Reviews (2)

the book is better than the movie, but worth watching
When originally released in Europe as Sangre Negra in 1950, Native Son - the film - was a long time coming for Wright. The author had fought for the intergrity of his original novel enough to take up playing Bigger Thomas himself. When released for American audiences as much as 30 minutes of film was left on the editing room floor. It would be interesting to know what was left out, but one can make an educated guess.

For those of you who have read the novel this may not seem odd, but the main parts left out of the film have to do with misegenation (Bigger kissing Ms Dalton) and Communism (the word isn't even mentioned!!). What is left is a dry husk of novel, but it leaves one to wonder what American audiences (or rather the censors) were ready to show in American theatres.

Several liberties were taken by the director (and Wright?) that may also prove interesting for further conversation. Bessie, Bigger's one-dimensional love interest, is killed in the movie also, but it comes to the reader/viewer in a the form of a flashback in the prison scene (Fate).

Also, there is an interesting dream sequence where Bessie comes to Bigger like a Judas figure and Bigger runs through the cotton fields of his dream to his waiting father (Wassup with the cotton field, Rich!?). Its refreshing to see his father appear in the dream sequence considering that its NOT in the book and Wright's father had left him at an early age.

Wright may have been an excellent though 'confused' writer, but he is NO actor!! I just imagined Bigger to be a little more thuggish than Wright could pull-off. But he should get an E for Effort: Loosing 50 pounds to play the role, fighting to get the film made in Europe since he had Communism affiliations During the Macarthy trials, and just being an all around 'Daemonic Genius.'

I'd recommend the film for its extra-literary qualities. If your teaching the novel, give your self a 90-minute break!!

But the Book is Better than the Film!!!

Amateurish, but of definite interest
Made on a shoestring in Europe, this filmization of Richard Wright's literary classic has little to recommend it in the way of production values, yet it is of definite interest due to the casting of Wright himself in the lead role of Bigger Thomas. Already middle-aged at the time, Wright is a good twenty years too old for the part and his skills as an actor fall dramatically short of his talents as a writer. Nonetheless, I can think of no other "serious" author who has appeared on-screen in a film version of one of his novels (Norman Mailer, of course, directed a movie based on his "Tough Guys Don't Dance"), and for that reason, this otherwise amateurish version of "Native Son" ranks as a curio. Admirers of the writer and his novel are not likely to be impressed by what they see here but, approached as a novelty, this film is worth a look. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A lesser version of the Camelot legend, Sword of Lancelot is practically a one-man show by Cornel Wilde, who coproduces, directs, and plays the title role in this 1963 film. The major plot points are all here: Lancelot is King Arthur's most valued Knight of the Round Table and a paragon of courage and virtue. Things change, however, when the good knight falls for Guinevere (Jean Wallace, Wilde's wife), bride of Arthur (Brian Aherne, who has essayed this character more than once), and she for him. Ten years after Richard Thorpe's Knights of the Round Table, the illicit romance this time is portrayed as a more intimate affair, and the sword fights have a more menacing reality (Wilde was an excellent fencer). A subplot concerns Arthur's effort to forestall a challenge from a rival king, a problem that will inevitably catch Lancelot up in a personal conflict. As a director, Wilde (The Naked Prey) knows what he wants, though his skills are generally outmatched by the size of his themes. Still, there is something very likable about this movie, and it's definitely recommended for anyone who can't get enough of Camelot. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (2)

60'S HOLLYWOOD VERSION OF LANCELOT-GUENEVERE-ARTHUR
Cornel wilde was sort of the bridge wetween Errol Flynn and Kevin Costner. He started out in swashbuckling adventures, then tried his hand directing epic movies, attempting to re-interpret each genre he tackles. Here he tackles the Arthurian romance/medieval epic with a focus on the suffering of passionate love against loyalty and duty.

One can say that a parallel of passions is played out here. Both Guenevere and Mordred want something they can't have, and Lancelot's duty to King Arthur is to deny them both. These two desires wind up working for each other, though in Mordred's case it's deliberate, Gwen's passion makes her not realize the danger she is putting the kingdom in.

Hollywood movies had gotten a little less stiff in how they portrayed romance and love scenes by this time, and Wilde takes advantage of it, giving the romantic leads a little bit more steam than they had in "Knights of the Round Table." It doesn't make the romance much more convincing, however. The trouble with many Arthurian movies is the unconvincing set up for the love between Lancelot and Guenevere ("Camelot" is a significant exception to this). The slightly stilted writing and silly French accent that Wilde puts on doesn't help.

There is plenty of sword-swinging action scenes. There's a joust, two battles, a fight through the castle, and a rescue. There is some innovation in the fight scenes; heads and body parts are cleaved, rather than sanitary thrusts to the armpit. Unfortunately, there is a degree of stiffness to the fighting and battles (unlike the love scenes) that detract from the drama. In the joust Lancelot sits on his horse, standing still, and recieves a lance with nary a quiver. Perhaps the pan-and-scan ("full-frame") presentation is at fault in some bits. In several battle scenes the figure in the center is the guy standing around like he doesn't know what to do. It also seems that some of the weapons, axes and maces, are too big for the one-handed use they are given.

The production design follows 11th-12th century styles of costume, armor, and architecture (mostly). This would match the period in which was written Geoffrey of Monmouth's "History of the Kings of Britain," the foundation of much of the Arthurian legend (ironically, Lancelot is not in that version). Unfortunately there is some stiffness here also. Certain pieces of costume and armor look clumsy and awkward, and of course the chain mail is all Hollywood fake stuff.

