It's interesting that I watch this so soon after I last spoke with my father. In our conversation we were talking about James Cagney and how he essentially created, simply in his state of being, the face of typical P.I. film gangsters. His look, his voice and his physicality started a new trend. I did not know that he was starring in this film until I began watching, and interestingly he plays the exact opposite of such a character.
Cagney plays Chris Cross, a clerk who is despised by his wife, relatively unappreciated by his friends, and is a self-proclaimed loser. His one passion and hobby is painting, but all lack of encouragement keeps it something of a dirty secret.
By chance one night his prospects change when he saves a beautiful young woman from an assailant on the street. She is Kitty March, a glamorous Hollywood-type with ugly habits, but infinite charm. A friendly conversation turns into infatuation on Chris' part, and through a misunderstanding she comes under the belief that he is a famous artist.
Kitty has a boyfriend, though, who complicates matters for them all. He is Johnny, a thug and a liar whose slick tongue and good looks has Kitty under his spell. Johnny uses all his charms to employ Kitty's to squeeze every once of money from Chris, believing him to be world famous.
Tensions grow--albeit at a snail's pace--until finally the story ruptures at the seams. Fritz Lang directs, and I saw in this film many parallels to his masterpiece, "M", which is about a child-killer whose presence in the city causes a breakdown of society. Although Lang didn't like to admit the expressionist influences of his work they are undeniable. In this film it is more content based, rather than aesthetics, but it was still very clear to me.
It is a story of a faceless man with no spine who finally cracks after being pushed around for far too long. He simply longs for a place to fit into in the world and this beautiful woman with the false smile could be the answer. When he learns it's all sham, which of course we know he would--how could he not?--Lang makes a very interesting argument about his ideas of love and loyalty. Chris is a failure and remains so. He fails at everything in life up until the end of the film which was haunting and tragic.
I really loved the last third of this movie, but the first two acts were almost unendurable. Firstly, the lack of any sort of interesting conflict was taxing. There was far more buildup than there needed to be for very little outcome. The stakes were not raised until I had almost lost interest, and then the characters' dense attitudes towards these changes was entirely unbelievable. This last point was the fault of the writer.
Then there was the tremendous issues with casting. As I mentioned, Cagney was known for the character which he created and frankly he should have stuck to just that. There is simply too personality in the man to be bottled up in the hollow shell that is Chris. Then the caricature portrayals of Chris' wife as a screechy, soulless harpy, and Johnny as the tough guy, cool cat were irritating and boring simultaneously. Joan Bennett as Kitty almost saved this film. It's clear to me that she has talent and with a better script could have done some good work. For instance, there is a moment on a balcony when she is hobnobbing with an art critic and her poised demeanor and sultry voice wooed me instantly.
However, there is not enough in this film to recommend. Lang is a great director, but this film was too long, too boring, and it was too obvious that I was watching actors recite lines.
2/4
No comments:
Post a Comment