Noir Alley

[Dargo]

3 hours ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

I better get this in before Dargo does:    James Craig best performance IMO is in the Mickey Rooney film The Strip (1951).     Craig plays a gangster convincingly.

Much of the picture was shot on location in and around the Sunset Strip. Interiors were shot at popular nightclubs Mocambo and Ciro's and at restaurants Little Hungary and Stripps.[2]

 

Yep, as you and I have discussed before James, this is the one film in which I've always thought the usual wooden and stiff Mr. Craig does good work. 

I think it might be because he always gave me the impression in almost any film I've seen him in, that he acted as if he had something to hide and/or was holding something back, and so his role as the seedy and nefarious underworld type character in The Strip suited him much better than as the romantic lead or hero type, but of which he was mostly cast as and because of his matinee idol looks.

(...and not to pile on poor Mr. Craig here, but Eddie Muller has shown the Fritz Lang-directed 1956 noir While the City Sleeps a couple of times in the recent past, and so for those unfamiliar with James Craig, he has a featured role in it...however, with the other cast members in this one being some very good actors such as Dana Andrews, Ida Lupino, George Sanders, Vincent Price and Thomas Mitchell, a viewing of this film will pretty much put into focus just how much lesser an actor he was to those others by immediate comparison)

 

[TomJH]

Arguably the best film in which James Craig had a prominent role was The Devil and Daniel Webster (aka All That Money Can Buy). It's a variation on Faust with Craig as a 19th Century farmer who makes a pact with the Devil over his soul in exchange for wealth. The film mixes some imaginative photography with the super natural, a New England setting and a scene stealing, beguiling performance by Walter Huston (an eccentric combination of rustic charm and wickedness) as a mysterious character who calls himself Mr. Scratch. Edward Arnold appears as Webster speaking on behalf of the farmer in a final courtroom scene before a jury of the dead who had previously sold their own souls to Satan.

[Herman Bricks]

4 hours ago, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

James Craig was also in the Sci-Fi classic The Cyclops (remake, anyone?) heading a stellar cast that included: Gloria Talbott, Tom Drake, Lon Chaney Jr.

 

Gloria Talbott in an interview with Tom Weaver, said that she had "no rapport" with Craig, who was an "an enigma...who didn't want have much to do with anybody."

She liked Chaney Jr. ("a dear sweet man") and said Lon's mom brought his lunch to the set, and an air mattress for him to nap on. This air mattress must have been huge! I wonder if it might actually have been a military surplus inflatable pontoon or landing craft?

Craig, Drake, and Chaney apparently were all drunk when the scene in the little plane's cockpit was shot and poor Gloria got intoxicated from the fumes those three boys exhaled.

There's more here...

https://books.google.com/books?id=kMYf7vlGQn0C&pg=PA335&lpg=PA335&dq=james+craig+alcohol+cyclops&source=bl&ots=op0CmZJPCO&sig=ACfU3U3kJHTZ3hrcCwSH9lJPAxCR46Gm5Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjiqvaerfT1AhXxYt8KHXcPAtg4ChDoAXoECA8QAw#v=onepage&q=james craig alcohol cyclops&f=false

 

 

[cinemaspeak59]

I was excited about Guillermo Del Toro bringing another version of Nightmare Alley.  I look forward to his movies. There’s the production design, art direction, and fabulous lighting that create immersive worlds. The carnival scenes were almost too beautiful.

Nightmare Alley’s protagonist, Stan Carlisle, is a character we’ve seen before: Jimmy Cagney’s Bert Harris in Blonde Crazy, and Warren Beatty as John McCabe in McCabe & Mrs. Miller.  It doesn’t end well for any of them.  These archetypes are too smart for their own good.  In their insatiable desire to acquire advantage, they fail to discern that in a corrupt, unfair world, there will always be someone or something ready to crush them.  Del Toro has something to say beyond simply indulging in noir tropes. The class distinctions reveal how the customers react to being tricked by having their minds read. When Stan leaves the carnival for the big city, the people he’s conning aren’t as sophisticated, or decent as the hoi polloi he left behind.  The latter knew there was an angle, a clever ruse. And if they didn’t, away from the show, they had to worry about an impending war and putting food on the table. (The picture is set in 1941.) In contrast, the wealthy society types play for keeps. Their obsession with Stan’s psychic chicanery is partly a function of too much money and too much free time. And the longer Stan hangs around, he makes himself vulnerable. For there’s an apex predator circling him. In the 1947 version it was Helen Walker’s pseudo psychiatrist Dr. Lilith Ritter.   Here, del Toro enlists Cate Blanchett, with a feminist spin.  Blanchett’s Lilith Ritter has been burned before, by men.  She doesn’t trust them, knowing firsthand their methods at control inevitably involve violence.  She senses this brutality in Stan, and her victory over him registers as a form of justice.

