Gloria Grahame a complete package

[JackFavell]

Thanks, Molo, for your kind words. My thoughts were really just fleeting impressions from someone so ignorant of film noir that I don't even know when the movies are on! I really should go and watch the whole movie now so I can actually give a decent opinion...

 

Frank- so what is this theme you so cryptically talked about? Stand by your man? You have caught my interest here. Or is it a ploy to get us all comparing High Noon and IALP while you go skipping happily away?

 

I am interested in this comparison because I imagine (in the case of High Noon) it is quite hard to live with someone who is so absorbed by their job that they have no room left over for you. Dix is not in this exact situation, but he WILL do what he should not, leaving Laurel somewhat out in the cold. Yucky Amy and Laurel are both in the midst of incredible doubt over their men, and maybe more importantly, over their own actions. Does this show that marriage is an eye opening experience? Both Amy and Laurel's husband/fiance seem to have completely changed personalities once the ring is on the finger.

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> Thanks, Molo, for your kind words. My thoughts were really just fleeting impressions from someone so ignorant of film noir that I don't even know when the movies are on! I really should go and watch the whole movie now so I can actually give a decent opinion...

 

Don't sell yourself short, Wendy! You probably get a lot more about noir than you think. And you've got great insight into the characters, I believe.

 

> Frank- so what is this theme you so cryptically talked about? Stand by your man? You have caught my interest here. Or is it a ploy to get us all comparing High Noon and IALP while you go skipping happily away?

>

 

Of course it's a ploy!

 

But don't worry, we can all compare the movies and come up with something interesting all on our own.

[FrankGrimes]

Good day, Jackie! -- Frank- so what is this theme you so cryptically talked about? Stand by your man? You have caught my interest here. Or is it a ploy to get us all comparing High Noon and IALP while you go skipping happily away?

 

"Stand by your man" is definitely one of the themes, but I was thinking in broader terms: marriage/commitment. Most people (again, male critics) overlook that theme with In a Lonely Place and High Noon, but it's something I tend to focus on. "Dixon Steele" and "Will Kane" are certainly front and center, but I feel it's "Laurel GRAY" and "Amy Kane" that are "secretly" driving the stories.

 

I am interested in this comparison because I imagine (in the case of High Noon) it is quite hard to live with someone who is so absorbed by their job that they have no room left over for you.

 

Actually, with me, Will Kane is completely innocent. The spotlight is on Amy, just as

it is on Laurel with In a Lonely Place, hence my comparing the two.

 

Dix is not in this exact situation, but he WILL do what he should not, leaving Laurel

somewhat out in the cold.

 

Dix is a more complex character than Will, and this helps Laurel's case with me.

 

Yucky Amy and Laurel are both in the midst of incredible doubt over their men, and

maybe more importantly, over their own actions.

 

Bingo! Except the "yucky" part, Yucky Amy. You'd never know that In a Lonely Place

and High Noon featured serious female dilemmas, but they do. Both were wonderful

revelations to me, ala Hitchcock's The Birds, which is another great female dilemma

film disguised as something else.

 

Does this show that marriage is an eye opening experience? Both Amy and Laurel's

husband/fiance seem to have completely changed personalities once the ring is on the

finger.

 

I disagree with that. I believe Will is Will and Dix is Dix. It's the WOMEN who are on the

hot seat in these two films, with me.

[JackFavell]

> I disagree with that. I believe Will is Will and Dix is Dix. It's the WOMEN who are on the

> hot seat in these two films, with me.

 

I don't think the men are completely off the hook here..... but I will play your game.

 

And what does *The Birds* have to do with it? Explain yourself, Mister.....

[FrankGrimes]

I don't think the men are completely off the hook here..... but I will play your game.

 

Why are they on the hook for you? You know I'd love to hear it.

 

And what does The Birds have to do with it? Explain yourself, Mister.....