This film does have more appeal to fans of the genre than the average movie viewer. It is interesting as a transitional piece between "Knights of the Round Table" and "First Knight" ("Excalibur" is in a different league).

A bit of trivia: In one scene, Gwen talks about a bowman named Diccon. Diccon bowman was a charater in Henry Pyle's "Men of Iron," made into the movie called "Black Shield of Fallworth."

Neither Flynn nor Havilland
Mr and Mrs Wilde (Jean Wallace) suffer a lot, but all their suffering does not touch the heart. Mr Wilde is perhaps too old for this part and uses terrible intonations. Brian Ahearne as a King is very good. Fights are good with a lot of fighters. I recommend Flynn and Taylor epics instead of this. It is not bad, but something is lacking. ... Read more

Description

Raw and violent, steeped in the film noir tradition, this cult classic ventures into the seamy gangster underworld, oozing with seediness and low-life characters. Far ahead of its time, "The Big Combo" takes a dark, disturbing look at the battle between Leonard Diamond (Cornel Wilde), a good cop, and Mr. Brown (Richard Conte), a sadistic crime boss--and the cool blonde who gets caught in the middle (Jean Wallace, married to Wilde in real life at the time). With the help of the gangster's ex-girlfriend, Diamond is determined to bring down the cunning gangland kingpin. But the gangsters are ruthless. They savagely pummel Diamond and conduct gut-wrenchingly brutal acts of torture that were unusual on screen at the time of the film's release. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

A Forgotten Masterpiece Remembered!
First and foremost I would like to congratulate and say thank you very much to IMAGE ENTERTAINMENT for having the sense to make available a great overlooked, and underappreciated classic on VHS and DVD. "The Big Combo" is one of the best film noirs ever made, and one of the best films of the 1950s. It is one of the most brutal films both visually and in its depiction of the violence that lies beneath the surface of society. It also has many great performances by Richard Conte, Cornel Wilde, and Conte's two psychopathic aids Lee Van Cleef and Earl Holliman. This is definitely a must-see for either fans of dark, violent films, or for fans of great artistic films also. I congratulate, applaud, and thank very much, IMAGE ENTERTAINMENT for remembering and making "THE BIG COMBO" available on DVD and VHS as it should be. Here are some forgotten classics that aren't available on video or need a better transfer, that definitely should: NIGHT AND THE CITY (1950), GUN CRAZY (1949), BIGGER THAN LIFE (1956), NIGHTMARE ALLEY (1947), CRIME WAVE (1954), WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS (1950), TROUBLE IN PARADISE (1932), EDGE OF DOOM (1950), SCARLETT STREET (1945), THE RED HOUSE (1947), DETOUR (1945), CAUGHT (1949), THE RECKLESS MOMENT (1948)

Tough, Muscular Film Noir
This is tough, muscular film noir delivered by a master of the genre, director Joseph Lewis, whose master touch in low budget mystery gave us the unforgettable "Gun Crazy." The camera work is excellent in this epic about a large city at night, when two obsessive men do battle for turf control, giving us a microscopic view of its fierce underbelly and the ferocious mobsters who tenaciously seek to control it.

Cornell Wilde is a tough, uncompromisingly honest cop who is belittle by his equally determined adversary, Richard Conte, for being so bright yet ending up with such a small paycheck at the end of the week. Wilde has two reasons for bringing down the cocky Conte, that earlier expressed of seeking to make the city a more decent place with the mobster's loss of influence. The other is that he holds a passionate love for the beautiful blonde controlled in such a tight vise by Conte that she attempts suicide. The blonde is Wilde's real life wife, Jean Wallace, and Wilde is determined to pull her away from the egomaniacally dominating Conte before she is destroyed.

For a large part of the film Conte laughs at Wilde, taunting him over his ineffectuality, telling him he is wasting his time attempting to put him away. This is largely a bluff, though, since he recognizes Wilde's zealousness and competence. At one point his henchmen kill a lovely young stripper going with the policeman, intending to terminate Wilde instead.

Wilde is able to crack the case when he learns about the existence of Conte's wife, thought to be dead, played by Helen Walker. When Wilde gets the goods on the mobster and is ready to arrest him Conte begs his adversary to kill him. Wilde will have none of it, telling Conte that he will instead be tried, convicted, and sent to prison, where he will be a man devoid of power. Wilde knows that this is a much sterner punishment to Conte than death by execution.

Mr. Brown.
Quentin Tarantino owes his career -- or what's left of it, anyway -- to Joseph L. Lewis' *The Big Combo*, from 1955. Fans of *Resevoir Dogs* will be surprised to see that the villain of the piece (a hissable Richard Conte) is named "Mr. Brown" (which was Tarantino's color-coded name in his own film). They will also be shocked to discover that Tarantino is something of a rip-off artist when they see the scene here where Conte and his goons torture a cop tied to a chair. In 1955, force-feeding someone booze, splashing it all over him, and cramming a hearing-aid into his ear with the other end attached to a radio was considered sufficient torture. In 1992, our sensibilities required the removal of the ear and splashes of gasoline. Progress. At any rate, my point is that *The Big Combo* was a very influential film noir among connoisseurs. It still packs a wallop. I take issue with the fellow from Canada below on several points. As for his sniping about the low budget here . . . yeah? So? If anyone can name a classic film noir that had an extravagant budget to play with -- with the possible exception of *Double Indemnity* -- I'd be interested to know about it. And my answer to his complaints about the dialogue is to suggest that perhaps he has confused *The Big Combo* with, well, *Double Indemnity*. I personally find the dialogue to be compact, lean and mean, and reasonably free of superfluous verbiage. (Unlike in Wilder's "classic", wherein insurance agents talk like lifelong Hell's Kitchen hoods, to say nothing of nattering voice-over narration.) There are certainly no page-long, single-space monologues in this movie. In any case, the absolutely stunning cinematography provided by the master John Alton should mute any misguided criticisms. This will be one of the best-shot black & white movies you will ever see. It ranks with the Expressionist milestones of Murnau and Welles. The pulsing alternation between shadow and sudden clarity is particularly impressive. A word of praise also goes to the performers: Jean Wallace is a walking blonde veneer steaming with sexual degredation beneath the surface; her real-life husband Cornel Wilde is the quintessential New York City detective. The supporting players are great, too. [The DVD is not so great. No extras, but who cares? -- it's the transfer that's really lacking. *The Big Combo* needs, and deserves, a thorough clean-up, in the Criterion tradition. We're still missing the entirety of Alton's photographic achievement with this product.]

