Skip to main content

Do you still take two lumps in your stinky? I mean, your coffee?

The Thin Man Goes Home
(1945)

The penultimate Thin Man movie arrived after a four-year gap spanning the majority of the US’ involvement in WWII. This time Nick (William Powell) and Nora (Myrna Loy) visit the former’s parents in Sycamore Springs. The small-town New England locale is the antithesis of Nick’s preferred fast-living big city comfort zone. The juxtaposition is irresistible, and much fun is had with the couple snooping around a backwater. Slightly awkwardly, since character development wasn’t of great importance previously, the theme of Nick just wanting to please his father is caught lurking on the verges of the plot. Fortunately the interplay between Powell and Loy atones for this; they are as strong as ever, and the picture pulls off some fine comic sequences. Less surefooted is the reveal of the murderer, which, despite some well-devised red herrings, feels like an afterthought. This person (or persons) doesn’t become any more likely a perpetrator (or perpetrators) once Nick has explained their motivation.


Robert Riskin and Dwight Taylor take screenplay credits (Harry Kurnitz, who contributed to Shadow of the Thin Man, gets a story nod). The former worked on a number of Frank Capra pictures (including It Happened One Night and Mr Deeds Goes to Town) while the latter was one of the many wordsmiths who pitched in on Astaire/Rogers musicals Top Hat and The Gay Divorce. While they’re good with the gags, they also stick perhaps a little too devotedly to the murder plot. Consequently, The Thin Man Goes Home lacks the sense of borderline anarchy, the feeling that the picture might go off on a complete tangent at any moment, which characterised earlier outings. Nick’s arrival is even acknowledged with a Scooby Doo welcome whereby he is expected to get straight to work solving an unspecified crime (“I dare say there’s plenty of evil in Sycamore Springs, and its your duty to ferret it out”).


The plot-first approach is emphasised by the set up. Nick is just visiting home on an off chance? Not really, but the extent to which he is visiting with intent is never made clear. He knows a whole lot about the relationship of the murder victim to one of the townsfolk, which suggests this is at least partly why he fetches up in Sycamore Springs (the murder is presumably not something he expected, but quite possibly the scheme that led to it is), but this in itself puts him on a different footing to the signature reluctant-but-not-really tipsy ‘tec who’d rather sit pretty with his wife’s fortune.


The involvement of Brogan (Edward Brophy, who played a different character in the original) is never fully clarified either; he’s presumably in Nick’s employ, but it isn’t revealed just why he is lurking in the bushes at the time the murder happens (aside from giving Nora reason to get the wrong end of the stick). In any other era we’d suspect he was up to something rather unwholesome, hiding in shrubbery and peering in through windows at night. Perhaps something was excised. The interconnecting relationships in the town are well mapped out (and explained), making the weakness of whodunnit an added disappointment. One can feel the emphasis on plot more consciously this time out, so when it comes up short the effect is more damaging. Some of the coincidences are on the clumsy side also (Nora just happening to buy a painting of vital importance to the plot, which admittedly leads to an amusing routine where Nick fails to acknowledge it as a present).


There is something approaching slavish devotion to the cute routines by this point too, even if part of the fun comes from the makers recognising this. Nick must lead Nora up the garden path so he can head off alone to do some real detecting, but in doing so she happens across vital information. Her account of Nick’s preferred method for revealing the murderer verges on the meta; asked why they have all been herded into a room she comments “For a very simple reason; this is the way he always works”. And then there’s her confidence in the likelihood of a gun going off (“That’s the way these things usually end up. It’s called the pay-off. I usually duck under the sofa when it starts”) and undisguised disappointment when everyone is frisked. This scene is more exacting exposition-wise than we’re used to, but this serves to make the comic punctuation points more memorable; a musket going off, Brogan arriving with a sniper rifle, mother coming in with an update (“Just keep doing what you’ve been doing. I’ll have the cocoa in a few minutes”).


So too, Police Chief MacGregor (Donald MacBride) is basically a reworked Lieutenant Abrams, protesting that he isn’t as dumb as everyone thinks while Nick runs rings around him. Like Abrams, he is granted a smattering of memorable lines. When Nora asks him to arrest Brogan she asks why it has to be for something definite. He deadpans “No, no. You just pick out anybody at all and I’ll put him in jail for life”.


Nick: Who’d like some cider?

Having Nick switch to cider seems like a betrayal almost as horrific as a 12 certificate Predator/Robocop/Die Hard/Alien. How can a character that is equal parts pickled have his calling card struck from under him? In truth, it doesn’t actually diminish his character (but more could have been made of this than the short-lived gag of everyone thinking he’s soused again when in fact he’s sober), and the notion that cider doesn’t really count as alcohol is amusing, but there is a feeling that Nick is being gradually defanged. It’s a good while since prohibition was repealed, and in the midst (well, towards the end stages) of WWII there was a feeling that perhaps temperance is in order as a reflection of then in force rationing. Surely the movie ought really to have been giving folks something to aspire to; like getting completely blotto?


