Nightmare Alley

Seen for the first time in February 2013.

"Nightmare Alley" is a very good film noir about a scummy, ambitious fellow, unscrupulous by even carney standards. It moves at a brisk pace and never fails to entertain while wallowing in the unseemliness of its protagonist. Takes on a spiritual angle at some point out of nowhere before becoming a kid icarus cautionary tale. Grade A-.

Macao - Josef Von Sternberg

Seen for the first time in January 2013.

I don't consider myself particularly well-versed in Mitchum, but in "Macao" I can definitely see why he was a star. It's maybe not the best film of his that I've seen, but it's probably the most charismatic Mitchum performance that I've seen. Jane Russell also gives a great performance. Her smile is intoxicating, illuminating a deceptive beauty. She brings a crass sophistication to her tenderly cynical role. Matched with Mitchum's charisma, this seedily glamorous noir is both routine and excellent. Grade A-.

The Two Jakes

Seen for the first time in January 2013.

That a film is not as good as "Chinatown," one of the finest films of the 70's, is not at all a fair criticism to level any film. But by virtue of being its sequel, I probably won't be able to keep myself from spending much of my time explaining why "The Two Jakes" is not as good as "Chinatown." This is despite the fact that I think "The Two Jakes" is a very enjoyable film with many entertaining parts. I would certainly watch it again.

Nonetheless, it's not as good as "Chinatown." First of all, I don't really understand it. I don't understand the plot. The motivations are opaque. It's moody, but we don't really understand why it's moody. And I suppose I could rewatch the scene where Keitel's Jake Berman character actually talks about his motivations and figure things out better, but truthfully I don't really care. Fundamentally the plot of this movie doesn't really make any sense, and whatever the contrived explanation is, it isn't really going to make it make sense. By the way, did Berman's business partner really not know who his wife is? It's easy enough to figure out well before the movie reveals it.

Also, "The Two Jakes" is a little tawdry, a little tacky. Listening to the pleasured moans of a women engaged in sexual congress strikes a dissonant note for example. "Chinatown" was a classy movie. A fine movie. "The Two Jakes" is a base thriller. I like cheap thrills. But you want "The Two Jakes" to be respectful to its heritage. It doesn't quite succeed.

And on the other hand, "The Two Jakes" is portentious. Jake Gittes, and in this movie everyone pronounces his name how it's spelled, is haunted by the past. Characters talk about how you can "never escape" the past and we get serious voice-overs and and a such a serious tone at times. "Chinatown" did not try so hard to be a serious movie. It was before it was anything else, a suspenseful thriller with a particularly great iconic 70's film ending. It didn't have to tell you it was serious, it just was. True to the best of noir's instincts. it featured a flawed protagonist, in an irredeemably corrupt world, who fought that corruption on behalf of one innocent. And who lost, because corruption is inexorable, and the innocent do not survive. Maybe "The Two Jakes" tries to gesture at this sort of thing, but it's not really integrated into the story cohesively and we're back at the fact that all in all this movie doesn't make any sense.

But it entertains nonetheless. And when it isn't being tacky or corny, it can be pretty funny. I don't really get it. I don't get what's going on with Harvey Keitel for example pretty much at all. But Jack Nicholson more or less carries the film with his charisma nonetheless. Grade B.

The Enforcer

Seen for the first time in December 2012.

At first, "The Enforcer" seems like a generic Bogart film and a generic film noir as well. This would be fine as generic noir and generic Bogart are both pretty enjoyable and certainly better than bad noir or stale Bogart. But the off-putting thing is watching these cops in the 1950's who have never heard of a murder referred to as a "contract" or a "hit" by bad guy types. Watching this in what is near to anno domini 2013, this sounds silly. Naive even. Certainly almost insultingly so.

Nevertheless, the film ultimately begins to sizzle. We can see the twist involve the cab-driver's daughter a mile away. Certainly the moment he says "big blue eyes," we cotton on to where this is going. And Bogart playing a recording back at least three times to drive that home, is not only overkill but unbelievable. Also it's really damn strange that someone shoots at this guy Rico through a window, and then as soon as he can he's sticking his head out another window. Like you think that'd shake a man up enough to keep him away from windows for a while.

But the end is so tense. And the whole story comes together in a nice entertaining way. It's not Bogart at his best, but this film is very watchable, and the ending is as tense and suspenseful as any ten minutes in film. Okay, maybe not as tense as the end of "Vertigo." But as tense as any ten minutes in nearly any other film. Grade B+.

Force of Evil

Seen for the first time in November 2012.

“Force of Evil” is a nice crisp film noir. Though it may seem a run-of-the-mill example of the genre at first glance, there is something in the film elevating it to a solid second tier status of film noir, just below the heavyweights like “The Big Sleep,” or “The Postman Always Rings Twice.” This is a very solid film, reminiscent, probably due to the issues of brotherhood, to “On the Waterfront.” They have similar endings even, though for some reason the “On the Waterfront” ending works whereas this one feels hollow and hokey.

