Reviews

25 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
10/10
An unbelievably underrated and overlooked Bogey film
1 May 2007
To begin with, this had an extremely unfortunate title for the year that it came out. Events of previous years left the public rather depressed and apprehensive of the future, and a phrase "In A Lonely Place" was so overwhelmingly depressing sounding that even Bogart fans stayed away from this one in droves. Nobody wanted to be "in a lonely place" that year, and they sure didn't want to watch a movie about somebody who was.

Of course, the title was a misnomer and wouldn't affect people in this day and age who are hardened to such phrases.

One quote says so very much about the movie and what to expect from it: "I was born when she kissed me.  I died when she left me.  I lived a few weeks while she loved me."

Bogar's earlier roles such as Rick Blaine and Sam Spade were undeniably heroes, although with movie character flaws.

Dixon Steele, by contrast, is a controlling, unstable man whose problems are fleshed out or alluded to without apology. Bogart was an actor who inhabited these flawed men he portrayed, men who often bordered on madness. It was so fitting that one of his last roles was in The Caine Mutiny as the captain who finally did more than border on madness. 

Anyway, Dix Steele is a much more complex, difficult character and Bogart makes you think he's not acting.  Just watch the scene where he's describing how Mildred may have been killed as he insists Det. Nicolai and his wife re-create the killing (in their own home) to be convinced of Bogart's brilliance.

The question in this film is not whether he committed the unspeakable act he's accused of, but only whether he was capable of it.

The characters who Nicholas Ray and screenwriter Andrew Solt give us are terrifically flawed individuals doomed by their own fates.  Steele is controlling, paranoid and unabashedly vicious, but Gloria Grahame's character somehow tames him for a brief period.

In a Lonely Place works on many different levels. There's the romance between Dix and Laurel.  We also get a scathing look at the superficiality of Hollywood, exemplified by Mildred's moth-like attraction to Steele's "fame" that directly leads to her murder.  It's also frequently categorized as film noir, and the murder investigation, with Dix remaining a prime candidate despite Laurel's alibi, is constantly lingering in the background. 

Like other great noir protagonists, Dix Steele is unable to overcome his fatal flaw and adapt to the outside world.  More atypical is that it's not death or imprisonment that Steele must face, but loneliness after knowing and feeling the happiness that a change of temperament could have yielded.

This is a film I could go on and on and on about, but best that you just see it for yourself.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A great 1949 drama
28 March 2007
This masterful adaptation of Jerome Weidman's novel stars Edward G. Robinson (arguably his best performance) as an Italian immigrant turned successful and wealthy banker. His hard-nosed attitude alienates three of his sons (portrayed by Efrem Zimbalist Jr., Paul Valentine and the always superb Luther Adler). His fourth son (the film noir regular, Richard Conte) however worships the ground his dad walks on. This doesn't go over so well with his brothers.

Although billed as a film noir, the film is as much a family drama as a thriller - and an extremely good one. Excellent screenplay by Philip Yordan. Robinson won the best actor award at the Cannes Film Festival for his performance.
18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Great pastiche
25 March 2007
The first third especially distinguishes this film with the excellent pastiche...if you don't know what that is, look it up. The lead character gave a great Bogey imitation and the gal seemed to me more Veronica Lake than Lauren Bacall. I also spotted a Raymond Burr type...that third was, to me, the best part of the movie, but the fade into the reality of the writer's life and the twists were likewise good. I've heard of Haines, but am largely unfamiliar with his work...this film will have me searching for more of his. I will say that the acting left a bit to be desired, but the direction was quite good and kept me hanging on throughout.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Great noir atmosphere and city setting
25 March 2007
This is a very good Canadian film. On the face of it, one would expect a strictly routine lady reporter investigating some unusual doings, but it's much more than that. I won't spoil the intricate plot, but it does take concentration to follow. Paul Lukas is, of course, his usual magnificent self The camera work is especially good and the backdrop of a city that most Americans didn't see very much of on the screen is quite good. The classical tone set by Helmut Dantine's character's composition, The Quebec Concerto, is very impressive.

