Month: November 2015

Review: Hunt the Man Down

bryancyr film-noir, Movie , , , , ,

Hunt the Man Down is a film noir from 1950 directed by George Archainbaud and is some B-noir brilliance! This film starts out with a dish washer and a waitress counting the money after closing. A man breaks in to rob the two and turns out to be The Paper Bag Hold-up Man.The piano playing dish washer played by James Anderson dodges a few bullets and takes down the gunman, killing the robber and becoming a hero. When our hero is photographed, against his will, his photo is in the newspaper. He is wanted on a 12-year-old murder case and sent to Los Angeles to stand trial! When he gets to L.A. he tells the Public Defender Paul Bennett, played by Gig Young, the way he escaped during first trial, when things were not looking to good for him. He also tells Bennett that he is innocent and what really happened in flashback form. From this story we learn there are 7 witnesses to the murder and Bennett tracks them down to find the real story.

Bennett soon recruits his father to help with tracking down the witnesses. His father is a one-armed ex-police officer played by Harry Shannon. As the seven witnesses are found and interviewed we learn their lives have changed for the worse since the first murder trial. Will the truth be found? Is our accused man innocent or guilty? If he’s innocent who did it?

The beginning of this film reminded me of the beginning of The History of Violence. Though the starting point of the two films are similar, nothing else is. I still wonder if this film inspired John Wagner and Vince Locke when they wrote the original graphic novel.

So if a B Noir with a one-armed detective, a dish washing piano player who has been running from the law for 12 years and a crazy array of witnesses to work through to find the truth sounds like a fun ride to you, it is. This is a film worth seeking out for noir fans looking for a hidden gem. It is a short film and would have benefited from a little longer run time, so we could have enjoyed the search for the lost witnesses a little longer, but then it wouldn’t be a B-Noir would it?

News: A long-lost film noir gets a second look

bryancyr film-noir, Movie, News , ,

The Hollywood film noir re-make of the classic German film “M” has a unique history. I have never seen this film, but after reading this article, I will be on the look out for this film. Anybody out there seen this film? What are your thoughts on it? Read and listen to the full story over at The Frame here:

http://www.scpr.org/programs/the-frame/2015/11/04/45109/a-long-lost-film-noir-gets-a-second-look/?slide=4

Review: The Bridge or Bron/Broen Season 2

bryancyr Neo-Noir, Nordic Noir, Television , , , ,

I recently reviewed The Bridge Season 1 here:

https://everythingnoir.com/2015/10/08/review-the-bridge-or-bronbroen-season-1/

As I said in that review, I could not wait to watch the next season. I was leery that this show could keep up the quality of the first season, but my concerns where unnecessary.

This season starts out with a tanker running into the bridge. The tanker has no crew and 5 teenagers drugged and chained in the boat. Saga, played by Sofia Helin, is soon on the case. As the investigation goes on Saga soon goes to Denmark for their support on the case and of course she wants to work with Martin again. Without giving any spoilers of season 1, we find Martin, played by Kim Bodnia, with totally white hair from the stresses still haunting him from the conclusion of season 1. The season continues as an investigation about a group of environmental terrorist takes our duo on a rollercoaster ride of an investigation.

The personal lives of our heroes has changed too. Saga has a new boyfriend, who has moved in with her. She tries to adapt to somebody always being at her home as she turns most of her attention to the case. Martin also digs into Saga’s past and he uncovers some troubling facts about her childhood and family. Martin on the other hand is seeing a psychiatrist to deal with his new problems stemming from season 1. Martin’s wife has also left him and he is trying to win his family back through out this season.

This season also introduces us to a vast new collection of supporting characters, all great in their own right. There are too many to name here, but trust me they are all intertwined into a twisted plot that will leave you wanting more. This season also ends with a very unpredictable outcome for our two detectives that I don’t think anybody could see coming.

I highly recommend this television series for any fans of neo noir and especially those of Nordic noir. If you haven’t seen season 1 yet, go do it now! Then run out and watch season 2 as soon as you’re done.

Since season three is airing in Europe right now, we may have to wait awhile to see it over here in America. I will be waiting patiently for the day I can watch it.

News: Dragon Tattoo Sequel May Have Found A New Lisbeth Salander

bryancyr article, Movie, News , , , , ,

Though I’m sad to hear the original cast and director David Fincher may not be back for the sequel to Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, at least a worthy replacement for Rooney Mara is being considered.

Alicia Vikander is the current top choice for the role. I’ve enjoyed her work in a number of films, including my review of Son of a Gun here:

https://everythingnoir.com/2015/03/28/review-son-of-a-gun/

You may have seen her in The Man From U.N.C.L.E. and her best performance so far, Ex Machina.

Now who are they going to replace Daniel Craig and David Fincher with? Read the entire article on this over at CneBlend.com here:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Dragon-Tattoo-Sequel-May-Have-Found-Lisbeth-Salander-92577.html

Re-Watching the Classics: Rebecca

bryancyr film-noir, Movie , , , , , , ,

Rebecca is a classic film by anybody’s standards. This is Alfred Hitchcock’s first Hollywood film and his only film to win an Oscar. The film is based on the now classic novel by Daphne Du Maurier of the same name. This film stars Laurence Olivier, one of the greatest actors ever to be filmed and a fresh face yet to be a big name on the silver screen, Joan Fontaine.

Fontaine was not the first choice for this starring role, with  Margaret Sullavan, Loretta Young, Maureen O’Hara, Anita Louise and Anne Baxter all being considered as well as Olivia de Havilland, Fontaine’s older sister, who was producer David O. Selznick’s first choice. When Fontaine was chosen, it did not make everybody happy. Olivier wanted his then girlfriend and future wife, Vivien Leigh to get the part. Olivier reportedly treated Fontaine horribly for this reason, Hitchcock used this and told Fontaine everybody on the set hated her. This helped with Fontaine’s performance of always seeming on edge and scared.

Fontaine plays a young women who has lost her parents and is working as a companion for a wealthy woman. She does not come from wealth and from the very start of the film she has a hard time learning the manners of the rich. Olivier plays Maxim de Winter, a wealthy widower. The first time we see him, it appears he is depressed and about to commit suicide, when his future wife, Fontaine seems to stop him. When Fontaine’s boss falls ill, this opens up some time for Fontaine to get to know Maxim. They soon wed and move back to Maxim’s estate Manderley.

As the new Mrs. de Winter learns the ways of her new home, she soon finds the shadow of the first Mrs. de Winter, Rebecca is still present. Though Rebecca is not a ghost, her presence haunts the new Mrs. de Winter. The head of the house staff, Mrs. Danvers, played by Judith Anderson, helps keep Rebecca’s presence known.

Will Rebecca’s past drive this new marriage apart? Was Rebecca what she seemed?

After watching this film, I was debating on posting a review on my site. Is this a Film Noir? That question can probably be asked of most movies classified as film noir. I have heard arguments for and against this one. I would say this is a suspense film with film noir aspects. A Gothic tale with some scenes of noir.  1940 being just the beginning of film noir you can see why this film was influential on films to come. For one thing in order to maintain the dark atmosphere of the book, Alfred Hitchcock insisted that the film be shot in black and white. He also used deep focus photography throughout the film, something Citizen Kane would use to great effect in the next year and would be found in many films noir after. Hitchcock also made good use of shadow, a staple of noir.

He also did a fair number of shooting at night, with rain and fog used to great effect, another staple of noir.

That being said, is the story noir? I would say it definitely has noir elements. Our main protagonist is put into a world and situation she is trapped in. She must fight to keep what she wants, the love of her husband. This story isn’t as gritty as some noir, but, without giving away any spoilers, this film gets pretty dark in the last third of the film.

Whether you consider this film a film noir or not, you must admit it is worth watching and is a classic either way. I would say this film has noir elements that would go on to influence future films and is worth watching for the film noir aficionado. I am by far not the expert to classify this one way or another, but it is currently the 4th most popular film classified as film noir as well as the 6th highest rated film noir on IMDb.

Review: The Drowning Pool

bryancyr Movie, Neo-Noir , , , , , ,

The Drowning Pool is the sequel to Harper, both starring Paul Newman as our lead detective. This film was made in 1975, 9 years after the original. I recently reviewed Harper here:

https://everythingnoir.com/2015/11/02/re-watching-the-classics-harper/

Where Harper was a commercial success, The Drowning Pool was a box office failure. I’m not sure why this was, as Paul Newman was coming off of two of his biggest hits, The Sting and The Towering Inferno. Some of the reasons I would say this film didn’t do as well as Harper are:

  1. The supporting cast on this film are nowhere near as strong as the first. Harper had Lauren Bacall, Janet Leigh, Shelley Winters and Robert Wagner, while The Drowning Pool’s supporting cast had Newman’s wife Joanne Woodward as the only real standout at the time of release. Melanie Griffith has a pivotal role, but being only her second film after Night Moves, she wasn’t a box office draw yet.
  2. For some reason they moved the location to New Orleans. As the original book and first film take place in Los Angeles, I’m not sure why they moved it to New Orleans. Though I liked some aspects of the film for this reason, I miss the flash and style of Los Angeles. This may have kept some Lew Archer fans away from the film.
  3. 9 years may have just been too long to wait for this film for the movie going audience at that time. Now with cable, DVD, On Demand, Netflix, etc. a film can live a lot longer in the people’s conscious. Harper was probably out of circulation quite awhile after 9 years, with a possible viewing on television every few years.

Just because this film was a flop back in the 1970’s doesn’t mean neo noir fans won’t enjoy it today. Like the first film, this is also based on a Ross Macdonald book.

