Film Noir HoF - Part 2

Funnily enough that is exactly how i felt about Touch of Evil. I liked it and could understand why people would love it but it didn't "wow me" personally, it is my least favourite of the five Welles films i've seen so far even though i thought it was solid.

The others i've seen just in case anyone was wondering: Citizen Kane, The Trial, Othello and F For Fake.

The Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton, 1955)

A man has come a courting. The man is a preacher who speaks of good and evil. And the preacher is a damn dirty son of a bitch from the "Church of the Truly Angry Jesus." Or at least that is what I call crazy crack pot psycho killer preachers. Robert Mitchem is GREAT in this flick. Creepy, intimidating, but also charming as all hell. Perfect casting. And Racheal Cooper is awesome. A little too high and mighty at times, but easily the most likable character in the flick.

__________________
Fear and Loathing in MoFo... The Gunslinger 45's Top 50 Favorite Films

In the 10 Ring: Gunslinger45's reviews

That's a good amount of Welles films you've seen. I need to watch some more one of these days. I liked the documentary extras on F For Fake, did you watch those? Especially the narrated by his ex girlfriend.

You know my sister said this to me and i didn't agree at all. I always took him as sinister and questioned why people other than the mum took him any other way. It was understandable with the mother since she had went through the trauma of losing her husband under those circumstances and she was being heavily pressured into finding a husband.

Personally, i thought me not finding him charming made me enjoy it that bit more because it completely placed me in the kids situation and thought process of why is my mum and the rest of the town being taking in by this guy.

The Killers (Robert Siodmak, 1946)

Another great flick I watched after buying the Criterion Blu Ray. It is kinda like the Noir Citizen Kane because of all the flashbacks telling the backstory. Only with more crime, lust, betrayal, murder and no sleds. And this time we get Burt Lancaster as the lead. Remember kids, your ex is your ex for a reason.

He was charming enough for the widow. To me he was always superficially charming. The kinda BS charming you get from a used car sale man.

Nah, i don't own it, i was already thinking about buying it though. The woman who i'd need to use spoilers to explain her situation was his girlfriend/ex girlfriend right?

The scene near the start seeing her walking with everybody stopping what they are doing to watch her was just brilliant.

Yeah, i'd agree with that then. Sorry, when you said "charming as all hell" i took it a different way like a natural charm. Know what you mean now.

No worries dude.

I can't remember her name, but I looked it up, it's Oja Kodar. I'm pretty sure? she narrated one of the documantry extras on the DVD, it was about Orson's life but mostly about all of his attempts to make movies, that never got finished. This is her:

Yeah, that's her. Looking forward to the extras then if she is involved.

No I don't think that scene was in there. Or anything like that. But look at the cover for "I Confess" that you have posted there. It made me think that we were going to get a story about a "bad" priest. Look at how he has his hand over her mouth. I was hoping for something really scandalous and I didn't get that. I honestly think that poster could be a little misleading - "I Confess", I mean.


If I remember what I read correctly, it was the first one that you have mentioned there that would've been the one that they used originally.


Maybe. I am not 100% positive on that either. Too bad I can't google movie scenes with glowing boxes and see how many come up. Then maybe I could figure it out.


OK. So you get it about Larrue! I don't know about recasting the film. I would have to give it some thought. One thing I know is that they need to cast someone who "wasn't thin" this time to make it seem more like he could be a possible suspect!

No. Not cool at all.

__________________
I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity - Edgar Allan Poe

I really liked the plot. The twist was good and there were plenty of morally ambiguous characters. Not as many shadows as I prefer to flicks like The Killers, T-Men, and the like. But it will do. The ending was also not quite what I prefer to see in Noirs. A little too Hollywood if you get my meaning. But I have really enjoyed Noirs with similar endings. Today's flick was no different. Either way though I thoroughly enjoyed it.