I would have liked to have seen more explanation to Ezra Grindle, played by Richard Jenkins. We’re told he’s very dangerous, that he didn’t get so rich by following the rules.  The exposition provided, though, is fine: Grindle is a remorseful misogynist haunted by guilt over causing the death of the only woman he loved. Stan’s marks are all haunted. But Stan doesn’t follow the advice of his mentor, Pete (David Strathairn, in a devastating turn.) Nor does he listen to Molly.  For Stan reasons why should he have a moral standard when the beneficiaries of a system that creates such unconscionable inequality do not.  It is a credit to Del Toro and Kim Morgan’s screenplay that the rich are not dehumanized. It goes without saying the cast is great.  Del Toro didn’t remake Nightmare Alley.  He used the benefits of a big budget and the lack of restrictions to create a companion piece to the 1947 film. One isn’t better then the other.

[Eucalyptus P. Millstone]

20 hours ago, Herman Bricks said:

Gloria Talbott in an interview with Tom Weaver, said that she had "no rapport" with Craig, who was an "an enigma...who didn't want have much to do with anybody."

She liked Chaney Jr. ("a dear sweet man") and said Lon's mom brought his lunch to the set, and an air mattress for him to nap on. This air mattress must have been huge! I wonder if it might actually have been a military surplus inflatable pontoon or landing craft?

Craig, Drake, and Chaney apparently were all drunk when the scene in the little plane's cockpit was shot and poor Gloria got intoxicated from the fumes those three boys exhaled.

There's more here...

https://books.google.com/books?id=kMYf7vlGQn0C&pg=PA335&lpg=PA335&dq=james+craig+alcohol+cyclops&source=bl&ots=op0CmZJPCO&sig=ACfU3U3kJHTZ3hrcCwSH9lJPAxCR46Gm5Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjiqvaerfT1AhXxYt8KHXcPAtg4ChDoAXoECA8QAw#v=onepage&q=james craig alcohol cyclops&f=false

 

 

Herman Bricks,

Thank you for that link to Tom Weaver's Interviews with B Science Fiction and Horror Movie Makers.

Re Lon Chaney, Jr., TODAY, February 10, marks the 115 anniversary of his birth!

The way he walked was thorny. But after a few belts of "the hair of the dog," the man AKA "Lawrence Talbot" felt no pain.

Happy Birthday, Wolfman!

 

 

 

 

[JamesJazGuitar]

16 minutes ago, Thompson said:

D.O.A.  — O’Brien certainly didn’t have to pay for a funeral, and you can’t expect his girlfriend to flip the bill.  What happens to him?  Do they just throw the poor bastard away?  That’s what they do, huh, you ain’t got no money they just throw you away.

The noir Pickup on South Street has a key scene related to being too poor for a funeral;    Moe (Thelma Ritter),   the living on the edge friend of pick-pocket Skip (Widmark),   is murdered by a commie.    Skip asks the cops what will happen to Moe and they said she will go to plotter's field where all the bodies no one cares about,  go.     Since Moe was killed trying to protect Skip,   this changes Skip's entire POV towards the commie who Skip was trying to blackmail;     There is a grim scene where Skip goes and retrieves  Moe's body so that he can pay for a decent funeral.    Now Skip is ready to get the guy that took out Moe.

 

[ElCid]

The actual Noir Alley this week-end is Side Street (1950).

[JamesJazGuitar]

23 minutes ago, ElCid said:

The actual Noir Alley this week-end is Side Street (1950).

Side Street was directed by Anthony Mann and features Farley Granger and Cathy O'Donnell and was made right after their other film They Live by Night.

TCM has shown this MGM film before but I don't recall ever hearing Eddie comment on it.

 

 

[misswonderly3]

15 minutes ago, ElCid said:

The actual Noir Alley this week-end is Side Street (1950).

Right, with Farley Granger  and sweet Cathy O' Donnell,  the same couple  who starred in Nicholas Ray's  They Live by Night  two years earlier.

Side Street  is a nifty little noir,  one of the "likable everyman type makes one mistake with dire consequences" type.   Intriguing cinematography, lovely black and white look,  take note especially of the great, unusual overhead shot of the narrow little street flanked by skyscrapers on either side.

It's also worth checking out because it's directed by the great Anthony Mann, who made quite a few fine noirs,  and also,  many equally outstanding Westerns.

[Det Jim McLeod]

16 hours ago, misswonderly3 said:

Side Street  is a nifty little noir,  one of the "likable everyman type makes one mistake with dire consequences" type

I saw it last night, it was the second time and it was even better than I remember. I love how Granger gets deeper and deeper in more trouble as the film goes on. Many great supporting players like Adele Jergens as a sexy blackmailer and Whit Bissell as a nervous bank teller.

[jameselliot]

The best part of Side Street is the opening aerial shot of Manhattan and the closing car chase sandwiched by skyscrapers filmed from a high angle. That chase was expertly choreographed besides being very unusual.  That the production team took the time and effort to shoot it was impressive.  The noir look of the entire film is just as impressive.

Granger's characters in his late 1940s-early 50s crime movies are twitchy, troubled, hyper-nervous, and prone to panic. In Side Street he can't do a single thing right, let alone intelligent. He's directly responsible for the death of several characters as the story moves along. O'Donnell and McGraw are given little to do and wasted. Hague brings desperation to her stock noir role but gets very little screen time.  James Craig could have been directed to play an obvious psychopath. Instead, his coldblooded, matter of fact, homicidal personality makes him a real monster, calmly  strangling or shooting anyone in his way. The false-ringing "happy" ending knocks Side Street down a few notches.

[Hoganman1]

I thought SIDESTREET was very well done.  Farley Granger was perfect as he usally is in these type roles.  Maybe O'Donnell was just a little too naive and sweet to be believed and I've seen McGraw do better work.  I guess the happy ending was a bit too sappy, but we needed that after seeing the demise of William Holden's character last week. 

A few monhs ago I suggested that maybe Noir Alley had "run it's course".  Well, I was wrong. It now appears Eddie has more up his sleeve.  I'm looking forward to next week. 

[Dargo]

2 hours ago, jameselliot said:

James Craig could have been directed to play an obvious psychopath. Instead, his coldblooded, matter of fact, homicidal personality makes him a real monster, calmly strangling or shooting anyone in his way.

Yep, have to agree about Mr. Craig here.

And re my earlier stated dismissive opinion of his acting abilities, I do have to say that this would be the second performance of his that I've ever seen which I do think his acting was up to the challenge of his role. 

However, remember, I did say of him that I always thought because of his limitations, he was best cast in roles such as he was here as the heavy in this film and not as the lead or protagonist in a picture.

(...and re Charles McGraw being wasted in this film, yep, he sure was, and have begun to wonder what he could have done with the role that James Craig got in this one...no doubt he would've been well cast in this part as well, of course)

[King Rat]

49 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Yep, have to agree about Mr. Craig here.

And re my earlier stated dismissive opinion of his acting abilities, I do have to say that this would be the second performance of his that I've ever seen which I do think his acting was up to the challenge of his role. 

However, remember, I did say of him that I always thought because of his limitations, he was best cast in roles such as he was here as the heavy in this film and not as the lead or protagonist in a picture.

(...and re Charles McGraw being wasted in this film, yep, he sure was, and have begun to wonder what he could have done with the role that James Craig got in this one...no doubt he would've been well cast in this part as well, of course)

Dargo, I thought about you when Eddie mentioned James Craig and Jean Hagen as giving the standout performances. The matter-of-fact way James Craig makes his decisions and goes about his work is a real plus to the film. It was nice to see a photo of Farley Granger talking with Eddie at a film noir event. Granger was still quite handsome until Alzheimer's took its toll.

One thing I didn't understand about Side Street: does it make sense for Granger to run away from his in-laws (well, that makes sense) and stay in cheap hotels after he steals the money? Is this just a panicky reaction, a feeling that he'll go nuts trying to accept his new reality if he has to stay with wife and in-laws?

I had to laugh at Cathy O'Donnell giving her husband passionate kisses so soon after giving birth.

For next week: Cast a Dark Shadow is based on a stage play, and it shows, but Dirk Bogarde, Mona Washbourne, Margaret Lockwood, and Kay Walsh are all really, really good.

[speedracer5]

33 minutes ago, King Rat said:

I had to laugh at Cathy O'Donnell giving her husband passionate kisses so soon after giving birth.

This part made me laugh too.  I was beginning to think that at the rate Farley Granger and Cathy O'Donnell were going, she'd be having another baby before she left the hospital! 

And what was up with that nurse?! She was so mean.  I can't remember exactly what she said to Granger, but it was something to the effect of "Take a look (at his baby) and get out!" 

[speedracer5]

I actually watched the Noir Alley live last night which is a rarity for me.  I usually end up recording Noir Alley and watching it later.  Having seen They Live by Night, I very much wanted to see Farley Granger and Cathy O'Donnell's second pairing in Side Street.  In a way, their characters from 'Night' are very similar to those in 'Street.' Granger is still the good-intentioned but somewhat dopey beau to O'Donnell.  O'Donnell is a "ride or die" type woman who will stay by her man's side no matter what dumb thing he does. I wish her character had a bit more of a backbone in this film; but I guess she just needed to be unflappable to give Granger the motivation to keep digging himself in deeper.  I couldn't believe it when O'Donnell screamed "RUN! THEY'RE TRACING THIS CALL" into the phone.  Ugh.  

When Granger went to the bank to find out who made the large deposit, I wouldn't have been surprised if the bank had willingly given out the information.  It seems so easy in classic film to obtain really sensitive information about people.  See Dark Passage where the thug motorist manages to get Lauren Bacall's name, address and financial rating just by asking to have her plates run.  So when Whit Bissell said that it was against the bank's policy to give out that information, I was proud of the bank.  Then of course, Bissell wimps out when intimidated outside the office by Granger.  And as an aside, Whit Bissell seems like he was in every movie and television show ever made between like 1950-1970. 

I also thought it was interesting that the gang didn't even know that their money was missing? If Granger hadn't naively gone down to the office to confess, would he have gotten off scot-free with the money?   I was also confused during the scene with Granger and Jean Hagen.  I got the part of him tracking her down, because she was connected to James Craig, aka the source of the $30k; but at some point, the two were acting like they'd known each other prior.  Was that just Granger taking advantage of Hagen's drinking by lying to her about him being an acquaintance so that she'd give up the location of Craig? 

Overall though, I really enjoyed the film. I think I prefer They Live by Night, but I really enjoyed this film.  I was disappointed to see that this film doesn't have a decent physical release.  The print last night, while okay, could be so much better.  This film is screaming for a restoration and Blu Ray release.  I loved the cinematography.  The car chase scene at the end was fantastic.  I also loved all the shots of New York City.  I want to visit Marie's Crisis Cafe.  I love the name.  I also loved seeing Adele Jergens, despite her small role.  Charles McGraw was good, though I agree was wasted in his role.  I learned last night while reading about McGraw, that his real name was Charles Crisp Butters.  Which I thought was funny.  I also read about how McGraw died, which sounds like it was just a freak accident.  He apparently fell through a glass shower and bled to death.

I want to see a buddy film between McGraw and that kid who came into the office.

[Dargo]

46 minutes ago, King Rat said:

One thing I didn't understand about Side Street: does it make sense for Granger to run away from his in-laws (well, that makes sense) and stay in cheap hotels after he steals the money? Is this just a panicky reaction, a feeling that he'll go nuts trying to accept his new reality if he has to stay with wife and in-laws?

The thing I didn't quite understand was how Granger's character's identity became known so quickly to Paul Kelly's cop character. While I know Kelly mentioned to some witnesses that they were going to not only show them mug shots of convicted felons but also of military veterans, it still seems as if the idea of these witnesses finding him and pointing him out of the probably many thousands of WWII vets living in NYC at the time happened extremely quickly, and in fact much too quickly to be truly believable.

(...wouldn't ya say?)

[speedracer5]

2 minutes ago, Dargo said:

The thing I didn't quite understand was how Granger's character's identity became known so quickly to Paul Kelly's cop character. While I know Kelly mentioned to some witnesses that they were going to not only show them mug shots of convicted felons but also of military veterans, it still seems as if the idea of these witnesses finding him and pointing him out of the probably many thousands of WWII vets living in NYC at the time happened extremely quickly, and in fact much too quickly to be truly believable.

(...wouldn't ya say?)

I assumed that Paul Kelly figured it out because Granger had gone to Drummon's bar to recover his money, only to discover that Drummon had sold the bar.  Granger gets his package and is on his way.  Then Drummon turns up murdered.  Kelly interviews the two new business owners and they tell him about Granger.  I figured that is how Kelly started suspecting Granger.

[Dargo]

23 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

I also thought it was interesting that the gang didn't even know that their money was missing?

Actually speedy, the shady lawyer character played by Edmon Ryan did know that the money was missing, but and as he tells Craig after he arrived into his office and right after Granger leaves, that he (Ryan) thought Granger might have been sent there by the cops as some sort of a ruse and so disavowed knowing anything about the money at that time.

