Kind of Women, The Racket, Macro,  Angel Face,  Night of the Hunter,  Cape Fear.

 Like I said I didn't include the 3 neo-noirs,   and the 2 noir-westerns.    

What films did you view as "noir" that I didn't include?  

 

https://www.ranker.com/list/robert-mitchum-film-noir-roles/reference

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Neville Brand Story. Brand was reported to have a liberry of 30,000 books. At the pace of reading

one book a week and taking two weeks off for vacation he could finish 50 books a year. So it would

take him 600 years to read all his books. The good news is if he doubled the number of books read

per year it would only take him 300 years to complete the task. Keep on readin'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished it.  Have seen it before, but enjoyed it again.  As usual Eddie's commentaries added a lot to the experience.  His final comment was whether or not the Robert Mitchum and Robert Ryan roles should have been reversed - Mitchum as the crook and Ryan as the honest cop.   Not so sure.  Might have worked, but having seen this version hard to picture the role reversal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Ryan, of course, has the best role in the film, as did Louis Wolheim as the gangster in the 1928 silent original. Ryan makes the most of it, bringing a hard edginess to his volatile character, MItchum is always more interesting when he is allowed to bring grey shadings to his characterization, which he was not allowed to do here, with his "honest cop" portrayal.

The highlight sequence in the 1928 silent version is a scene in which Wolheim shoots a gangland rival who visits a nightclub he operates. Of course, in the 1951 version Ryan doesn't run a nightclub, nor does he appear to have any rival hoods operating in the city against him.

At the remake's end "the old man" who runs the syndicate remains untouched. That fact is pretty much sloughed off by the film. By the way, was Mitchum deliberately setting up Ryan to be killed, what with the available window in the room and a cop waiting outside, not to mention a thug like William Conrad hanging around with a gun.

SPOILER ALERT: Did sleepy eyed Bob blink even once after the bad guy was gunned down in his cop shop? You'd think he might be annoyed if only because of all the extra paperwork he'd have to fill out, not to mention the suspicious sloppiness of the circumstances which lead to a man being shot down. He might get questioned by his superiors afterwards about that. Not to mention the fact that Mitchum didn't know that the gun he left on the table in the room with Ryan was unloaded. What kind of a cop is he anyway? He leaves a gun with a gangster and thinks the gun is loaded? Maybe it's time for Mitchum to be moved on to another precinct again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I give this one a 6 out of 10. It was entertaining, but not something I need to see again.  Lizbeth Scott's character seemed like an after thought to me.  It's like they had to have an attractive "femme fatale" so let's throw her in the mix. I actually enjoyed watching Tallman and Collins as much as the two Roberts.  I thought William Conrad was good too.  I guess when one considers all that happened with script writers and directors it turned out pretty well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hoganman1 said:

I give this one a 6 out of 10. It was entertaining, but not something I need to see again.  Lizbeth Scott's character seemed like an after thought to me.  It's like they had to have an attractive "femme fatale" so let's throw her in the mix. I actually enjoyed watching Tallman and Collins as much as the two Roberts.  I thought William Conrad was good too.  I guess when one considers all that happened with script writers and directors it turned out pretty well.

agree, and seen it before also

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to Eddie's comment about Mitchum and Ryan switching roles:     I don't think it would improve the film;  Ryan gives the best performance in the film and his screen persona really makes Scanlon tick.     I don't see Mitchum making a better Scanlon.     

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TomJH said:

By the way, was Mitchum deliberately setting up Ryan to be killed, what with the available window in the room and a cop waiting outside, not to mention a thug like William Conrad hanging around with a gun.

SPOILER ALERT:  Not to mention the fact that Mitchum didn't know that the gun he left on the table in the room with Ryan was unloaded. What kind of a cop is he anyway? He leaves a gun with a gangster and thinks the gun is loaded? Maybe it's time for Mitchum to be moved on to another precinct again.

I think Mitchum knew Conrad would kill him or he would go out the window and the cop out there would kill him.  One way or the other it was basically a set-up.  As for the gun, I noticed that as well, but SOP should have been that they would never leave a loaded gun around.  

Of course, with four screen writers and five directors, the movie actually came out pretty well.  I think Lisabeth Scott did get a fair amount of screen time considering she was not really a femme fatale, just a "nice" girl involved with the wrong brothers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few notches above routine, but nothing very exciting. It's basically just another cops and gangsters

flick with some nice touches. The bad guy usually is a juicier role than the cop, at least an honest

cop, so Ryan comes off better than Mitchum, whose character is a bit on the dull side. Maybe if Bob

had taken a few hits of weed it would have helped. I felt sorry for Talman. He shot the two goons who

were out to kill him and just a few hours later he's killed in the police station by Ryan. Ham Burger just

can't win. I had a hard time buying that Liz Scott would be interested in that green newspaper reporter

at the end of the movie. You'd better keep an eye on your wallet buddy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it odd that neither Eddie Muller nor any of you here, all of whom seem to really enjoy noticing character actors etc.,   has mentioned something I noticed right away:  the actress who plays Johnson's (William Talman) wife is Virginia Huston, who played the "nice" girl, Ann,  in Out of the Past (the girl Mitch's character wants to return to,  as opposed to Jane Greer's Cathy).

Since Eddie always likes talking about the cast and actors who appeared together in more than one noir, I'm surprised he didn't say anything about Miss Huston. The one scene in The Racket she has with Mitchum is very brief, it's right near the end when Mitch's character has to tell her that her husband's just been killed.

image.jpeg.5fd48b1d5bc5347f09964d52bedb3754.jpeg

Virginia Huston with Mitch  in "Out of the Past"

 

image.jpeg.dcfe11c3a3ebb0ddca3ca1c3ae8eaba5.jpeg

and here she is with William Talman in "The Racket"  (admittedly she looks quite different)

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, ElCid said:

I think Mitchum knew Conrad would kill him or he would go out the window and the cop out there would kill him.  One way or the other it was basically a set-up.  As for the gun, I noticed that as well, but SOP should have been that they would never leave a loaded gun around.  

 

Well, it certainly looks like a set up at the end. Which is interesting inasmuch as Mitchum's character is earlier presented in the film as a straight arrow cop who brokes no law breaking by any his men. Yet here he is, trying (and succeeding) in creating circumstances to basically set up a hit on a gangster in his custody to which he turns a casual blind eye. I guess this is the price a hood pays for bombing a police captain's home.

But you have to stop and think about it to come to that realization because, right to the film's end, Mitchum is presented as an honest "good guy" (which is the way the actor plays the role), not a cop who can turn ruthlessly crafty (which, in fact, is what he is with that set up). And it's still worth repeating that Mitchum's character was sloppy stupid to leave Ryan alone with what he thought was a loaded gun.

The Set Up, by happenstance, is the title of a far better Robert Ryan film with which noir fans are very familiar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...