We also still get Paul Newman playing the same Harper we loved in the first film. The story is good and well executed. Harper is brought out to New Orleans on a case, when he is hired by an old girlfriend. She asks for his help because she is being blackmailed. She has married into a wealthy family and when her mother-in-law is found dead, the case really takes off.

Though this sequel maybe inferior to the first film in a number of ways, it is still a good film worth watching. It is a bit darker than the first film with some grittier story points, making it more interesting in some ways. I watched this and Harper back to back and feel they do make a great double feature on a weekend afternoon. This movie is worth watching for fans of Newman and fans of Harper.

Favorite Tidbit: This is Melanie Griffith’s second film at only 17. Here first film released earlier in 1975 is also a classic neo noir, Night Moves. I reviewed this film earlier here:

https://everythingnoir.com/2015/05/07/review-night-moves/

Re-Watching the Classics: Harper

bryancyr Movie, Neo-Noir , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Harper is a neo noir from 1966 directed by Jack Smight. When a producer asked writer William Goldman to find him a script with a harder edge, Goldman recommended Ross Macdonald’s Archer books. He was asked to write a screenplay and choice the first book in the series “The Moving Target.”

This movie was Goldman’s first solo screenplay writing credit and started the career of one of the greatest screenwriters in history.

So why is this movie called “Harper” and not “The Moving Target” or “Archer”? Well I have found three possibilities for this change of title in my research. I will call these theories since I do not know which one is right. One is Paul Newman wanted the name change to continue his streak of hits starting with H, including The Hustler and Hud, Hombre would come out a year later. The second theory is the film rights were for the story only and the rights to the Lew Archer name was not included in the deal. The third is the Macdonald estate was not pleased with the idea of a film and would not allow the use of the Archer name. Hard to say what really happened here, but I suspect theory two or three is true and they named it Harper because of theory one.

Either way, we got a throwback film in the vain of a classic film noir revolving around a private eye. This must have been an exciting film for fans of noir that didn’t really have a lot to choice from in the 1960’s. Fans of film noir also got to see some familiar faces from some of their past favorites. They got three of the best actresses from the classic film noir era making appearances in this film, Lauren Bacall, Janet Leigh, and Shelly Winters.

Paul Newman plays Harper as a wise cracking, tough as nails, street smart private detective, just like we like them. Harper is a little more wise than some of our detectives in the past, for instance all three of our female legends try to use their feminine ways on our hero in various ways, but all fall in the end. In fact he uses his charms on them to get what he wants more than the other way around. Harper may not have a lot of money, but he does have great taste. For instance I think his car tells much about the man. He has a Porsche, but it is a little beat up and in need of a tune-up and he has no money to do the proper repairs.

We do have a femme fatale or two in this film. Our first femme fatale is played by Pamela Tiffin who is a bit of a Lolita to Harper’s friend and the lawyer who got him this job, played by Arthur Hill.

Tiffin’s character also has a thing for pretty boy Allan Taggert, played by Robert Wagner. The thing is Taggert already has a femme fatale that is revealed later in the film.

This film is a twisted kidnapping case where Harper is hired by Bacall’s character to find her missing husband. As Harper tracks different leads, he discovers more strange characters. Will Harper find the kidnap victim before it is too late?

The first time I seen this, I was already a huge fan of Bacall and Newman and found the film good, but not great. On watching this again, I really found I enjoyed it much more. The wise cracking humor is very good and not over the top, especially Winters’ character. I think if you are a fan of hardboiled P.I.’s like Marlowe, Spade and Hammer you should give Archer…I mean Harper a try.

Favorite Tidbit: Frank Sinatra was offered the lead, but turned it down.

Review: A Wolf at the Door or O Lobo atrás da Porta

bryancyr Brazil Noir, Movie, Neo-Noir , , , , ,

A Wolf at the Door is a film written and directed by Fernando Coimbra. This is his first full length film and I look forward to seeing more from him.

This story starts with Sylvia, played by Fabiula Nascimento, going to pick up her daughter at school. She is told by the teacher that Sylvia called earlier and her neighbor has picked up her daughter. Of course Sylvia did not call and has no idea who has picked up her daughter.

Soon Sylvia’s Husband, played by Milhem Cortaz, is brought into the police station. His mistress, played by Leandra Leal is also soon brought in for questioning. From here we get a he said, she said story. Our husband tells his story and how he has left his mistress, but she did not take it well. Then we get the mistress’ story about how she didn’t know her boyfriend was married with a family and was betrayed by her boyfriend.

Which one of these two are telling the truth? Did either one have anything to do with the kidnapping? This movie is a bit of a slow burn, but it is worth the payoff in the end. This is a he said/she said with unreliable narrators and a crazy ending. The film is from Brazil, but shows a domestic life similar to anywhere in the world, showing fears and realities of mentally unstable people and of course the dark side of affairs. Is our mistress a femme fatale or is she a victim of circumstance? This film is worth watching for fans of world cinema and neo-noir.