[Thompson]

There are lots of plot questions and left after only  one sip glasses (2) of beer on the bar, but those are forgiven. I really like Farley Granger in this one.  He acts fast.  He is a natural born actor.  This was really a fun movie to watch.  Granger can wear a hat like Bogart smokes a cigarette.  But his hat came off during the auto accident and they drag him out from under the truck and he doesn’t have his hat on.  Yet later, when he’s walking away from the near fatal accident, he’s got his hat on.  I was waiting for the same scenario in the climax, Granger losing his hat . . . but he lost it for good so that was okay.  He should have drunk his two beers that he ordered at the bar but let’s not be so picky.

[Thompson]

He can really portray the angst, you can feel it.  Super actor.

[Janet0312]

1 hour ago, speedracer5 said:

 

And what was up with that nurse?! She was so mean.  I can't remember exactly what she said to Granger, but it was something to the effect of "Take a look (at his baby) and get out!" 

I thought she was wicked funny.

[Janet0312]

1 hour ago, speedracer5 said:

I actually watched the Noir Alley live last night which is a rarity for me.  I usually end up recording Noir Alley and watching it later.  Having seen They Live by Night, I very much wanted to see Farley Granger and Cathy O'Donnell's second pairing in Side Street.  In a way, their characters from 'Night' are very similar to those in 'Street.' Granger is still the good-intentioned but somewhat dopey beau to O'Donnell.  O'Donnell is a "ride or die" type woman who will stay by her man's side no matter what dumb thing he does. I wish her character had a bit more of a backbone in this film; but I guess she just needed to be unflappable to give Granger the motivation to keep digging himself in deeper.  I couldn't believe it when O'Donnell screamed "RUN! THEY'RE TRACING THIS CALL" into the phone.  Ugh.  

When Granger went to the bank to find out who made the large deposit, I wouldn't have been surprised if the bank had willingly given out the information.  It seems so easy in classic film to obtain really sensitive information about people.  See Dark Passage where the thug motorist manages to get Lauren Bacall's name, address and financial rating just by asking to have her plates run.  So when Whit Bissell said that it was against the bank's policy to give out that information, I was proud of the bank.  Then of course, Bissell wimps out when intimidated outside the office by Granger.  And as an aside, Whit Bissell seems like he was in every movie and television show ever made between like 1950-1970. 

I also thought it was interesting that the gang didn't even know that their money was missing? If Granger hadn't naively gone down to the office to confess, would he have gotten off scot-free with the money?   I was also confused during the scene with Granger and Jean Hagen.  I got the part of him tracking her down, because she was connected to James Craig, aka the source of the $30k; but at some point, the two were acting like they'd known each other prior.  Was that just Granger taking advantage of Hagen's drinking by lying to her about him being an acquaintance so that she'd give up the location of Craig? 

Overall though, I really enjoyed the film. I think I prefer They Live by Night, but I really enjoyed this film.  I was disappointed to see that this film doesn't have a decent physical release.  The print last night, while okay, could be so much better.  This film is screaming for a restoration and Blu Ray release.  I loved the cinematography.  The car chase scene at the end was fantastic.  I also loved all the shots of New York City.  I want to visit Marie's Crisis Cafe.  I love the name.  I also loved seeing Adele Jergens, despite her small role.  Charles McGraw was good, though I agree was wasted in his role.  I learned last night while reading about McGraw, that his real name was Charles Crisp Butters.  Which I thought was funny.  I also read about how McGraw died, which sounds like it was just a freak accident.  He apparently fell through a glass shower and bled to death.

I want to see a buddy film between McGraw and that kid who came into the office.

Oh, that kid was great, wasn't he? What an accent! 

Great review, BTW.

[Thompson]

It’s all about the hats.

[King Rat]

3 hours ago, Thompson said:

There are lots of plot questions and left after only  one sip glasses (2) of beer on the bar, but those are forgiven. I really like Farley Granger in this one.  He acts fast.  He is a natural born actor.  This was really a fun movie to watch.  Granger can wear a hat like Bogart smokes a cigarette.  But his hat came off during the auto accident and they drag him out from under the truck and he doesn’t have his hat on.  Yet later, when he’s walking away from the near fatal accident, he’s got his hat on.  I was waiting for the same scenario in the climax, Granger losing his hat . . . but he lost it for good so that was okay.  He should have drunk his two beers that he ordered at the bar but let’s not be so picky.

Thanks to you, I noticed that Granger didn't drink his beer! Now I'm going to start noticing that, too. Granger does wear a hat really well.