The Combo Is Fine, It Just Needs Another Script
Fans of the Noire B-Picture can learn a lot from this movie. Joseph Lewis (the magnificent "Gun Crazy") helms it, John Alton ( "T-Men", "Railroaded", and the astounding "Raw Deal") photographs, and the cast includes Cornel Wilde, Richard Conte, Brian Donlevy, and the young Lee Van Cleef and Earl Holliman.

Film students take note:

There's obviously no money to spare here: the sets are all recycled from other B-pictures. What's impressive is how Lewis uses the same locations for multiple shots without and significant re-setting, he keeps his angles down and holds the long take. Alton helps with the right atmosphere and his wonderfully graphic compositions, and the cast get on board for the ride. You can almost see another "Gun Crazy" or "Raw Deal" emerging.

But the script is awful. In B-Movies, "Talk Is Cheap" - much cheaper than action, or scene changes. That's why Reservoir Dogs spends so much time in a warehouse (the similarities don't end there: in a scene of remarkable brutality Wilde is taped to a chair and tortured via a hearing air placed near his EAR!). But one of the problems with shooting few locations fast, is you need the dialog to fill the scenes.

It's just not here. The speeches (there isn't any conversation here, just hard-line pronouncements) are all tough-guy cliché: "he's the kind guy that blah blah blah, and blah blah, but blah blah, because mark my words, blah blah". They're not very good and they always go on for a few sentences -- or a page -- too long. Someone's always trying to stretch the analogy, or extend a metaphor, or get with the poetry of the streets. Nothing they say has anything to do with character. This the kind of juvenile dialog that turns up in parodies of old noire B-pics. It's a shame, because while this is a very capable cast worthy of better material, they just can't save this.

Picture and sound quality are good (Image Entertainment is an excellent DVD label), but unless your a student or serious film buff this is nothing more than a curiosity.

Bad DVD
Great movie and one of the best examples of film noir but this release is awful. The image quality is terrible and it looks like it is copy off an old print with bad scratches, milky contrast and clicking and popping on the track. I hope a reputable company like Criterion gets the rights and they can do a restoration and new transfer. Meanwhile don't waste your money on this version, ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Kino's 2-disc DVD version
Relative newcomer Marlene Dietrich's electrifying performance in the 1930 sound film THE BLUE ANGEL overshadows the perhaps even greater performance by Emil Jannings as a sexually-repressed professor. Her screen presence also more than overcomes Josef von Sternberg's rather static direction that was typical of early sound films, elevating this romantic melodrama into its classic status.

Kino's region-free DVD contains both the German and the English versions of the film, each on a separate disc. Both versions look very clean for a 71-year-old film, although just a tad less sharp than I would have liked. The English version looks a bit cleaner still. The supplements include a side-by-side comparison of the two versions (with the German version shown on the left), and the English version indeed looks better. The German version is supported by optional, white-on-black-bar English subtitles. The black bars, of course, cover up part of the picture. I would suggest Kino use white, black-bordered lettering for subtitles in the future instead.

The German version runs 102 minutes, and has a few scenes that are not shown in the English version due to censorship (such as the moment when Lola rotates her body to reveal her bare back side to her nightclub audience). The English version runs 100 minutes. Although it was supposedly made for English audiences, only Dietrich's role is all English-speaking, while the other actors speak a combination of both languages -- English for important dialogs, German for less important ones.

The included audio commentary on the German disc is a mild disappointment. Although historian Werner Sedendorf's analytical comments are excellent, he just does not speak often enough. Long stretches of silence are frequent. Kino should have thought of filling the vacancies with additional comments (either by Sedendorf or someone else), especially when a lot of relevant topics are not adequately covered, such as the legendary collaborations between Dietrich and von Sternberg, the details about the censorship practiced on the English version, the period of German Expressionism that inspired directors like von Sternberg, etc.

The DVD does include a generous amount of extra material. There is a wonderful biography section that includes photos and credits of about 30 cast and crew members. There are about 150 photos, some of which are then-and-now comparisons of some of the props and costumes in the movie. There are text screens of the film's production history. The best extras, unquestionnably, are the 4 film clips of Dietrich's screen test and concert performances. There is a memorable clip of the 1930 screen test of Dietrich singing "You are the Cream in my Coffee." There are 2 clips of televised concerts from the 60s and 70s showing Dietrich performing two of the songs in the movie (English renditions of "Falling in Love Again" and "Lola Lola"). There is another TV footage of her singing "You are the Cream in my Coffee" after reminiscing about her 1930 screen test.