This was a real good one. Essentially a morality play. Man in a loveless marriage, a young femme fatale, and a scheme to swindle money from a humble cashier and amateur painter. Because of his failings the main lead (Chris) commits acts that he never would have done before he met this beautiful young woman (Kitty). It is a tragic tale really. A man's life undone by his own weakness and by the deceit of his new obsession. I really liked the ending as well. Great job Fritz Lang!

I just realized that no one nominated a movie with this femme fatale in it.

Lizabeth Scott

Attachments

 

The Killers: Did my proper rewatch. I love this movie. The cinematography is perfect, the story clips along and is told very nicely. I love this performance by Lancaster as well. Just a great watch.

I will say I knocked this down half a star to a on a rewatch. That happened with me rewatching Out Of The Past as well. Noirs are so plot driven I think a lot of them don't reward rewatches like other types of films. Still love this and will be a Noir I always recommend very highly.

__________________
Letterboxd

“Except for markf, you’re all a disgrace to cinema.”

That's nine Noirs you've reviewed, I have to get busy and watch some. Do you have any of the nominations left to watch?

Rewatch Night Of The Hunter. I am going to skip Maltese since I have already seen it and Pelican seems to be a no show. Just saw it a year ago too, so I am comfortable even if he suddenly pops back.

That sounds like a good plan. I might watch Night of the Hunter myself tonight. It's been years since I seen it. It's a movie that has always stayed with me, though I thought the ending was weaker than the rest of the movie. I'll have to see if my opinion has changed of it.

Touch of Evil

Boy, Janet Leigh sure doesn’t have any luck staying in motels, does she?

I was pretty sure – just not positive – that I hadn’t seen this one before. And I realized very early on that I’d never seen it. I would also like to mention that I watched the Restored Version. I honestly don’t know what was that different from the original version, but one thing that I know is that I believe it was 15 minutes longer than the original. So, if anyone has seen BOTH versions, I would love to know what was added to the Restored one to make it that much longer.

Anyway, I know I will be the only be who felt this way, but I thought the beginning was a bit scattered. It almost seemed like it knew how it wanted to start, but it just couldn’t get there. There was just so much happening but not happening at the same time that I didn’t quite know how I was going to feel about this one.

But as the film “mellowed”, I kind of realized that, perhaps, that scattered beginning was deliberate. (And please forgive my use of the word “scattered” – I can’t think of a better one to use to describe it) After all, Orson Welles was not a dumb man. He knew what he was doing. And when I thought about it later, the here-and-there of everything, after the incident that got the story going, was to add to the feel of the moment of what had just taken place. Wouldn’t everything be a bit scattered in that situation? So I guess it worked.

But as soon as they were done with all of that the movie turned around for me. It is a very engrossing film to watch. I think credit has to be given to Welles for that. He made Hank Quinlan one of the most despicable characters that I have ever seen in a movie. Sure we’ve seen characters such as his before, but it is the way that Welles plays him that makes him so much more detestable.

I am not a fan of Charlton Heston. I might as well admit it. I never got the love for him or his acting. He was OK in here, but he was the least impressive to me (and that isn’t a surprise). Janet Leigh was fine, but she always is. And everyone else – who didn’t really have too much time to shine on screen – were fine, also.

This is another film where the overall look of the film was pretty good. But one thing that I do give Welles credit for his is ability to get scenes filmed in just the right lighting to give that scene the exact feeling that it needs.

My one really big complaint about this would be that they really should’ve put the effort in to getting a real Mexican actor to play the part. I understand Heston was a big name to have in this, but come on! He wasn’t an American born character, right? He kept talking about Mexico being his country. Well, actually cast someone that IS from that country then. Or at least someone of Mexican descent. The make-up was a little too dark on him, and he didn’t even have an accent – if he is supposed to be from there. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I am probably being particularly picky because I am not a Charlton Heston fan, but it is just something that I kept thinking about while watching that.

Anyway, other than that, I really, really liked this movie. I finally had a reason to sit down and watch it (not that I really needed a reason – I just never got around to it before now). So I am glad that I got that one checked off of my “To Watch” list now.