One realizes who the villain is from his first appearance and yet the movie achieves not quite Hitchcockian suspense by the end. This is indeed an unjustly overlooked film.
30 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
China Moon (1994)
6/10
Saved by the acting
24 March 2007
This falls into the "erotic thriller" category, but doesn't over due it. It fits the basic neo-noir pattern depicting a sympathetic and ordinarily upstanding man drawn into covering up for an abused wife. It doesn't come up to the quality of older and of classic noirs, but the acting especially from Ed Harris and Madeline Stowe keeps it going. Benicio Del Toro isn't to be overlooked either, but he was not yet developed into the great performer he was in TRAFFIC.

As others have indicated, this isn't a truly bad film and if one overlooks the flaws and just enjoys the performances, it's definitely worth watching Alert viewers won't be surprised by twists in the plot, but the ride is still good enough for a rental.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A sad history of this film
17 March 2007
This was written and directed by Brewster McWilliams in 1997. You will note that this is his one and only credit. A review was written in 2000, four years before this was finally released directly to video. It's obvious who wrote that review and it saddens me. He meant well with this one attempt. And as I said it was finally released on video under the title The Last Hand in 2004. Apparently one person in 2006 saw it and gave it a kind review. It's now available on Netflix and I rented it because they list it as film noir.

It's not a bad film. It shows thoughtfulness in writing and direction. I had no trouble watching it all the way through in spite of flaws.

Good points in it: The director had Frank Gorshin and Lou Rawls in the cast, and it was good to see these two. The characters were of interest including the bartender.

Difficulties started with the murder sequence and the bizarre disguise of the murderer. Then came the long presentation of two principle characters as prime suspects. That of course leads the viewer to look elsewhere for the murderer.

The climactic scene could have had more emotion than it did.

However, all in all, this is an okay film which indicated that the director/writer had ideas. Unfortunately, it looks like he has disappeared. That's tragic.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Not quite good enough to be called mediocre
16 March 2007
I've been watching quite a few ho-hum films lately and this one doesn't quite reach even that status.

We are first assured that this movie is 100% factual, and I guess it came close. I see how the story of a criminal couple on a short crime spree sold tabloid newspapers, but it just didn't make an interesting movie. It aspires to a forties look, but is too ninetiesh for me.

The acting is okay, but no outstanding performances. Directing...well, not very good. Scrept's sorta blah.

There's maybe one good though lurid scene in this and that isn't enough to make sitting through the movie to see.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mr. Ace (1946)
Quite forward looking film
14 March 2007
Women in politics weren't common in 1947 when this came out. Therefore, this was a surprisingly straight forward look at the theme with an ambitious socialite who's no sweet "goody goody". I do agree with the reviewer who would have liked more emphasis on Sylvia Sidney and her campaign and less on George Raft and the inevitable romance.

And so this is disappointingly mediocre, not going where it could have gone. Even so, it's an interesting film to watch, especially in this age. And actually, I believe that it stands as a better "woman in politics" movie than most with the theme. Don't expect a gangster movie although Raft naturally is close to being one in this.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
About Carradine's acting in this...
12 March 2007
These reviews have lots of bad things to say about Carradine in this, but for me, he really made the film.

He is called bland here. One person says he acts like he doesn't know what he's doing in this.

I believe this is the point. This is a guy who was a rock star and then hit the skids and is a bum. And he doesn't really realize why.

And then he becomes embroiled as a witness to a race riot, is suspected of a killing, and is generally tossed about, and he reacts to all of this as a person who doesn't quite understand, and yet is driven by a desire to get revenge on those who are ill-using him.

This is the last film by a legendary director who never rose above B movies, but injected a quirkiness of his own. This isn't his best, but it is mesmerizing. It certainly is a violent film, but it isn't mindless. See it when you are in the mood for ridiculous plotting exquisitely directed.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Hoodlum (1951)
6/10
An entertaining example of B 2nd features...
11 March 2007
This is typical but quite entertaining B movie fare. Well, not completely typical because the main character of such fare is generally more sympathetic than Lawrence Tierney is here. He's a guy you love to hate as he gets paroled thanks to his sweet and loving mother and then proceeds to be a total heel, raping and impregnating his sister-in-law, robbing a bank and just an overall not-nice guy. He doesn't even evoke sympathy at his dying mother's bedside and that's one of the perverse charms of the film. The ending in a dump is quite satisfying and prompts a feeling of good riddance to bad rubbish. This is a typically short little B film, cheaply made, ludicrous at times, but fun to watch and one which will be appreciated by fans of 40's and 50's 2nd features.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Jim Thompson and Stacy Keach fans will be disappointed
11 March 2007
This isn't a waste of time, nor is it one to fervently hunt for. It certainly could have done better for the brilliant author, Jim Thompson, and talented star Stacy Keach.

One problem is the slow development. It takes seemingly forever to get into the schizophrenic aspects of the character. I have seen films where such slow development is well handled with skillful forewarning of what is to come. Unfortunately, that's not the case here.

Veteran actors, Keenan Wynn, Royal Dano, and John Carradine show up here and buffs might find it worth watching this just to see their appearances.

All in all, it's an okay movie, but don't risk breaking your neck to see it...it's not worth it, pal.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A sleepy TV movie which doesn't know where it's going
11 March 2007
I doubt that anyone connected with this who hopes to advance his/her career will include this in their resume.

The title refers to the Sleep Easy Motel where Hutch Rimes takes his chosen lady friend of the moment. Jealous and brutal husbands, conniving women, and sundry characters get involved with this and by the end, I for one just didn't care.

It's not the worst I've seen, and it's about as good a way of spending an hour and a half as sitting and twiddling your thumbs.

As far as any talent shown in this is concerned, it appears to be mainly a training exercise.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Warning: For Intelligent and Advanced Film Buffs Only!
10 March 2007
Okay, now that I have your attention, I don't guarantee that you will rate this the 7/10 I do, even if you qualify as an intelligent and advanced film buff. However, I do believe you will find something to chew on here.

It's written and directed by noted author Norman Maileer. And it's tough in every meaning of the word.

The rough plot sounds like a rather typical noir. An excessively drinking author given to memory blackouts doesn't know if he committed a murder or not.

Believe me, it's not that simple and Mailer takes us down a long winding and convoluted path before we know the whole story. At times, it seems ludicrous, and although I disagree with the Razzie noms it got, I understand. This is the type of movie which some will find inexorably bad.

However, it weaves a spell and the tough will stay with it because it's addictive. You will laugh at inappropriate times and groan sometimes, and yet the very serious film buff will continue watching it, and be glad he/she did. And I do believe that many will find this rewarding although certainly not unflawed. Maybe Mailer wanted it flawed.

As others mentioned, Wings Hauser is the perfect actor in this. However, Ryan O'Neal gave this his all, and veteran B film noir actor Lawrence Tierney also adds to this.

Some will love it; some will hate it. I did neither, but I did enjoy it. There was a point, the chain connecting the characters in their sex lives and in the chain of violence.

Love it or hate it, I suspect you will remember this one and not consider it a waste of time.
23 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Fritz Lang + Barbara Stanwyck: It has to be film noir
28 February 2007
OKay, that isn't completely true. But this is indescribably savory and smart drama, and I file it under film noir. After some Rossellini-style images of Monterey stirring and awakening as the fishing boats dock at Cannery Row, director Fritz Lang gets down to business.

Barbara Stanwyck portrays weary local lady who has just returned on the morning train, having been chewed up and spit out by the outside world ("Big ideas, small results," she says).

She gets involved with first an ego-less dullard of a fisherman nicely portrayed by Paul Douglas, and noir regular, Robert Ryan, a movie projectionist. This sure is an intelligent symbolic occupation for a man who watches others go through life and treats them as if they were no more important than shadows on a screen. As always, Ryan makes surliness interesting.

Ryan and Stanwyck have explosive physical chemistry. It's a duet you don't get often: an actor who displayed the bitterness of the postwar era in his face, matched with an actress who was at home on ocean liners and tugboats alike. The flamboyant dialog can almost seem like melodrama. But this is a hard-nosed, urgent movie, firmly on the side of the usual sacrificial victim of this kind of picture, namely the straying wife.

This is a Clifford Odets play transposed to the Monterey coast from Odets' New York. It's rich with the feeling of the California area in those days. Highly recommended.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Young Adam (2003)
6/10
I'm sorry, but I didn't get it
25 February 2007
It seems like everyone loves this film and it sure won the BAFTAs. But I found it dreary, sordid, and slow. Slowness doesn't usually kill a film for me, but in this case, I was constantly impatient to get out of the various bedrooms and into something more fitting to my usual tastes.

I will say that I loved watching Tilda Swinton, but then I always do. She's a doll. She doesn't try for glamor in this, and yet she is quietly glamorous.

And I did enjoy the scenery, but then scenery from the British isles always pleases me. The cinematography was good.

However, it did seem so immersed in sex and sometimes perverse and sordid in the graphic portrayal.

Well, somebody said it isn't for everyone and I guess I'm one of the guys it isn't for.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fascinating and rewarding for thinkers; boring and senseless for average movie-watchers.
23 February 2007
Before you consider renting this, consider the fact that it is a filmed stage play consisting of three people at a table talking not to each other but to the person watching.

Nobody here has mentioned the coloring of each scene. There is some significance here.

If you enjoy a true exercise in using your little grey cells, you will enjoy this. If you enjoy watching skilled actors talking ideas, you will enjoy it.

Don't look for action or plot. This is only for people who love thinking, who are able to live in the world of the mind.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A dream-come-true for the writer?
23 February 2007
Yeah, pals, I'll bet this is a dream of many writers, to portray his or her favorite character on the screen. I imagine Agatha Christy would have loved to portray Miss Marple, and Dashell Hammett possibly would have picked The Continental Op to portray.

That off my chest, I feel kindly toward this film and was glad for the opportunity to see Spillane as Hammer. I can't say he was terribly good, but one can at least say that his portrayal was interesting, and I don't mean that as a put-down.

It was also good as always to see Lloyd Nolan still around and adding to the film. This sure isn't the best Mike Hammer film, but I found it worth a look and imagine you will too.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pleasant domestic suspenser, but not film noir
19 February 2007
Honestly, pals, the "film noir" designation is being slung around in a decidedly inappropriate way.

Okay, with that out of the way,this isn't a bad B movie from the early and still innocent 50's.

It is one of the many cases of putting the over 30 actresses into movies below their capabilities. Loretta Young who deservedly won an Oscar for The Farmer's Wife was "ancient" when she made this is the fact that she wanted so desperately to be cast instead of Judy Garland who was the first choice for the role tells a story.

I group this with the "woman-in-jeopardy" movies although it isn't a case of her husband seeking to directly murder her as it is his wanting to frame her for his impending death.

I will join those who point out the loving depiction of middle-class Los Angeles as it was in the 40's and early 50's. Gee, she even had a white picket fence. LOL However, it appeared that hers was the only one in her neighborhood.

The nitty gritty, pals, is that this is an "okay" movie, but don't break your (pretty, if you're female) neck to see it because it just ain't worth it.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Of course those Brits can do noir
18 February 2007
The truth of the matter is that they did a bang-up job in emulating American noir and gangster type films. Why not, the American stuff was going great guns on that side of the pond.

This was pretty heavy stuff for 1947. References to cocaine, brutality towards women, and such goodies are noticeable here. Also noticeable is the noir type anti-hero magnificently portrayed by Trevor Howard, and lots and I do mean lots of shadows.

A rooftop scene was undoubtedly the prototype and inspiration for later movies such as To Catch A Thief.

Don't confuse this with the earlier Hollywood movie, They Made Me A Criminal, which featured John Grfield and the Dead End Kids. There's no similarity between those two films.
20 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lost Junction (2003)
5/10
Hard to know what to do with this one....
18 February 2007
Really, just what can you say about a movie that has a gal who's driving around with her husband's dead body in the trunk, a drifter who pushed his best friend off a cliff crippling him for life (the best friend is one of the characters too), a no-goodnik trying to make off with a batch of money he's got no right to, and a batch of yokel law enforcers? Well, I gave it a mediocre rating because I can't say it's really good...it sort of wanders all around the place in no hurry to get to where it's going. On the other hand, I can't say it's bad because there was never a place where I wanted to stop watching it.

So really, I think you should see it. Neve Campbell is good as Missy as is Billy Burke as Jimmy.

The bottom line is that I can't rate it high nor can I rate it low, but I can't say it's mediocre either. I really think you should see it.

And if anybody gives this review a helpful rating, I shall be shocked!
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Criminal (1999)
3/10
Yeah, it's bad
18 February 2007
I'd like to be kind as this was the director's first film. The trouble is there just isn't anything particularly good to say about it.

Well, I'll take that back just a little. The beginning looks good, the musician picking up a gal, and then her getting murdered. But that's about it. From there on, it's a downhill slide of contrived complications, red herrings, swearing inspectors. The swearing in this film was something else again like the British are trying to prove that they can be as foul mouthed as Americans.

I won't urge you to skip this. You might have reasons of your own to see it and if you do, all I can say is good luck.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Qualified director didn't quite make it this time...too bad
18 February 2007
Mike Hodges certainly has delivered many times, but sadly, not this time.

The film has lots of atmosphere and build up, but until a good ending, continually disappoints.

It does touch a topic which might turn off a number of viewers. Even so, it could have been a terrific film. It took me time to get into it, and then it drug out longer than it should have, leaving me want to yell "get on with it." The acting was competent, but it was just plain difficult to stay tuned in through the length of the film. It's not a total waste of time, but is just a case of too much buildup and not enough of a payoff. The mobsters in this would have been in trouble if their payoffs were as disappointing as those of the film.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
In contention for worst remake of all time
18 February 2007
I've got no love for remakes and don't care who knows it. Sure, there are a number of truly great remakes such as Bogey's The Maltese Falcon (anyone who doesn't know that's the third version of the Hammett novel needs to check it out) and Scorsese's current The Departed.

However, as the kids say, most remakes suck and this one sure beats the cake in that department.

It's too bad because Thandie Newton is really developing into a great actress and Mark Wahlberg sure is on the upswing, but this atrocity sure as heck doesn't do either of them justice. Putting those two in roles created by Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant is just plain pitiful

The biggest deal is the lack of humor. That alone makes this close to unwatchable. It soon becomes a chore to keep watching. The supporting actors sure don't match George Kennedy, James Coburn, and Walter Matthau.

Ah, why go on, because older reviews here say it all. This is one hell of a misbegotten mess.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Woman's place is in the home...LOL
17 February 2007
Hey, gals, don't shoot me for that statement...that isn't my idea, but let's face it, this is the underlying statement of this rather soap operish film.

After all, the war was over and women did a great job working in all fields while the men were fighting a war, but look what happens to this gal when she decides to put her career ahead of getting married, popping out kids, and being a nice dutiful wife.

Instead, she continues her job as a chemical research scientist, gets tangled up with a blackmailing woman who's aided by an ambulance-chasing shyster lawyer, is disfigured thanks to her jealous assistant, and just generally is in a mess that takes her the length of the movie to get out of.

Ah, Anthony Mann sure won't get the woman's vote for this effort, but he redeemed himself later with films with strong and able female leads.

Seriously, this is strictly a B concoction made to be a space filler on a double feature bill, just what was to be expected by the old Republic Studios which churned out hundreds of those great B films and cliffhanger serials.

However, it is fun.
2 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Charade (1963)
Impossible not to love this
17 February 2007
I started out thinking that this was just too much of a takeoff on the classic Hitchcock style, but as it progressed, I became completely wrapped up in the combination of suspense, mystery, and classic comedy.

It did start as almost a steal from Hitchcock with the innocent woman (Audrey Hepburn) caught up with crooks, (such as James Coburn and George Kennedy each at his most formidable) the CIA, and a mysterious attentive male in the person of Cary Grant.. one had to think of Hitchcock. But the comedy has more of a screwball edge to it than Hitchcock ever allowed in his films.

Highly recommended for pure fun.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed