Noir Films

[Robert Regan]

Where would Noir be without Woolrich?

[ChiO]

Answer: With far less Paranoia, Obsession, and Guilt.

[movieman1957]

We can't have that can we?

[Robert Regan]

Not hardly!

[CineMaven]

I watched "STRANGER ON THE THIRD FLOOR" and really enjoyed it. It certainly did seem to have all of the elements of film noir: flashbacks, voice-overs, dark dark nights, innocence turned on its ear. Was Lorre creepier? ( Well, yeah...maybe. But he was no walk in the park here. ) I liked the two leads. When the reporter went off into his own nightmarish reverie of being accused of murder...that sequence was wonderfully stylized. The scene with the reporter and his girlfriend in his room was kind of sexy I have to say. Caught in the rain...take off those wet stockings. And then the little squirrely guy busts in. ACK!! I was also struck by one attention to detail. When the couple leave the rooming house, his raincoat is still slightly wet. I liked that. ( See for me...it's the little things. ) I really enjoyed how it played out, and I loved the look of it.

* * * *

Also saw the George Brent film "THE MAN WHO TALKED TOO MUCH" which was pretty good. Brent plays a prosecuting attorney who sends an innocent man to fry in the chair. Quits the prosecutin' bizness to be a public defender. Of course, there's no money in that. Big time crooks hire him to defend...the guilty! Now he's rich and ego-driven. Looks up the skirt of justice and gooses her, bending the rules. He has a kid brother ( William Lundigan ) he's put through law school who now joins the firm. But you know the rest: just substitute William Lundigan for William Holden and you've got it. The idealistic and very boyishly handsome kid brother. There was a moment where the brothers have an argument, and Brent gives Lundigan a royal beatdown. Hmmm...papa! I didn't know Georgie had it in him to be so...rough. I mean it was awful. There was one moment when Brent defends a crooked client accused of poison where Brent takes the poison. Ah ha, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. It was N0T poison. The crook, I mean, the client is off scott-free. And then Brent and his backers rush Brent OUT of the courtroom TO a doctor's office to pump OUT the poison he just ingested. WOW!! Great! Makes me think of Jean Peters in "BLUEPRINT FOR MURDER." Oh, you've never seen it? You've just got to see Jean Peters in this. Also in "...Talked Too Much" Brent is not above torturing a bad guy to get a confession. (( Sigh!! )) Still waters do run deep, ey Georgie! Justice: by any means necessary.

Both "The Man Who Talked Too Much" and "Stranger 0n A Third Floor" were "B" movies. And that ain't a bad thing.

[JackFavell]

I LOVE Stranger on the Third Floor! I watched it again, and that dream sequence was just wonderful. I also really REALLY like the two leads, Margaret Tallichet, and John McGuire. McGuire has a sort of Tom Neal haircut, floppy curly on top which means he ran his fingers through his hair a lot, when he felt guilty or worried. It worked for me. Lorre is CREEPY here, just nutty serial killer creepy. Mean nosy neighbor was the ever present Charles Halton AGAIN. He's on every two days in TCM land, just about. And the landlady was Ethel Griffies, the ornithologist in THE BIRDS.

I was totally thrilled when Georgie took that poison! What a grandstand play! Wow! What a man.

[RedRiver]

Both "The Man Who Talked Too Much" and "Stranger 0n A Third Floor" were "B" movies. And that ain't a bad thing.

Not at all. "Stranger" is exciting, even expressionistic. Any slight in technology and scale merely enhance the experience. THE MAN WHO TALKED TOO MUCH sounds wonderful. I haven't seen it, though the title suggests I might be the subject of the story!

[RedRiver]

A young man asked me today, "Do you ever watch film noir? With Humphrey Bogart and stuff?" Yes. Yes I do!

[CineMaven]

...THE MAN WHO TALKED TOO MUCH sounds wonderful. I haven't seen it, though the title suggests I might be the subject of the story!

You said it, not I.

[JackFavell]

The dog!

[JackFavell]

I loved this movie almost as much as Gueule d'Amour. I don't know, it's just got a great fatalistic vibe about it, like you said. I couldn't find anything not to like!

[ChiO]

A director, like any artist, may have but one good work in his system. Often the promising work turns out to be the ultimate work, and Murder by Contract seems to fall into that category. -- Andrew Sarris (on Irving Lerner), The American Cinema: Directors and Directions, 1929-1968

Last night that statement was tested. Although I've seen and loved many movies with which Lerner was affiliated -- NEW YORK, NEW YORK (supervising film editor), SPARTACUS (uncredited second unit director & editor), THE SAVAGE EYE (technical advisor), GOD'S LITTLE ACRE (associate to director), MEN IN WAR (production supervisor), ROBOT MONSTER (production associate) -- MURDER BY CONTRACT was the only movie he directed that I'd seen. It may be the ultimate Lerner work, but it is far from his only worthwhile work.

The evening opened with A PLACE TO LIVE (1941), a quasi-documentary short made for the Philadelphia Housing Association. He shows the poverty in an integrated inner city, with its abandoned buildings, rumble-strewn vacant lots, and rats, contrasted with the promise of urban renewal to attain the American Promise and Dream. Then MUSCLE BEACH (1948), a documentary short co-directed with Joseph Strick, one of the directors/producers of THE SAVAGE EYE (1960) about, yes, the Muscle Beach. Lots of bodybuilding young men who leave little to the imagination and a few of the young women who also engage in the physical arts, but who leave far more to the imagination. And children. Yes, Muscle Beach is for the family who loves the sun and relaxation...as long as they don't have to listen to the beatnik cum hootenanny singer of the soundtrack. the editing (presumably done by Lerner) is the key, keeping the viewer engaged even as one sees the same shot for the third or fourth time.

CITY OF FEAR (1959), in a pristine 35mm print, the movie Lerner directed immediately following MURDER BY CONTRACT. A minimalist wonder. A convict has escaped San Quentin. He brought with him to L.A. what he believes is a canister of pure heroin. It's worth $1,000,000 to him once he gets it cut and distributed. But it's not heroin...it's Cobalt 60, a radioactive element with rays that can penetrate anything...and that will result in a horrible death for anyone who has a prolonged exposure. The authorities must find him and that canister before the citizenry of L.A. panic and die.

Vince Edwards is masterful as the escaped con. Who cares about dialogue? His face, his body, his being convey the sadistic glee of his escape, his murders and good fortune, followed by his puzzlement and fear as he gets sicker and sicker while the authorities are tracking him down. Lyle Talbot, as Police Chief Jensen, provides the requisite official concern and the personal struggle of balancing the covert search for the con with the public's right to know that it's in peril. But the star is cinematographer Lucien Ballard (MOROCCO (uncredited), LAURA (uncredited), FIXED BAYONETS!, THE KILLING, MURDER BY CONTRACT, RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY, THE WILD BUNCH). Every frame is a perfectly composed moving picture. Although no single shot may make a viewer gasp in amazement, the cumulative effect is one of magnificent artistry.

Sarris placed Lerner in the "Oddities, One-Shots, and Newcomers" section of The American Cinema. A better placement would have been in the following section, "Subjects for Further Research."

[RedRiver]

I like CITY OF FEAR a little more than the previous film. It has a slightly wider scope, opening up the story for a few more surprises. The story, in fact, is very much like a book called STOP THIS MAN! (Is that a title?) I see no indication that one was based on the other. In the 1950's, there were probably a number of "radiation on the loose" thrillers. In the book, the main guy was a criminal. A bit of a dirtbag. I don't remember him actually killing people. He's a decent bad guy!