It’s not the first good film noir with a bad ending though. Bad endings actually tended to happen as often as they were avoided. And though the whole basic plot of “Force of Evil” from start to finish is more or less discernible early on, it doesn’t stop the movie from commanding your attention. The background characters are as quirky as you’d want and everything is ably performed. I might like John Garfield better in this than in “The Postman Always Rings Twice.” The dialogue and the voice-overs are sharp as well. All in all, other than the ending, there’s no weak aspect of this noir, and plenty of strengths. Grade B+.

Where The Sidewalk Ends - Otto Preminger

Seen for the first time in October 2012.

This movie begins in an unassuming manner. It’s straight underwhelming and then it gets kind of good. The last ten minutes are great. But otherwise it’s sort of like watching an old tv show on the boring channel for 90 minutes. Dana Andrews plays his role really well throughout. Gene Tierney, on the other hand, doesn’t have anything interesting to do. The main villain has a good moment toward the end, but he otherwise doesn’t have anything interesting to do either. The supporting cast was probably huffing carbon monoxide between takes. At it’s top level best, this uninspired film is still sort of noir-by-the-numbers. I love the ending because I love noir, but this thing almost never has any sort of pulse. Grade C+

Somewhere in The Night

Seen for the first time in October 2012.

This is really high quality film noir. The only thing it’s lacking is any kind of star power, but it’s every bit as good as something like “the Maltese Falcon,” though less celebrated all of these years later, and maybe on the verge of being forgotten. This makes me wonder what it’s reception was like upon release. Did it seem like just another noir amongst a surfeit of noir, overlooked amidst the gluttony, requiring the passage of time and the change of fashions for its quality to emerge from the background? Maybe similar to the 70’s funk of Betty Davis rediscovered early in this century?

If so, I hope it’s re-discovered before it’s completely forgotten. It’s hard though, because only noir fans tend to watch old nor, even good old noir, and our numbers dwindle, I feel. It’s hard to imagine this movie receiving the fanfare it deserves at this point. It deserves better than to be relegated to genre-specificists, though that’s probably where its fate lies.

What makes it good? A good mystery. A good twist. Nothing is telegraphed. Some of the hard-boiled dialogue seems like it was lifted straight from the novel, as of course it was, but you can just picture the words on the page and that’s a bit detrimental. Though maybe if Bogart were delivering the lines he would have pulled it off. It’s hard to say. This nonetheless holds your attention and we’re riveted by the mystery. I don’t really buy the romance and the movie could do without it, but all of the suspense pays off, and that’s what matters. Grade A.

Pickup on South Street - Samuel Fuller

Seen for the first time in September 2012.

This is basically anti-communist propaghanda, but at the same time so very…stylish. I love film noir done well, and this is a fine example at its toughest and leanest. I recalled Richard Widmark from Jules Dassin’s excellent “The Night and the City,” and this is another great performance. The women who played Mo is also great.

What helps elevate this above anti-communist silliness is the fact that Widmark’s character is such a louse, such a two-bit low-life, instead of some kind of boy scout. This allows the femme to play the real hero of the film. Widmark never even really has that formulaic Bogey-in-Casablanca turn from cynicism to patriotic idealism. He is shown to have a sentimental side however, with Mo’s death and the femme.

There was a moment when the dirty commie shoots the girl when I thought this might be the bleakest movie I had ever seen, but this one gives us a happy ending which I am of two minds about. I like the ending, but the final moments are a little cornball. That’s okay though. The stylized dialogue and engaging tautness of the preceding eighty minutes more than make up for it. Grade A.

Railroaded - Anthony Mann

Seen for the first time in August 2012.

This is about as generic an example of classic film noir as I can imagine. It’s a bit like watching a television show from 60 years ago. Sort of hokey. No stand out performances. Literally nothing stands out. I actually watched this film two weeks ago and am restructuring my thoughts from notes I jotted down afterward. I’ve already forgotten just about everything that happens in this film. Is this the one where the guy perfumes bullets?

The conclusion of the notes I took at the time are as follows: “Not bad, but cannot be recommended to anyone but buffs, and even then, it just feels unexceptional. Bad guy. The girl. The femme. None of it outstanding.” Grade C-.

The Asphalt Jungle - John Huston

Seen for the first time in August 2012.

A nice criminal heist film. The hooligan was a memorable character. Intense and intimidating yet proven to have a human side. Enjoyable film. It’s maybe dated in a hokey way with some of the police stuff, but it does not fail to glamourize criminality. This sort of thing makes the code requirement of crime failing to recompense a sort of blessing.

The criminals with which we identify meeting their doom gives these films a tragic power. Today the movies give the audiences what they want, and the glamorized charismatic criminals always get away with it. Grade A-.