 

For me, The Birds is a courtship film from a female's point of view. "Melanie Daniels"

begins the film as a spoiled, selfish socialite but she starts to grow as a woman as the

story grows. The "birds" represent the attacks she faces as a woman who has fallen in love

with a man who is a mama's boy. It's a mother-in-law film.

 

I must go! I'll answer your replies later. Hopefully I can finally spend some time writing about

In a Lonely Place later on, as well.

[Film_Fatale]

"Stand by your man" is definitely one of the themes, but I was thinking in broader terms: marriage/commitment. Most people (again, male critics) overlook that theme with In a Lonely Place and High Noon, but it's something I tend to focus on. "Dixon Steele" and "Will Kane" are certainly front and center, but I feel it's "Laurel GRAY" and "Amy Kane" that are "secretly" driving the stories.

 

Sounds to me like someone's getting in touch with his feminine side. That is always a good thing. Hopefully soon, he'll grow to appreciate and admire Coop.

[JackFavell]

Men are brought up to value a career more than anything else in the world. Women are brought up to value men more than anything else in the world. Men are THEIR career. Or at least at the time these movies were made that was the case.

 

I believe that at some point, a woman will expect a man to value her above everything else. To the woman, this is only fair. To the man, it's a rule change, and almost impossible.

 

So I guess what I am saying is, neither Dix nor Kane trust their mates enough to actually consider AND value the woman's opinion. Now, I am not sure that either woman WANTS them to do what they ask, but they do want their men to make a serious attempt to see their point of view.

 

Kane is just so used to being the boss of his own and everyone else's life, he doesn't even take a second to explain to Amy why he can't leave town. Maybe he doesn't know why he must stay, but he does owe Amy a sentence like, "I'm doing this for you, so you can be safe forever, because I love you most of all." That would have gone a long way toward healing the growing breach between them. Instead, he just turns away to go do his job - this makes it very clear to Amy what comes first in his life, and what her life will be from now on - him turning away over and over and over. Never listening.

 

Dix has an excuse, he cannot read Laurel's mind, after all. But he should have taken the time to OBSERVE Laurel, to find out what she is thinking, not immediately jump to conclusions or leap to action. Trust goes both ways - Laurel makes a mistake by not trusting Dix, however, he doesn't trust her either, which fuels his paranoia and rage, maybe even his love. They really don't know one another well enough for such a trust to have been built up over time. Maybe by saying, "Nothing you can say will affect my love for you." he might neutralize the fear in her heart. Put HER first instead of HIS fear. Believe in her, and she will believe in you. This is a bit of a stretch, here, I know. But Dix knows he has a problem.... he should have gotten some help or something if he wanted to continue his relationship......just as Laurel should have gotten help for her commitment issues.

 

OK. enough of this! My brain feels foggy just trying to make this all fit together! Oy vay. I forgot what I was trying to explain.....

 

Now it's your turn, Dix..... if you ever come back........

[Film_Fatale]

OK. enough of this! My brain feels foggy just trying to make this all fit together! Oy vay. I forgot what I was trying to explain.....

 

I think it makes sense, Wendy. To some extent, I guess you're saying both of these male characters were rather self-absorbed, right?

[JackFavell]

> {quote:title=Film_Fatale wrote:}{quote}

> OK. enough of this! My brain feels foggy just trying to make this all fit together! Oy vay. I forgot what I was trying to explain.....

>

> I think it makes sense, Wendy. To some extent, I guess you're saying both of these male characters were rather self-absorbed, right?

 

Well, yeah. If you wanna boil it down into one sentence...... Why didn't I think of that?

[CineMaven]

First off Jack, nicely written. I printed up your post and read it on my train ride home. Nice. It's an interesting way to look at plots, from a perspective perhaps not intended by the filmmaker.

 

I think glorious Gloria Grahame was victimized in that film and I'm not a proponent of blaming the victim...in films. I do see your point that her reluctance to be as forthright with Bogey unhinged him, but he was a borderline case anyway. I don't think this is "Laurel's" fault and I do not blame her for his behavior. Yes, she could've spoken up a bit sooner, and beat it out of there pronto, but I do not blame her.

 

I've seen a lot of movies from the 40's where boy-meets-girl happens fast and without rhyme or reason and sometime without psychological credibility. Again, I love my classics...so I suspend my disbelief easily.

 

FrankGrimes: "I must go! I'll answer your replies later. Hopefully I can finally spend some time writing about 'In a Lonely Place' later on, as well."

 

Secondly, please don't hold your breath waiting for a response from Mr. Grimes. He has been named "Mr. Procrastinator of 1942." And I don't think he's ready to relinquish that title.

 

Sorry Frank...you know it's true. ;-) But I like ya anyway.

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> Well, yeah. If you wanna boil it down into one sentence...... Why didn't I think of that?

 

Well, good writers sometimes appreciate being concise.

 

By the way, I don't know if anyone's posted this before, but I don't think I've heard anyone refer to it - it's the article on *In a Lonely Place* from tcmdb.com:

 

http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title.jsp?stid=224&category=Articles

 

*In a Lonely Place*

"I was born when she kissed me.

I died when she left me.

I lived a few weeks while she loved me."

 

As written by Hollywood screenwriter Dixon Steele (Humphrey Bogart), the above dialogue is not only a summation of a brief romance in Steele's new screenplay but also the short, sad tale of his own roller coaster affair with Laurel Gray (Gloria Grahame), a neighbor in his apartment complex. The couple meet under unusual circumstances. Laurel provides an alibi for Dixon when he is suspected of murdering a restaurant hat-check girl he invited to his apartment for a script reading (Laurel witnessed the woman leaving the apartment alone). Convinced of his innocence, Laurel soon falls deeply in love with Dixon and the two embark on a passionate relationship. But Dixon's volatile, highly paranoid nature begins to emerge through a series of disturbing incidents; during one, he physically attacks a movie producer in a restaurant; in another, he almost beats a man to death in a case of road rage. In the end, Steele's self-destructive behavior condemns him to a private hell of his own making.

 

Long acknowledged as one of Nicholas Ray's greatest films, In a Lonely Place (1950) features what is probably Gloria Grahame's finest performance (she was married to Ray at the time) and shows us a side of Humphrey Bogart that was rarely exploited on the screen - a man at the boiling point, unable to contain any longer the suppressed rage of a lifetime. According to Goeff Andrew, the author of The Films of Nicholas Ray, "In a Lonely Place is both a product of the years in which it was made (the paranoia, distrust and treachery that colour its portrait of Hollywood are surely linked to the mood prevailing in the United States during the anti-Red witch hunts), and a characteristic Ray study of the destruction of an idealistic romance between lonely outsiders, by the harsh realities of the world around them." Sadly enough, Ray and Grahame were in the middle of a martial breakup when they were filming In a Lonely Place but kept their problems private for fear that the studio would replace Ray with another director. As a result, it's quite possible that Dixon and Laurel's troubled relationship in the film was merely a mirror of Ray and Grahame's off-screen problems and one reason why the couple's doomed romance has the painful ring of truth.

 

Produced by Santana, Bogart's own production company, In a Lonely Place was based on Dorothy B. Hughes' novel about a serial sex murderer that told the story from the killer's viewpoint. In 1949, however, the Breen Office (Hollywood's self-censoring arm) would never consent to a film version of Hughes' book without some major revisions so screenwriter Andrew Solt set the story in Hollywood, gave Dixon Steele the occupation of screenwriter (he was only posing as a writer in the novel) and avoided the depiction of any on-screen murders with one exception. Still, Ray made further changes to the script, completely revamping the ending.

 

In an article in The Velvet Light Trap, Ray said that In a Lonely Place was "a very personal film; the place in which it was filmed was the first place I lived in Hollywood. It was my second film with Bogart, and, as some people pointed out, it was the kind of film that made it possible for him to go into The African Queen [1951]. I took the gun out of his hand for the first time in Knock On Any Door [1949], and he was more comfortable this time. The ending which Andrew Solt and I had written became one which I found I couldn't live with, but I had to shoot it. And I did exactly as we had written it, in which Bogart kills the girl, and, as he is writing on the typewriter the last few lines, his old pal from the Army comes in and arrests him and takes him to the police station. Well, if that's not wrapping it up with a nice pink ribbon, I don't know what is; and, as I came closer and closer to the end of it I said, 'Well, today is the day and I have to be ready.' And I kicked everyone off-stage except Bogart, Gloria Grahame, and Art Smith [he plays Dixon's agent]. Even the producer, and [Lauren] Bacall, who had come down to see Bogie work for Columbia for the first time since they were married. And we improvised the ending which is in the film - because romances and marriages always end tragically or with a family. A little avant-garde for its time..."

 

In a Lonely Place was well-received by most critics but was not a box office hit, though some studio executives at the time felt it might have been had Lauren Bacall been cast in the Gloria Grahame role. Of course, Ray's film is now lauded as a film noir masterpiece and a career highpoint for Bogart. As Robert Sklar wrote in City Boys: Cagney, Bogart, Garfield, "Bogart's performance as Dix Steele shares most of the characteristics of his classic performances except that the tie between the killer and the lover is laid bare, without the romanticism, the genre conventions, or the political ideology which underlay it in previous films....There are no moments for audiences to cheer as he pumps lead into a noxious villain - surely not when he extols the wonderful feeling of crushing a throat, or with his hands around one. In a Lonely Place is a radical demystification of the classic Bogart hero. The role of Dixon Steele is among the most interesting examples of a performer's critical reevaluation of his screen persona, and surely belongs on the list of Bogart's great performances."

 

Producer: Robert Lord

Director: Nicholas Ray

Screenplay: Edmund H. North, Andrew Solt; based on the novel by Dorothy B. Hughes

Art Direction: Robert Peterson

Cinematography: Burnett Guffey

Editing: Viola Lawrence

Music: George Antheil

Cast: Humphrey Bogart (Dixon Steele), Gloria Grahame (Laurel Gray), Frank Lovejoy (Brub Nicolai), Carl Benton Reid (Capt. Lochner), Robert Warwick (Charlie Waterman), Art Smith (Mel Lippman), Jeff Donnell (Sylvia Nicolai).

BW-94m.

 

By Jeff Stafford

[JackFavell]

Cinemaven - Thanks for the response!

 

I too would never ever blame the victim in real life. As I said before, Dix scares me to death. I have a hard time watching the film for that reason. But I do like to play devil's advocate on occasion, and I just felt an itch to turn things around. I like the idea that this movie has a deeper, subversive meaning - that the ideal 50's marriage is not what it's cracked up to be, and in fact, can cause a complete breakdown between a man and a woman.

 

It seems to me that Laurel (and maybe Dix too) is caught in a 1950's movie, when she is a more modern character. She has a lot of chutzpah, the way she comes right out and tells the police that she was standing on the balcony in her negligee..... and that she was attracted to Dix. I think this shows Laurel at her best, honest and forthright, free to choose who she is interested in. But then she and Dix fall in love, and marriage comes up (because that is what you did in the 50's), and she is caught. She loses whatever honesty she had, and becomes a liar. 50's morality has turned her into a cowering, lying mess! Her 50's side says, "Stand by your man, no matter what." Her 2009 side says, "This guy's a loon. Run away!" In any case, she must pay for her foolhardy attraction....because this is a 50's movie after all....

 

(I don't want to offend anyone by writing about subversive motives or making a modern statement about a 50's movie, I am just having a bit of fun here. I hope no one gets too upset with my modern "spin". I am just a goofball who likes to analyze things too much)

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> (I don't want to offend anyone by writing about subversive motives or making a modern statement about a 50's movie, I am just having a bit of fun here. I hope no one gets too upset with my modern "spin". I am just a goofball who likes to analyze things too much)

 

I don't think anyone would be offended, Wendy. You do make a very good point about 50's morality turning her into a mess. One might also consider Jeff Stafford's argument that the movie is a result of both the 50's paranoia and the real-life split up of Gloria and Nicholas Ray. (No I'm not saying Ray was like Dix!)

[FrankGrimes]

Good evenin', Jackie! -- Men are brought up to value a career more than anything

else in the world. Women are brought up to value men more than anything else in the

world. Men are THEIR career. Or at least at the time these movies were made that was

the case.

 

That's a fascinating statement and I happen to agree with you... mostly.

 

I believe that at some point, a woman will expect a man to value her above everything

else. To the woman, this is only fair. To the man, it's a rule change, and almost

impossible.

 

Wow! You're getting very deep. That's yet another mesmerizing statement. And I like

how both of your statements are worded. Again, I agree with you.

 

So I guess what I am saying is, neither Dix nor Kane trust their mates enough to

actually consider AND value the woman's opinion.

 

I respectfully disagree with you here. I believe Will greatly values Amy's opinion and I also

feel Dix values Laurel's opinion. They both hear what each says to them and they

respond to their words.

 

Now, I am not sure that either woman WANTS them to do what they ask, but they

do want their men to make a serious attempt to see their point of view.

 

Amy wants Will to do as she wants. Laurel starts the fire and throws logs onto the flame.

 

Kane is just so used to being the boss of his own and everyone else's life,

 

Again, I respectfully disagree. Will doesn't go around town, demanding everyone do as he

says. Quite the contrary. And it is HE who is making the sacrifice for Amy, not the

other way around.

 

he doesn't even take a second to explain to Amy why he can't leave town. Maybe he

doesn't know why he must stay, but he does owe Amy a sentence like, "I'm doing this

for you, so you can be safe forever, because I love you most of all." That would have

gone a long way toward healing the growing breach between them. Instead, he just turns

away to go do his job - this makes it very clear to Amy what comes first in his life, and

what her life will be from now on - him turning away over and over and over. Never

listening.

 

I disagree. Will does take the time to explain his reason for staying to Amy. And his

reason is:

 

 

Her.

 

The "store" represents them. It's their future together. Will understands the situation,

Amy does not. This is nothing against Amy, though. In fact, it's part of what I wish to

talk about with High Noon. I believe there's a heckuva lot more to Amy and marriage

than what people have written about with High Noon.

 

You also must realize that Will has a ticking clock on him. Time is of the essence for him

AND Amy. He cannot afford to have a sit down with her. He needs her to TRUST him.

NOW!

 

I believe marriage must have trust and both High Noon and In a Lonely Place

place trust on the burner.

 

Dix has an excuse, he cannot read Laurel's mind, after all. But he should have taken

the time to OBSERVE Laurel, to find out what she is thinking, not immediately jump to

conclusions or leap to action.

 

I don't believe that's who he is.

 

 

Trust goes both ways - Laurel makes a mistake by not trusting Dix, however, he

doesn't trust her either, which fuels his paranoia and rage, maybe even his love. They

really don't know one another well enough for such a trust to have been built up over

time. Maybe by saying, "Nothing you can say will affect my love for you." he might

neutralize the fear in her heart. Put HER first instead of HIS fear. Believe in her, and

she will believe in you. This is a bit of a stretch, here, I know.

 

See, I believe Dix DID trust Laurel. Did. He had faith in her, no questions asked. This

is why he felt betrayed when he found out she was sneaking around behind his back. The

thing is, he forgave her the first time and then the second time but the third did him

in. I hope to shine a brighter light on Laurel in my commentary.

 

But Dix knows he has a problem.... he should have gotten some help or something

if he wanted to continue his relationship.

 

He was never happier in his life. Laurel had reached him.

 

just as Laurel should have gotten help for her commitment issues.

 

This is a problem. That's not to say Dix was an angel, because he clearly is not.

 

Now it's your turn, Dix..... if you ever come back.

 

 

(I don't want to offend anyone by writing about subversive motives or making a modern statement about a 50's movie, I am just having a bit of fun here. I hope no one gets too

upset with my modern "spin". I am just a goofball who likes to analyze things too much)

 

That got a laugh out of me! But I definitely believe there is something to your comments

about a 50s woman feeling trapped by "what's expected of." However, I do believe it's more

about a woman being afraid of commitment, a woman not knowing what she really

wants. Those who are scared look to run, even from those who love them most.

[FrankGrimes]

Ciao, CineBabe -- Secondly, please don't hold your breath waiting for a response

from Mr. Grimes. He has been named "Mr. Procrastinator of 1942." And I don't think he's

ready to relinquish that title.

 

1942? That killed me! And dead man can't write. The title is mine!

 

Sorry Frank...you know it's true. But I like ya anyway.

 

It's the pathetic truth. I'm guilty, many times over.

[Film_Fatale]

Maybe a little reverse psychology is in order.... Frank - take as long as you want to write that ramble. Really. _Take your time_. No rush.

[JackFavell]

> The "store" represents them. It's their future together. Will understands the situation,

> Amy does not. This is nothing against Amy, though. In fact, it's part of what I wish to

> talk about with High Noon. I believe there's a heckuva lot more to Amy and marriage

> than what people have written about with High Noon.

 

Maybe Amy doesn't understand the situation because Will has never explained it. She is new in town. THAT's why he should have said a few words to her....

 

> You also must realize that Will has a ticking clock on him. Time is of the essence for him

> AND Amy. He cannot afford to have a sit down with her. He needs her to TRUST him.

> NOW!

 

I agree that Amy should have had more trust in Will. She should have known he would handle things right.

>

> I believe marriage must have trust and both High Noon and In a Lonely Place

> place trust on the burner.

 

I totally agree!!!!!!

>

> Dix has an excuse, he cannot read Laurel's mind, after all. But he should have taken

> the time to OBSERVE Laurel, to find out what she is thinking, not immediately jump to

> conclusions or leap to action.

>

> I don't believe that's who he is.

 

Nor I.

 

> See, I believe Dix DID trust Laurel. Did. He had faith in her, no questions asked. This

> is why he felt betrayed when he found out she was sneaking around behind his back. The

> thing is, he forgave her the first time and then the second time but the third did him

> in. I hope to shine a brighter light on Laurel in my commentary.

 

I didn't realize that she was on her third strike.... Perhaps if I had seen the movie I might have known that. I did peek at the end on youtube, and refreshed my memory of the beginning with clips there.

 

> But Dix knows he has a problem.... he should have gotten some help or something

> if he wanted to continue his relationship.

>

> He was never happier in his life. Laurel had reached him.

 

Did she? He was still beating the crap out of people though.

>

> just as Laurel should have gotten help for her commitment issues.

>

> This is a problem. That's not to say Dix was an angel, because he clearly is not.

 

I'll say.

 

> But I definitely believe there is something to your comments

> about a 50s woman feeling trapped by "what's expected of." However, I do believe it's more

> about a woman being afraid of commitment, a woman not knowing what she really

> wants. Those who are scared look to run, even from those who love them most.

 

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

 

I believe that the filmmaker wanted to make a statement about how doubt can damage a relationship. Maybe even about how fickle Woman is. However, the whole movie is skewed by Bogie's terrifying performance, and the fact that he tries to strangle the life out of her at the end.....this makes Laurel's repeating of the line "I lived a few weeks while you loved me..." less poignant to me. I think she was lucky to get out of that relationship (alive).

[FrankGrimes]

Maybe Amy doesn't understand the situation because Will has never explained it. She is new in town. THAT's why he should have said a few words to her....

 

Amy: Please, Will. If you'll just tell me what this is all about.

 

Will: I sent a man up five years ago for murder. He was supposed to hang. But up north,

they commuted it to life. Now he's free. I don't know how. Anyway, it looks like he's coming

back.

 

Amy: I still don't understand.

 

Will: He's... well, he was always wild, kind of crazy. He'll... he'll probably make trouble.

 

Amy: But that's no concern of yours, not anymore.

 

Will: I'm the one who sent him up.

 

Amy: Well, that was part of your job. That's finished now. They've got a new marshal.

 

Will: Won't be here till tomorrow. Seems to me I've got to stay. Anyway, I'm the same man

with or without this.

 

Amy: Well, that isn't so.

 

Will: I expect he'll come looking for me. Three of his old bunch are waiting at the depot.

 

Amy: That's exactly why we ought to go.

 

Will: They'll just come after us -- four of them -- and we'd be all alone on the prairie.

 

Amy: We've got an hour.

 

Will: What's an hour?

 

Amy: Well, we could...

 

Will: What's 100 miles? We'd never be able to keep that store, Amy. They'd come after us,

and we'd have to run again, as long as we live.

 

I think Will does a very good job of explaining to Amy what is going on and what is at

stake. He doesn't need to explain anymore to her. It's now up to her to TRUST him. There

is no time for, "but, what if, let's think about this, maybe." No. She needs to trust him this

very second. He is her husband.

 

 

I agree that Amy should have had more trust in Will. She should have known he would handle things right.

 

She failed the first test of their marriage but there are reasons for her failure. Much can be learned through Amy and much is to be learned by Amy.

 

Did she? He was still beating the crap out of people though.

 

Yes, I feel she did reach him. She brought him to life. He was extremely happy with her and

because of her. She meant a lot to him. He trusted her.

 

Did she change who he was as a man? No. I hope to talk about Dix's anger further in coming

posts.

 

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

 

I believe that the filmmaker wanted to make a statement about how doubt can damage a relationship.

 

I completely agree with that.

 

Maybe even about how fickle Woman is.

 

Quite possibly. You keep coming up with so many different angles and many make great

sense to me. I love it!

 

However, the whole movie is skewed by Bogie's terrifying performance, and the fact that

he tries to strangle the life out of her at the end.....this makes Laurel's repeating of the

line "I lived a few weeks while you loved me..." less poignant to me. I think she was lucky

to get out of that relationship (alive).

 

I'm with you on this. No man should ever physically harm a woman and this is where any

sympathy for Dix goes right out the window. Some of Laurel's fears were imagined but

some were real. I believe a marriage to Dix would have been dangerous for Laurel or any

woman. His nature is a violently reactive one, and those types are to be feared. An

abusive relationship was most likely waiting in the wings.

[JackFavell]

> {quote:title=FrankGrimes wrote:}{quote}

> Maybe Amy doesn't understand the situation because Will has never explained it. She is new in town. THAT's why he should have said a few words to her....

>

> Amy: Please, Will. If you'll just tell me what this is all about.

>

> Will: I sent a man up five years ago for murder. He was supposed to hang. But up north,

> they commuted it to life. Now he's free. I don't know how. Anyway, it looks like he's coming

> back.

>

> Amy: I still don't understand.

>

> Will: He's... well, he was always wild, kind of crazy. He'll... he'll probably make trouble.

>

> Amy: But that's no concern of yours, not anymore.

>

> Will: I'm the one who sent him up.

>

> Amy: Well, that was part of your job. That's finished now. They've got a new marshal.

>

> Will: Won't be here till tomorrow. Seems to me I've got to stay. Anyway, I'm the same man

> with or without this.

>

> Amy: Well, that isn't so.

>

> Will: I expect he'll come looking for me. Three of his old bunch are waiting at the depot.

>

> Amy: That's exactly why we ought to go.

>

> Will: They'll just come after us -- four of them -- and we'd be all alone on the prairie.

>

> Amy: We've got an hour.

>

> Will: What's an hour?

>

> Amy: Well, we could...

>

> Will: What's 100 miles? We'd never be able to keep that store, Amy. They'd come after us,

> and we'd have to run again, as long as we live.

>

> I think Will does a very good job of explaining to Amy what is going on and what is at

> stake. He doesn't need to explain anymore to her. It's now up to her to TRUST him. There

> is no time for, "but, what if, let's think about this, maybe." No. She needs to trust him this

> very second. He is her husband.

>

>

>

> I agree that Amy should have had more trust in Will. She should have known he would handle things right.

>

> She failed the first test of their marriage but there are reasons for her failure. Much can be learned through Amy and much is to be learned by Amy.

 

Well, is my face red! I guess Will did tell Amy. So you just proved that Amy is actually yucky, after all!

[Film_Fatale]

Don't mean to change the subject back to the actual thread topic, Jackie and Frank, but I was just looking at the DVD of *In a Lonely Place* and I was amazed to learn what a thorough restoration Sony undertook for this movie. There is a 5-minute look at this restoration effort in the DVD's bonus features, and it's just amazing to learn they took almost a year to restore this movie to as close to its original condition as was possible, partly with the help of tech companies like Cinetech and Chace Productions.

 

The last time I had watched the movie it was on TCM so I hadn't really seen it on DVD before, I guess, and I just hope the restored print is the same one that Sony leases to TCM for broadcasting.

[Film_Fatale]

One little bit of trivia regarding *In a Lonely Place* - the character of Paul, who greets Dix in the opening bar scene, is played by Steven Geray, who appeared in other Columbia noirs like *Gilda* and *Affair in Trinidad* and was particularly memorable in the little B-noir with Chester Morris, *Blind Spot* (1947), which was just shown at this year's San Francisco Film Noir Festival.

 

Steven Geray

[JackFavell]

Thanks for the info, FF. I hope TCM shows it soon, so I can see the bits I missed....

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> Thanks for the info, FF. I hope TCM shows it soon, so I can see the bits I missed....

 

You're welcome Wendy. As I'm revisiting the movie, I started to think a little bit about GG's line, about Dix looking interesting and liking his face. In hindsight, it might be more than a throwaway line.

 

Maybe it's designed to subtly indicate that she is attracted to Dix because of his looks, and that perhaps she's not a very good judge of character. I guess most of the time people are attracted to someone else either because of their physical attributes or because of their intellect/ideas/values (admittedly, sometimes it's both).

 

As for TCM showing it again soon, it's not currently on the schedule, unfortunately.

 

I'll be back later with some nice screencaps. B-)

[JackFavell]

Great point! Bogie is a pretty mashed up looking guy.....

[Film_Fatale]

> {quote:title=JackFavell wrote:}{quote}

> Great point! Bogie is a pretty mashed up looking guy.....

 

Funny you should say that just now. I just finished watching the movie on the DVD, and there's this 20-minute featurette on the movie, with director Curtis Hanson (of *L.A. Confidential* fame) talking about the film and why it's one of his favourites. And one of the things he mentioned is how remarkable it was for a major star to be playing such an ugly, rotten character - especially when the movie was being produced by his own company!!

 

Hanson also praised the movie for being revealing of the essence of both Bogart and Nicholas Ray, thanks to their close collaboration on this movie - which he compares to that of Hitchcock and James Stewart in *Vertigo*, Gena Rowlands and John Cassavettes in *A Woman Under the Influence*, John Wayne and John Ford in *The Searchers*.