The "Stepping Stone" for Marlene Dietrich's World Conquest
Joseph von Sternberg 'packaged' his muse, Marlene Dietrich to become a world star with "The Blue Angel". The disturbing story of a revue entertainer (Dietrich) and the middle aged professor(Emil Jannings)who falls madly in love with, and later is destroyed by her, based on the novel "Professor Unrat". Many unforgettable songs by Friedrich Hollander are featured, most noteworthy of course "Ich bin von Kopf bis Fuss auf Liebe eingestellt" ("Falling in Love Again") and "Ich bin die feche Lola" ("They Call Me Naughty Lola"). -- There is a dub-version available, but I recommend the original German with subtitles. Many effects are lost with the former. I can highly recommend this film, a must for fans of either the stars or the director!*****

Falling Too Hard
This memorable, iconic film stars Marlene Dietrich as the showgirl Lola Lola, Emil Jannings as the Professor, and is directed by Josef von Sternberg. Stodgy, upright Herr Professor enters the cabaret after following some of his pupils, whom he's discovered with postcards of the singer Lola. He is shocked by the degradation of the place, but then catches sight of Lola and finds himself fascinated. In spite of himself, he returns again and again to the nightclub, driven by his feelings for Lola, a mixture of blatant lust and intense curiousity. Through a series of dressing room encounters, the Professor becomes acquainted with Lola, who views him as an amusing distraction, a relic with his gentlemanly ways and old-fashioned manners. The Professor proves useful in his way, serving as a foil between her and unwanted advances from customers and unwelcomed suitors. With the best of intentions the Professor offers Lola his hand in marriage, offering her his protection, and his good name. This is meaningless at the cabaret, no one plays by his rules. The befuddled Professor tries to fit in, but cannot, and in the process loses himself entirely. He can't change himself, just as he can't change Lola ~ to change Lola would be to destroy her, just as the Professor, through the change he endures, destroys himself. There is a sort of backhanded morality here: Lola cannot help for what she is, she is a product of what she has seen in her life, what she has been forced to do in order to survive, just as the Professor can't help for what he is, the product of his own background, mores, and values. He might have survived had he realised that what a person portrays on stage is not necessarily what that person truly must be, once the curtain is wrung down. The film arrives to its inevitable tragic end, climaxing with a scene of devastating humiliation. Many underlying psycho-sexual themes run through this film, the most obvious being repression vs freedom, and at what cost 'liberation' is achieved. To view the film in the context of the era in which it was made ~ a time portending many social and moralistic upheavals ~ makes for some interesting discussion. Marlene Dietrich, in her role, is in turns cold and unbending, charming and vexing, wise and vulnerable, and always, always absolutely luminously beautiful. Jannings is heartbreaking as the Professor. A must-see for anyone interested in cinema.

One of Kino's best packages. A must for Marlene Fans!!!!!!!!
I like most the DVDs that Kino makes but I must say that this is their most impressive package. A two disk set, the features are marvelous, including both versions of the film (which look great)! Marlene Dietrich musical performances, scene comparison, informative commentary, and a not to be missed screen test with Marlene. The film alone is great, but the DVD package makes it outstanding. Its about a professor, Emil Jennings, who is perfectly cast, and his downfall after meeting a nightclub dancer named Lola Lola, played with great charisma by Marlene Dietrich. A must, don't hesitate to but the Kino 2-disk set if your a Dietrich fan!

A classic of world cinema
A German cinema classic from the late Weimar-era, and the film debut of super-sexy Marlene Dietrich, who is stunning in her role as a flirtatious, heartless cabaret singer whose carnal wiles bring an infatuated school teacher to ruin. But then, what is *really* responsible for his downfall? Dietrich as the temptress, his own repressed sexuality and concurrent fetishization of her beauty, or the close-mindedness of the society around them? As with much of the art of this era (in Germany and without), this film depicts the clash of the old world and the new -- the modern, open, crass, liberating and chaotic world of the individual against the older, stable, stifling, communal and "moral" world of the village and church. At any rate, the transformation of actor Emil Jannings from a fusty old humbug into a degraded shell of a man is a dramatic triumph, and the direction, by Josef von Sternberg, is flawless -- filled with darkness, closeness and brooding claustrophia. The new DVD version features both the German and English-language versions (the English version isn't dubbed, it was actually *acted* in English by the same German actors, and has a few interesting differences of moral tone...) and also includes, as an added bonus Marlene Dietrich's first screen test, which is hilarious, and a must-see for her fans. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Very good movie....EXTREAMLY poor transfer. BEWARE
With this being a very difficult movie to get a hold of, I was thrilled it was getting a DVD release. Now I know why the price tag is so low on it.

I have seen better transfers of films from UHF TV stations in the middle of the night. It is grainy beyond belief, with a scratchy distorted soundtrack, and has so many splices in parts it makes it laughable. (remember those BBC 'Benny Hill' sketches with "Cheapo Films" when the splices in the film distorted the scene you were viewing ? This is what we are talking about here, folks....) Making matters worse, the colors are so badly faded it resembles a black & white film. Night sequences turn blue, skin tones turn yellow, whites turn light tan/bone....you get the point.

GOTHAM DISTRIBUTION should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing a product this poor to be released to the general public. I realize they think a $7-8 price tag is reasonable enough...I, personally, wouldn't pay more than 99 cents. Its barely worth that alone. I will never purchase anything by GOTHAM Distribution again. What a joke !

This gem of a movie deserves better fate.

An uneven crime thriller
Burgess Meredith, of all people, directed this oddball thriller, which features Franchot Tone as an ice-cool (but quite deranged) criminal mastermind who secretly yearns to be caught, and taunts a Parisian detective, Inspector Maigret (Charles Laughton) into hounding him. The moodiness of the film's beginning is undercut by the implausibility and uneven direction of the cat-and-mouse machinations of the second half; Laughton's character loses steam and while Tone delivers some choice moments eye-bulging insanity, it's had to make heads or tails out of his overly-explicit taunts of Maigret's faltering investigation. Sort of a lesser version of "The Third Man," with a resplendid mid-century Paris in place of a war-torn Vienna. Nice look at the inner workings of the Eiffel Tower as well... An interesting early adaptation of mystery novelist George Simenon's Maigret character, but ultimately a fairly shaky film.

A FINE FILM NOIR.
Simenon's seminal sleuth, Maigret, was never better enacted than by the shrewd, slow and sure Charles Laughton who is after a thrill-killer-for-hire Franchot Tone. Tone's portrait of a psychopathic murderer, who enjoys killing because it feeds his warped ego is fascinating. When the nephew of a rich woman hires Tone to kill his aunt and Laughton investigates. A very clever game of cat-and-mouse ensues. The acting is truly outstanding in this film: Tone actually and triumphantly overcomes Laughton's masterful mannerisms in their scenes together. The viewer is treated to a majestic Paris while we slowly engage in the thrilling story and the superb chase on the Eiffel Tower is uniquely exciting. Burgess Merideth (!) was the director, and he did an admirable job. The music score by Michel Michelet is exeptional. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Very good movie....EXTREAMLY poor transfer. BEWARE
With this being a very difficult movie to get a hold of, I was thrilled it was getting a DVD release. Now I know why the price tag is so low on it.

I have seen better transfers of films from UHF TV stations in the middle of the night. It is grainy beyond belief, with a scratchy distorted soundtrack, and has so many splices in parts it makes it laughable. (remember those BBC 'Benny Hill' sketches with "Cheapo Films" when the splices in the film distorted the scene you were viewing ? This is what we are talking about here, folks....) Making matters worse, the colors are so badly faded it resembles a black & white film. Night sequences turn blue, skin tones turn yellow, whites turn light tan/bone....you get the point.

GOTHAM DISTRIBUTION should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing a product this poor to be released to the general public. I realize they think a $7-8 price tag is reasonable enough...I, personally, wouldn't pay more than 99 cents. Its barely worth that alone. I will never purchase anything by GOTHAM Distribution again. What a joke !

This gem of a movie deserves better fate.

An uneven crime thriller
Burgess Meredith, of all people, directed this oddball thriller, which features Franchot Tone as an ice-cool (but quite deranged) criminal mastermind who secretly yearns to be caught, and taunts a Parisian detective, Inspector Maigret (Charles Laughton) into hounding him. The moodiness of the film's beginning is undercut by the implausibility and uneven direction of the cat-and-mouse machinations of the second half; Laughton's character loses steam and while Tone delivers some choice moments eye-bulging insanity, it's had to make heads or tails out of his overly-explicit taunts of Maigret's faltering investigation. Sort of a lesser version of "The Third Man," with a resplendid mid-century Paris in place of a war-torn Vienna. Nice look at the inner workings of the Eiffel Tower as well... An interesting early adaptation of mystery novelist George Simenon's Maigret character, but ultimately a fairly shaky film.

A FINE FILM NOIR.
Simenon's seminal sleuth, Maigret, was never better enacted than by the shrewd, slow and sure Charles Laughton who is after a thrill-killer-for-hire Franchot Tone. Tone's portrait of a psychopathic murderer, who enjoys killing because it feeds his warped ego is fascinating. When the nephew of a rich woman hires Tone to kill his aunt and Laughton investigates. A very clever game of cat-and-mouse ensues. The acting is truly outstanding in this film: Tone actually and triumphantly overcomes Laughton's masterful mannerisms in their scenes together. The viewer is treated to a majestic Paris while we slowly engage in the thrilling story and the superb chase on the Eiffel Tower is uniquely exciting. Burgess Merideth (!) was the director, and he did an admirable job. The music score by Michel Michelet is exeptional. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Very good movie....EXTREAMLY poor transfer. BEWARE
With this being a very difficult movie to get a hold of, I was thrilled it was getting a DVD release. Now I know why the price tag is so low on it.

I have seen better transfers of films from UHF TV stations in the middle of the night. It is grainy beyond belief, with a scratchy distorted soundtrack, and has so many splices in parts it makes it laughable. (remember those BBC 'Benny Hill' sketches with "Cheapo Films" when the splices in the film distorted the scene you were viewing ? This is what we are talking about here, folks....) Making matters worse, the colors are so badly faded it resembles a black & white film. Night sequences turn blue, skin tones turn yellow, whites turn light tan/bone....you get the point.

GOTHAM DISTRIBUTION should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing a product this poor to be released to the general public. I realize they think a $7-8 price tag is reasonable enough...I, personally, wouldn't pay more than 99 cents. Its barely worth that alone. I will never purchase anything by GOTHAM Distribution again. What a joke !

This gem of a movie deserves better fate.

An uneven crime thriller
Burgess Meredith, of all people, directed this oddball thriller, which features Franchot Tone as an ice-cool (but quite deranged) criminal mastermind who secretly yearns to be caught, and taunts a Parisian detective, Inspector Maigret (Charles Laughton) into hounding him. The moodiness of the film's beginning is undercut by the implausibility and uneven direction of the cat-and-mouse machinations of the second half; Laughton's character loses steam and while Tone delivers some choice moments eye-bulging insanity, it's had to make heads or tails out of his overly-explicit taunts of Maigret's faltering investigation. Sort of a lesser version of "The Third Man," with a resplendid mid-century Paris in place of a war-torn Vienna. Nice look at the inner workings of the Eiffel Tower as well... An interesting early adaptation of mystery novelist George Simenon's Maigret character, but ultimately a fairly shaky film.