The signs of war aren’t sledgehammered, though. The trains are packed like sardines (complete with a fat chap Nick refers to as Blockbuster). We see a few assorted servicemen, including the one who dances with Nora, and a souvenir Japanese sniper rifle. Even the bigger plot relates only to a non-specific foreign power, albeit the victim works at an aircraft factory. There’s little to announce, if one didn’t know, that this was wartime. Certainly not the way the Rathbone Sherlock Holmes pictures dwelt on the subject.


The flirtatious fun is a little more restrained than previously, although there are some memorable moments. There’s Brogan’s assumption that Mrs Charles is only pretending to be Mrs Charles and that Nick is up to his old dog’s tricks. Then we have Nora assuming, in a not really very jealous way, that Nick is smoothing his way with the ladies; finding Nick with Helena Draque (Helen Vinson) out cold on the floor she comments, “Well, you certainly got right down to business”. Unfortunately Laurabelle’s over-dramatic play for Nick fails to result in an encounter between the sleuth and her jealous boyfriend, so it’s the attentions Nora attracts that get more laughs; a crazy dance floor number where a visiting sailor doesn’t let her feet get anywhere near the ground (Powell must content himself with giving good double takes) and a trail of wolf whistles every time she walks through a bar. Less commendably, there’s a spanking scene in which Nick puts Nora across his knee. Even in jest, it’s rather uncomfortable to watch. Nora calling him a wife beater fails to alleviate matters, and then dad deals the deathblow when he admiringly comments, “I’ve wanted to do that to mother for 40 years”. More alarmingly still, MGM clearly thought this would be a selling point as the moment is captured in some of the film’s posters.


Talking of dad, Harry Davenport’s Bertram Charles isn’t sufficiently authoritarian to sell genuine disappointment in Nick. Aficionados of the book have made much of Nick’s absent Greek background, but I think the only real issue here is turning him into someone who only wants to make daddy proud. It’s a bit too cosy, as the Nick of the original really wouldn’t give two hoots. However, it’s endearing that Nora is itching for something terrible to happen so Nick can solve the case and impress pater (she also gives Nick some free press publicity; “Nick Charles is in town. Nick Charles is a detective. You can draw your own conclusions”).


Powell appears content to let Loy steal scenes all over the place, perhaps in part a reflection of her return to the big screen. If not for her detour into the Red Cross, this picture might have been made three years earlier. The scene in which she tells dad how Nick solved the Stinky Davis case is a comedy tour de force; both Nick and his father are left high-and-dry as stranded straight men while the rapt mother asks “Do you still take two lumps in your stinky? I mean, your coffee?


Elsewhere, perhaps to balance things out, the makers seem conscious of some of their past errors and return to the line up of the first two films. There’s no sign of Nick Jr who is consigned to school via a rather dismissive line to Mrs Charles (Lucile Watson, taking the role of the endearing parent who only sees good things in her son). It isn’t clear if his parents have visited Nick in the city before, but they don’t seem to treat Nora as if this is the first time they’ve met. And yet, as doting grandparents, you’d have thought it would be a huge snub not to bring the little urchin along. Perhaps the producers thought better of the inclusion of Nick Jr (if so, he surely wouldn’t have return for the final film in the series), although I’m the first to admit he very surprisingly didn’t damage the previous two pictures; a six or seven year old junior might be precocious to an unwelcome degree, though.


The supporting cast isn’t quite as merry as it has been but there are a few genuine oddballs and quirks. Brogan’s penchant for quoting Tennyson. Donald Meek as the overly literal gallery owner who can’t understand Nick’s colloquialisms. Then there’s screaming maid Hilda (Anita Sharp-Bolster) and Crazy Mary (Anne Revere) with her yen for bashing people on the back of the head. But we want a few hard-boiled types to add some bite to the proceedings. Threatening Nick’s dad with blocking his proposed hospital (he’s a doctor who wishes Nick had taken up the profession) doesn’t really do it. So when a couple of Nick’s dubious associates show up for the finale, and can’t get any hooch (“Cocoa? What a break!”) there’s a definite sense that Nick’s vacation ought to be coming to an end soon.


Asta has been refurbished, in that he’s a different Asta. The original pooch was retired and an energetic newcomer takes his place with a few interesting tricks up his furry sleeve. His encounters in the animal compartment of the train vary from amusingly cartoonish (the fake duck that pecks him) to the rather unnecessarily harsh (repeatedly being head-butted by a real goat). But as usual he provides invaluable aid in solving the mystery (finding the missing item, he is told “Astor, you’ll get an extra bone for this”). He drinks a good measure of Nick’s cider but the expected drunk doggy scene fails to materialise. Most impressively Asta launches onto a hotel’s hatcheck counter like he calls it home.


This a perfectly amiable Thin Man outing, coasting somewhat on the charm of its leads and as diluted as Nick’s liqueur. Richard Thorpe, who wasn’t much of a noir man, or any kind of style-maker, directs with a brighter, less fettered look than in earlier adventures, although its debatable if the change is to the ultimate benefit of its increasingly sober lead character.  Two years later, and thirteen years after the series had begun, the series would end with the (swan) Song of the Thin Man. Which at least goes to show that erratic and long running movie series are nothing new. Maintaining this kind of quality over such a period is a rarity, though.


***

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism