Film Pairing — Cinema Noir, Two More From Orson

As I may have suggested a couple of posts ago, Orson Welles could be the poster boy for American film noir. Personally I would only go so far as to say he is certainly one of the prime contributors. One of his films, Citizen Kane is among those films at the top of everyone’s “best list” and some argue that it is the first American noir. There are those who claim the classic is not noir at all.

For tonight, we’ll leave the sacred Citizen Kane and the noir debate for another day, focusing instead on two other Orson Welles’ films, each with a unanimous noir stamp.

The Third Man — This film is the basis for the novella by Graham Greene in an odd turn around of process. Here, we visit moody post-war Vienna, deep in shadows and shadowy deeds.  Joseph Cotten visits in search of an old friend, Harry Lime (Orson Welles). And the mystery begins. Cotton’s friend is hard to find and the pieces left behind become increasingly suspicious to Cotton. There is evil here; but where does it reside? The authorities or Harry Lime?  The old world backdrop is the the true beauty of the film, and cinematographer Russell Metty takes full advantage of it, including the final scene as Welles, the missing Harry Lime, explains his view of the world to his old friend as they are atop a Ferris wheel observing the people below as ants not particularly worthy of any empathy in their suffering at the hands of Lime, himself.  The film was directed by Carol Reed and released in 1949.  Trevor Howard is also featured, as is Alida Valli as Lime’s love interest.

A Touch of Evil — Charlton Heston, as the force for all that is good, never really challenges the slovenly evil Orson Welles for the center of attention in this late noir (1958) film, also shot by cinematographer Russell Metty. The action takes place in seedy adjacent towns straddling the border of Mexico and the U.S. With exception of those scenes in which Welles — bloated, unshaven, sweating and slobbering — held forth as a corrupt border town sheriff, I had the feeling I was watching a film made for television. But when Welles was on, he filled the screen and, well hell, he scared me. Even the sets he chewed were more impressive during his scenes.  No doubt this is a worthwhile film for noir lovers, but there was more ‘60s than ‘40s in the atmospherics and I prefer the latter. The cast was also a curious lot.  In addition to Janet Leigh and the notable performance of Akim Tamiroff, we have brief appearances by Joseph Cotten, Marlene Dietrich, Zsa Zsa Gabor and Dennis Weaver. Orson Welles directed the film based on author Whit Masterson’s novel, Badge of Evil.

The dirty sheriff in Touch of Evil drank his bourbon straight up perhaps one too many times.  Don’t be a dirty sheriff. Think Vienna.  As I understand it, the Viennese drink lots of coffee and beer.

Film Pairing — Orson Welles And The World Of Noir

The 1940s seemed to be the best years of film noir. Humphrey Bogart, Robert Mitchum, Robert Ryan, Sterling Hayden, and Richard Widmark were the regular tough guys of the genre. Another actor stands out, not only for being the center of attention on screen, but one of the major forces off screen.  Not always my personal favorite, Orson Welles, has nonetheless created four of the best in the genre just short of single-handedly.  Here are two of them.

The Stranger — In black & white, in high contrast and with a huge cast of shadows, Welles teams with an innocent beauty, Loretta Young in small-town post WWII America. Released in 1946 to an America recovering from the war and the horrors of Nazism, we are introduced to a fleeing war criminal (Welles), his pursuer, Edward G. Robinson and the criminal’s love interest  (Young). The film, directed by Welles, is melodramatic, stilted and yet suspenseful. Notes from various critics suggest Welles had wanted a more Nazi-oriented slant to the film rather than a small town murder story. It nonetheless works in its released form. In addition to the excellent cinematography by Russell Metty, I was also pleased to see a very young and talented Richard Long, who played Loretta Young’s younger brother.

  

The Lady From Shanghai — If The Stranger was muted by too much convention, The Lady From Shanghai might have suffered at the time of its release in 1947 by being too unconventional. We have Rita Hayworth, at her most devastatingly beautiful, playing the girlfriend of an extremely wealthy, older man, Everett Sloane, who doesn’t mind sharing her with the Irish tough guy, Orson Welles. Aside from the constant “sophisticated’ chatter, there is true noir here in my opinion, with twist on twist, dark and ingenious cinematography, and the lovely backdrops of Acapulco, Sausalito and San Francisco. Not Shanghai, however. The last scene was extraordinarily innovative, well worth the price of admission alone. The film was directed by Welles, based on the novel, If I Die Before I Wake by Sherwood King.

What would you drink on an autumn evening in New England? Maybe a sherry or port? That would do while you watch The Stranger. However traipsing about aboard a yacht in Acapulco might suggest some sort of icy tequila drink to accompany the second half of the double feature.

Film Pairing – Let’s Rob A Bank, Maybe Two

I’m a fan of heist films. The theft of fine art and jewels from the very rich or money and gold from the banks has always struck me as romantic rather than criminal, especially when no lives are lost in the process. On this double bill, one film is a classic drama, the other a clever puzzle. What makes them special is that they are not just about the heist, but that they offer an original, thought-provoking twist in the story telling.

Dog Day Afternoon — If you are of a certain age and have always loved movies, you’ve seen this one.  If not, see it.  If so, see it again. It is based on a true and unusual story, especially for its time. Sidney Lumet directed this multiple award winning film released in 1975 and based on the news article, “The Boys In The Park” by P.F. Kluge. Though most of the film takes place inside a branch bank in Brooklyn, one gets a great overview of the 70s, culturally and politically. Al Pacino is extraordinary as the central figure. The entire cast, which also includes Charles Durning, John Cazalle, Chris Sarandon, and James Broderick turn in fine performances. Credit also goes to Penelope Allen as the head teller. Pacino, who plays an unemployed perhaps unemployable young man, has a wife and a lover, the latter needing expensive gender-changing surgery.  Pacino decides to rob a bank to get the money and creates a situation that shows his character’s humanity and almost comic incompetence. This is a must see for film lovers and historians.

 

Inside Man — Justice isn’t always served the way you think it might. Inside Man, a 2006 release is a solid entry in the heist genre. Directed by Spike Lee, the intricate robbery plot is exercised by Clive Owen who faces Denzel Washington, representing the law.   Jodie Foster and Christopher Plummer add fascinating dimensions to the already clever screenplay by Russell Gewirtz. Actors Willem Dafoe and Chiwetel Ejiofor are also featured in this quick-paced drama that challenges the imagination.  How are the robbers going to get out with what they want and a couple of dozen dozen hostages kept safe? It seems impossible. Will there be a bloodbath? Perhaps we viewers make too many assumptions.

My suggestions for sustenance on these cool nights involve the drug caffeine.  Why not an Irish coffee?  Or some other coffee mix with or without alcohol that will keep you buzzed and able to keep up with Pacino’s typical high-energy performance.

Film Pairing — Don’t Worry Your Pretty Little Head about the Government

There is no consolation in this double bill, two films that express what many of us feel — the government is trying to protect us from those who would take our liberties by taking our liberties. Secrets, double crosses come easy to the alphabet agencies in these two films, which do little to dispel our cynicism but a lot to increase our heart rate and blood pressure.  Try these two for an escape into a dark, but sadly believable reality. It’s all about the hunt and the chase, and whom we can trust.

Safe House — Filmed in Cape Town, South Africa, a spy suspected of corruption is captured and temporarily placed in a “safe house,” where it is virtually impossible to escape or be found.  Except that he was found. Another faction was sent in to free or kill him. The highly prized target, a veteran spy played by Denzel Washington, and a low-level, inexperienced intelligence agent, Ryan Reynolds, find themselves dependent on each other for survival. It seems that two factions of the agency are at odds with each other, but both out to get Washington and Reynolds. This may be the darker and deeper of the two spy films, though the chases are not quite as extravagant. Daniel Espinosa directed Safe House, released in 2012. Brendan Gleeson and Sam Shepard do their usual fine jobs in supporting roles.

Jason Bourne —This is the fifth, and if they keep their promise, the last of the Bourne series.  Matt Damon returns for this 2016 release. I’ve liked all the Bourne films, including this one, accepting them as well-done action films with just enough plot and barely enough character to keep me in my chair.  The plot is essentially the same.  Get the all-too clever and resourceful Bourne and kill him. In this case I particularly liked the appropriately understated end. Tommy Lee Jones did his usual solid job, this time as the CIA chief. Alicia Vikander was cool and beautiful, but the writers didn't give her a whole lot to work with. The movie was directed by Paul Greengrass based on “characters created by Robert Ludlum," and set primarily Washington DC and Las Vegas.

Relevant, though perhaps not profoundly so, the films address our fears about trusting a government that keeps so much from us — operations that can be twisted at various levels of the intelligence bureaucracy and by the currently ruling corporate class. Given a chance, the films could lead to an intelligent discussion about how we can get more accountability and transparency from our elected representatives, cabinet appointees and commanders in chief.  More than likely though, we will settle in for a few hours of vicarious thrills with two moderately thrilling, competently made entertainment products, knowing that the Bourne film, for example, brought in more than $400 million at the box office in a year that saw the scariest election of the modern era and a new cabinet of generals and billionaire CEOs, stuff from which such movies gain inspiration.

This isn’t a wine, or even a beer night. For those who want some sort of tranquilizing accompaniment, I’d go for Scotch or Bourbon. Sip though, or the Bourne movie will zip by you much quicker than you can comprehend it, not that this is a serious detriment.  For the alcohol free, maybe a coffee of some sort to keep you buzzed and up to speed for all the chases.

Film Pairing — Cary Grant Times Two

With the possible exception of To Catch a Thief, these two films may be the best of the Cary Grant films, certainly of those with suspense at the core.  Romance, humor and danger are an entertaining mix for a double feature to snuggle up to some chilly night. In fact, it is such an obvious pairing I’m almost embarrassed to pair them.

Cary Grant And Eva Marie Saint

North By Northwest — As you would expect there is disagreement about which of Alfred Hitchcock’s films is his greatest. This one is toward the top of my list. By fluke, a Manhattan advertising executive (Cary Grant) is mistaken for a CIA agent. He is kidnapped and marked for death by a smuggler, played by James Mason. Grant’s character escapes and the chase begins — trains, planes, cornfields and national landmarks. Enter a love interest.  Eva Marie Saint portrays the smart (smarter than the usual Hitchcock blonde), beautiful, if not devious, damsel in distress.  Martin Landau is strong in a supporting role.  And I always like to see Leo G. Carroll. As usual, watch for Alfred’s trademark cameo                      

Cary Grant And Audrey Hepburn

Charade — A slightly darker film, but not all that dark, Charade is decidedly more of a mystery. A man is murdered, thrown off a train.  His widow (Audrey Hepburn) soon realizes she had no idea who her husband really was. Unfortunately for her, his unsavory cohorts believe she has the money her husband stole from them. And they want it back. When a handsome and charming stranger (Cary Grant) enters her life, she believes he’s there to help her.  Is he?  Stanley Donen directed this 1963 film based on a short story, “The Unsuspecting Wife,” by Peter Stone and Mark Behm. The strong supporting cast includes Walter Matthau, James Coburn and George Kennedy. There are many good reasons to watch this film. One is the score by Henry Mancini. The other is Charles Lang’s stylish cinematography.

As a number of critics have pointed out over the years, Charade seems like a Hitchcock film. If it were, it would be among the legendary director’s best. This alone makes it an interesting double bill. The opening credits on both films are also worth watching.  

Incidentally three years ago, Life Death and Fog polled visitors to vote on their favorite Hitchcock movies.  Click here for this blog’s top ten by the master.

Libations: With the Hitchcock film, try a Gibson. This is the drink he orders on the train. It is really a gin martini, usually served with a small, silverskin onion. Stirred, not shaken. With Charade, we need to drink in the spirit of Paris.  Perhaps now that it’s legal in the U.S., some absinthe.  For those who want to keep a clear head in order to keep track of Grant’s identities, mix tonic, lemon, citrus bitters, and rock candy for a great mocktail.

Film Pairings — The Laundry Business, From Colombia To Russia

Money from ill-gotten gains is no good unless you can spend it. So tonight is an examination of the money-laundering business. One of the two films is based on a true story about the days of Pablo Escobar in the 1980s. The other is a current classic British spy film soaked in Russian intrigue. These two films, released earlier this year, are not action oriented — though there is some of that. Even so they qualify as thrillers.

Our Kind of Traitor —If you like John le Carré, chances are you’ll like this understated film based on his novel starring a mature and impressive Ewan McGregor as well as scene-stealer Stellan Skarsgãrd.  The cinematography stars as well, with powerful imagery by Anthony Dod Mantle.  McGregor portrays an innocent professor who, believing he was merely doing a minor good deed, accidentally involves himself and his wife played by Naomie Harris in international intrigue, billions of dollars and the Russian mafia.  Directed by Susanna White, the film also features Damian Lewis, Alicia von Rittberg and Velibor Topic. This isn’t a naturally panoramic story, but it is played out in a big way, cinematically. It is also very much a story about the value of character.

The Infiltrator — Perhaps a bit less cinematic in scope, but with more grit. Bryan Cranston plays an aging (his last case?) special agent for the U.S. Custom Service. Based on agent Robert Mazur’s true-life novel, we visit Florida and the 1980s when there wasn’t enough room to store all of the drug war’s corpses until they could be disposed of.  Cranston, incredibly believable as Mazur, reveals the ugliness of the “good guys” as they attempt to contain evil while the plan to go against Escobar and his brutal Colombian cartel escalates in an increasingly deadly fashion. Among the film’s strengths are Cranston’s costars: John Leguizamo, Benjamin Bratt, Diane Kruger, Amy Ryan and Said Tghmaoui. Directed by Brad Furman, the film certainly has some tense and gruesome moments.

Well of course, what we sip during these two movies changes during intermission. No drinker would argue against vodka with the first. We have a chilly environment. Frilly drinks won’t work. However we make a drastic change when we arrive in Florida. Though there is nothing Cuban about the film,  we can cheat and try some of that new Cuban rum arriving on our shores.