A FINE FILM NOIR.
Simenon's seminal sleuth, Maigret, was never better enacted than by the shrewd, slow and sure Charles Laughton who is after a thrill-killer-for-hire Franchot Tone. Tone's portrait of a psychopathic murderer, who enjoys killing because it feeds his warped ego is fascinating. When the nephew of a rich woman hires Tone to kill his aunt and Laughton investigates. A very clever game of cat-and-mouse ensues. The acting is truly outstanding in this film: Tone actually and triumphantly overcomes Laughton's masterful mannerisms in their scenes together. The viewer is treated to a majestic Paris while we slowly engage in the thrilling story and the superb chase on the Eiffel Tower is uniquely exciting. Burgess Merideth (!) was the director, and he did an admirable job. The music score by Michel Michelet is exeptional. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

60'S HOLLYWOOD VERSION OF LANCELOT-GUENEVERE-ARTHUR
Cornel wilde was sort of the bridge wetween Errol Flynn and Kevin Costner. He started out in swashbuckling adventures, then tried his hand directing epic movies, attempting to re-interpret each genre he tackles. Here he tackles the Arthurian romance/medieval epic with a focus on the suffering of passionate love against loyalty and duty.

One can say that a parallel of passions is played out here. Both Guenevere and Mordred want something they can't have, and Lancelot's duty to King Arthur is to deny them both. These two desires wind up working for each other, though in Mordred's case it's deliberate, Gwen's passion makes her not realize the danger she is putting the kingdom in.

Hollywood movies had gotten a little less stiff in how they portrayed romance and love scenes by this time, and Wilde takes advantage of it, giving the romantic leads a little bit more steam than they had in "Knights of the Round Table." It doesn't make the romance much more convincing, however. The trouble with many Arthurian movies is the unconvincing set up for the love between Lancelot and Guenevere ("Camelot" is a significant exception to this). The slightly stilted writing and silly French accent that Wilde puts on doesn't help.

There is plenty of sword-swinging action scenes. There's a joust, two battles, a fight through the castle, and a rescue. There is some innovation in the fight scenes; heads and body parts are cleaved, rather than sanitary thrusts to the armpit. Unfortunately, there is a degree of stiffness to the fighting and battles (unlike the love scenes) that detract from the drama. In the joust Lancelot sits on his horse, standing still, and recieves a lance with nary a quiver. Perhaps the pan-and-scan ("full-frame") presentation is at fault in some bits. In several battle scenes the figure in the center is the guy standing around like he doesn't know what to do. It also seems that some of the weapons, axes and maces, are too big for the one-handed use they are given.

The production design follows 11th-12th century styles of costume, armor, and architecture (mostly). This would match the period in which was written Geoffrey of Monmouth's "History of the Kings of Britain," the foundation of much of the Arthurian legend (ironically, Lancelot is not in that version). Unfortunately there is some stiffness here also. Certain pieces of costume and armor look clumsy and awkward, and of course the chain mail is all Hollywood fake stuff.

This film does have more appeal to fans of the genre than the average movie viewer. It is interesting as a transitional piece between "Knights of the Round Table" and "First Knight" ("Excalibur" is in a different league).

A bit of trivia: In one scene, Gwen talks about a bowman named Diccon. Diccon bowman was a charater in Henry Pyle's "Men of Iron," made into the movie called "Black Shield of Fallworth."

Neither Flynn nor Havilland
Mr and Mrs Wilde (Jean Wallace) suffer a lot, but all their suffering does not touch the heart. Mr Wilde is perhaps too old for this part and uses terrible intonations. Brian Ahearne as a King is very good. Fights are good with a lot of fighters. I recommend Flynn and Taylor epics instead of this. It is not bad, but something is lacking. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Very good movie....EXTREAMLY poor transfer. BEWARE
With this being a very difficult movie to get a hold of, I was thrilled it was getting a DVD release. Now I know why the price tag is so low on it.

I have seen better transfers of films from UHF TV stations in the middle of the night. It is grainy beyond belief, with a scratchy distorted soundtrack, and has so many splices in parts it makes it laughable. (remember those BBC 'Benny Hill' sketches with "Cheapo Films" when the splices in the film distorted the scene you were viewing ? This is what we are talking about here, folks....) Making matters worse, the colors are so badly faded it resembles a black & white film. Night sequences turn blue, skin tones turn yellow, whites turn light tan/bone....you get the point.

GOTHAM DISTRIBUTION should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing a product this poor to be released to the general public. I realize they think a $7-8 price tag is reasonable enough...I, personally, wouldn't pay more than 99 cents. Its barely worth that alone. I will never purchase anything by GOTHAM Distribution again. What a joke !

This gem of a movie deserves better fate.

An uneven crime thriller
Burgess Meredith, of all people, directed this oddball thriller, which features Franchot Tone as an ice-cool (but quite deranged) criminal mastermind who secretly yearns to be caught, and taunts a Parisian detective, Inspector Maigret (Charles Laughton) into hounding him. The moodiness of the film's beginning is undercut by the implausibility and uneven direction of the cat-and-mouse machinations of the second half; Laughton's character loses steam and while Tone delivers some choice moments eye-bulging insanity, it's had to make heads or tails out of his overly-explicit taunts of Maigret's faltering investigation. Sort of a lesser version of "The Third Man," with a resplendid mid-century Paris in place of a war-torn Vienna. Nice look at the inner workings of the Eiffel Tower as well... An interesting early adaptation of mystery novelist George Simenon's Maigret character, but ultimately a fairly shaky film.

A FINE FILM NOIR.
Simenon's seminal sleuth, Maigret, was never better enacted than by the shrewd, slow and sure Charles Laughton who is after a thrill-killer-for-hire Franchot Tone. Tone's portrait of a psychopathic murderer, who enjoys killing because it feeds his warped ego is fascinating. When the nephew of a rich woman hires Tone to kill his aunt and Laughton investigates. A very clever game of cat-and-mouse ensues. The acting is truly outstanding in this film: Tone actually and triumphantly overcomes Laughton's masterful mannerisms in their scenes together. The viewer is treated to a majestic Paris while we slowly engage in the thrilling story and the superb chase on the Eiffel Tower is uniquely exciting. Burgess Merideth (!) was the director, and he did an admirable job. The music score by Michel Michelet is exeptional. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

60'S HOLLYWOOD VERSION OF LANCELOT-GUENEVERE-ARTHUR
Cornel wilde was sort of the bridge wetween Errol Flynn and Kevin Costner. He started out in swashbuckling adventures, then tried his hand directing epic movies, attempting to re-interpret each genre he tackles. Here he tackles the Arthurian romance/medieval epic with a focus on the suffering of passionate love against loyalty and duty.

One can say that a parallel of passions is played out here. Both Guenevere and Mordred want something they can't have, and Lancelot's duty to King Arthur is to deny them both. These two desires wind up working for each other, though in Mordred's case it's deliberate, Gwen's passion makes her not realize the danger she is putting the kingdom in.

Hollywood movies had gotten a little less stiff in how they portrayed romance and love scenes by this time, and Wilde takes advantage of it, giving the romantic leads a little bit more steam than they had in "Knights of the Round Table." It doesn't make the romance much more convincing, however. The trouble with many Arthurian movies is the unconvincing set up for the love between Lancelot and Guenevere ("Camelot" is a significant exception to this). The slightly stilted writing and silly French accent that Wilde puts on doesn't help.

There is plenty of sword-swinging action scenes. There's a joust, two battles, a fight through the castle, and a rescue. There is some innovation in the fight scenes; heads and body parts are cleaved, rather than sanitary thrusts to the armpit. Unfortunately, there is a degree of stiffness to the fighting and battles (unlike the love scenes) that detract from the drama. In the joust Lancelot sits on his horse, standing still, and recieves a lance with nary a quiver. Perhaps the pan-and-scan ("full-frame") presentation is at fault in some bits. In several battle scenes the figure in the center is the guy standing around like he doesn't know what to do. It also seems that some of the weapons, axes and maces, are too big for the one-handed use they are given.

The production design follows 11th-12th century styles of costume, armor, and architecture (mostly). This would match the period in which was written Geoffrey of Monmouth's "History of the Kings of Britain," the foundation of much of the Arthurian legend (ironically, Lancelot is not in that version). Unfortunately there is some stiffness here also. Certain pieces of costume and armor look clumsy and awkward, and of course the chain mail is all Hollywood fake stuff.

This film does have more appeal to fans of the genre than the average movie viewer. It is interesting as a transitional piece between "Knights of the Round Table" and "First Knight" ("Excalibur" is in a different league).

A bit of trivia: In one scene, Gwen talks about a bowman named Diccon. Diccon bowman was a charater in Henry Pyle's "Men of Iron," made into the movie called "Black Shield of Fallworth."

Neither Flynn nor Havilland
Mr and Mrs Wilde (Jean Wallace) suffer a lot, but all their suffering does not touch the heart. Mr Wilde is perhaps too old for this part and uses terrible intonations. Brian Ahearne as a King is very good. Fights are good with a lot of fighters. I recommend Flynn and Taylor epics instead of this. It is not bad, but something is lacking. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

the book is better than the movie, but worth watching
When originally released in Europe as Sangre Negra in 1950, Native Son - the film - was a long time coming for Wright. The author had fought for the intergrity of his original novel enough to take up playing Bigger Thomas himself. When released for American audiences as much as 30 minutes of film was left on the editing room floor. It would be interesting to know what was left out, but one can make an educated guess.

For those of you who have read the novel this may not seem odd, but the main parts left out of the film have to do with misegenation (Bigger kissing Ms Dalton) and Communism (the word isn't even mentioned!!). What is left is a dry husk of novel, but it leaves one to wonder what American audiences (or rather the censors) were ready to show in American theatres.

Several liberties were taken by the director (and Wright?) that may also prove interesting for further conversation. Bessie, Bigger's one-dimensional love interest, is killed in the movie also, but it comes to the reader/viewer in a the form of a flashback in the prison scene (Fate).

Also, there is an interesting dream sequence where Bessie comes to Bigger like a Judas figure and Bigger runs through the cotton fields of his dream to his waiting father (Wassup with the cotton field, Rich!?). Its refreshing to see his father appear in the dream sequence considering that its NOT in the book and Wright's father had left him at an early age.

Wright may have been an excellent though 'confused' writer, but he is NO actor!! I just imagined Bigger to be a little more thuggish than Wright could pull-off. But he should get an E for Effort: Loosing 50 pounds to play the role, fighting to get the film made in Europe since he had Communism affiliations During the Macarthy trials, and just being an all around 'Daemonic Genius.'

I'd recommend the film for its extra-literary qualities. If your teaching the novel, give your self a 90-minute break!!

But the Book is Better than the Film!!!

Amateurish, but of definite interest
Made on a shoestring in Europe, this filmization of Richard Wright's literary classic has little to recommend it in the way of production values, yet it is of definite interest due to the casting of Wright himself in the lead role of Bigger Thomas. Already middle-aged at the time, Wright is a good twenty years too old for the part and his skills as an actor fall dramatically short of his talents as a writer. Nonetheless, I can think of no other "serious" author who has appeared on-screen in a film version of one of his novels (Norman Mailer, of course, directed a movie based on his "Tough Guys Don't Dance"), and for that reason, this otherwise amateurish version of "Native Son" ranks as a curio. Admirers of the writer and his novel are not likely to be impressed by what they see here but, approached as a novelty, this film is worth a look. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

the book is better than the movie, but worth watching
When originally released in Europe as Sangre Negra in 1950, Native Son - the film - was a long time coming for Wright. The author had fought for the intergrity of his original novel enough to take up playing Bigger Thomas himself. When released for American audiences as much as 30 minutes of film was left on the editing room floor. It would be interesting to know what was left out, but one can make an educated guess.

For those of you who have read the novel this may not seem odd, but the main parts left out of the film have to do with misegenation (Bigger kissing Ms Dalton) and Communism (the word isn't even mentioned!!). What is left is a dry husk of novel, but it leaves one to wonder what American audiences (or rather the censors) were ready to show in American theatres.

Several liberties were taken by the director (and Wright?) that may also prove interesting for further conversation. Bessie, Bigger's one-dimensional love interest, is killed in the movie also, but it comes to the reader/viewer in a the form of a flashback in the prison scene (Fate).

Also, there is an interesting dream sequence where Bessie comes to Bigger like a Judas figure and Bigger runs through the cotton fields of his dream to his waiting father (Wassup with the cotton field, Rich!?). Its refreshing to see his father appear in the dream sequence considering that its NOT in the book and Wright's father had left him at an early age.

Wright may have been an excellent though 'confused' writer, but he is NO actor!! I just imagined Bigger to be a little more thuggish than Wright could pull-off. But he should get an E for Effort: Loosing 50 pounds to play the role, fighting to get the film made in Europe since he had Communism affiliations During the Macarthy trials, and just being an all around 'Daemonic Genius.'

I'd recommend the film for its extra-literary qualities. If your teaching the novel, give your self a 90-minute break!!

But the Book is Better than the Film!!!

Amateurish, but of definite interest
Made on a shoestring in Europe, this filmization of Richard Wright's literary classic has little to recommend it in the way of production values, yet it is of definite interest due to the casting of Wright himself in the lead role of Bigger Thomas. Already middle-aged at the time, Wright is a good twenty years too old for the part and his skills as an actor fall dramatically short of his talents as a writer. Nonetheless, I can think of no other "serious" author who has appeared on-screen in a film version of one of his novels (Norman Mailer, of course, directed a movie based on his "Tough Guys Don't Dance"), and for that reason, this otherwise amateurish version of "Native Son" ranks as a curio. Admirers of the writer and his novel are not likely to be impressed by what they see here but, approached as a novelty, this film is worth a look. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Very good movie....EXTREAMLY poor transfer. BEWARE
With this being a very difficult movie to get a hold of, I was thrilled it was getting a DVD release. Now I know why the price tag is so low on it.

I have seen better transfers of films from UHF TV stations in the middle of the night. It is grainy beyond belief, with a scratchy distorted soundtrack, and has so many splices in parts it makes it laughable. (remember those BBC 'Benny Hill' sketches with "Cheapo Films" when the splices in the film distorted the scene you were viewing ? This is what we are talking about here, folks....) Making matters worse, the colors are so badly faded it resembles a black & white film. Night sequences turn blue, skin tones turn yellow, whites turn light tan/bone....you get the point.

GOTHAM DISTRIBUTION should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing a product this poor to be released to the general public. I realize they think a $7-8 price tag is reasonable enough...I, personally, wouldn't pay more than 99 cents. Its barely worth that alone. I will never purchase anything by GOTHAM Distribution again. What a joke !

This gem of a movie deserves better fate.

An uneven crime thriller
Burgess Meredith, of all people, directed this oddball thriller, which features Franchot Tone as an ice-cool (but quite deranged) criminal mastermind who secretly yearns to be caught, and taunts a Parisian detective, Inspector Maigret (Charles Laughton) into hounding him. The moodiness of the film's beginning is undercut by the implausibility and uneven direction of the cat-and-mouse machinations of the second half; Laughton's character loses steam and while Tone delivers some choice moments eye-bulging insanity, it's had to make heads or tails out of his overly-explicit taunts of Maigret's faltering investigation. Sort of a lesser version of "The Third Man," with a resplendid mid-century Paris in place of a war-torn Vienna. Nice look at the inner workings of the Eiffel Tower as well... An interesting early adaptation of mystery novelist George Simenon's Maigret character, but ultimately a fairly shaky film.

A FINE FILM NOIR.
Simenon's seminal sleuth, Maigret, was never better enacted than by the shrewd, slow and sure Charles Laughton who is after a thrill-killer-for-hire Franchot Tone. Tone's portrait of a psychopathic murderer, who enjoys killing because it feeds his warped ego is fascinating. When the nephew of a rich woman hires Tone to kill his aunt and Laughton investigates. A very clever game of cat-and-mouse ensues. The acting is truly outstanding in this film: Tone actually and triumphantly overcomes Laughton's masterful mannerisms in their scenes together. The viewer is treated to a majestic Paris while we slowly engage in the thrilling story and the superb chase on the Eiffel Tower is uniquely exciting. Burgess Merideth (!) was the director, and he did an admirable job. The music score by Michel Michelet is exeptional. ... Read more