Skip to main content

Merry Christmas, you lug.

Lady in the Lake
(1946)

(SPOILERS) There’s a good reason this isn’t first in line for discussion of great Philip Marlowe adaptations. And it isn’t because Bogey isn’t in it (or Elliott Gould, come to that). Robert Montgomery doesn’t exactly look like a dishevelled PI – at least, on the occasions you can actually see him – but he gets the cadence right. No, the reason Lady in the Lake is largely left languishing in the icy depths is Montgomery’s leftfield creative choice as director: subjective camera.

Adrienne: Marlowe, where do you usually spend Christmas Eve?
Marlowe: In a bar. Where do you?

That’s right: Lady in the Lake is the ’40s’ Hardcore Henry. Time Out had this conceit right; it’s very difficult to make it work, and simply the idea of emulating a novel’s first-person narrative is far from like-for-like. Don Macpherson suggested “It really needed the magnificent panache of an Orson Welles, who had planned a ’40s version of Heart of Darkness… in the same subjective style”. Chandler didn’t like the result (“a cheap Hollywood trick”) and the way Montgomery approaches it, four-square, unfinessed camera, certainly makes it seem like expense was spared.

Marlowe: At least he had the decency to hit me above the Mason and Dixon Line.

The POV choice needs to advance the telling, or it’s entirely forfeit. In Cloverfield, it puts you in the melee, but with Lady in the Lake, it’s simply distracting, detracting from the murder mystery and replete with moments where you do see the detective (mirror shots or moments where we cut back to his in-person framing narration). There’s about one instance where the idea works, and that’s because it feels like a familiar POV choice; Marlowe comes round in a car wreck with a drunk leering over him (and, hilariously, the PI slugs him on the chin).

Marlowe: Mind if I go now, or do you want me to do card tricks too?

What it also does is make you wish someone would do a “proper” movie adaptation. Now, I wonder… Detective fiction. Acres of hardboiled dialogue, much of it quippy witty. Set at Christmas. Does Shane Black have anything going on since The Predator bombed out?

Marlowe: Is finding a corpse a crime?
Cop: In this town, yeah.

Marlowe gets put on a case by Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter), who lures him to Kingsby Publications on the pretence of publishing his short story. She wants him to locate the boss’s wife Chrystal, who left him a month prior, telling she wanted a divorce. Adrienne herself is something of a gold digger, her sights set on the millions of boss KIngsby (Leon Armes). Marlowe duly tracks down Chrystal’s lover (Richard Simmons), learns of a body pulled from a lake near a Kingsby property that may or may not have been murderised by Chrystal, encounters a gun-toting landlady (Jayne Meadows) and a corrupt cop (Lloyd Nolan). He gets roughed up several times too, of course, and reels off a slew of made-to-order smart remarks.

Adrienne: Tell me, Mr Marlowe do you always fall in love with all your clients.
Marlowe: Only the ones in skirts.

Most of the movie’s focus is on the dame, though. Totter, who bears a passing resemblance to Lindsay Lohan, more than holds her own as the seething gal Marlowe maligns (“Not bad in this light”: it’s dark). He also has his romantic intentions, though (as much as Marlowe gets romantic). Tellingly, Adrienne is absent from the novel; even if she weren’t, it’s inconceivable Chandler would have finished up with the two pitching tents together and bound for NYC.

Marlowe decides to write his story because “I was tired of being pushed around for nickels and dimes” (so not precisely the same line as Robert Mitchum’s “Tired of getting pushed around” in Out of the Past, and the cue for Two Men and a Drum Machine’s 1989 hit of the same name). There’s a problem here – besides the aesthetic one – that there’s too little sense of threat and generated suspense. There aren’t enough suspects. There isn’t enough atmosphere. There’s no tension.

And there isn’t enough festivity. The Christmas side could have been played up, undoubtedly; that pesky POV gets in the way of everything. There are amusing moments, however. The office Christmas party crashed by Marlowe, and the kid there who asks Adrienne for a kiss: “I’ve waited all year for that” he sighs soppily. “You’ve had your Christmas, son. Beat it. and tell your boss not to send a boy to do a man’s work” instructs Marlowe briskly. Elsewhere, he falls foul of the law (“Striking an officer, resisting arrest, and all on Christmas Eve”) and receives confessions of Yule yearnings (“I want to be your girl. That’s what I want for Christmas”).

Adrienne: Marlowe never sleeps until all’s well with the world.

This came out the same year as the definitive Chandler, of course: The Big Sleep. You know, the one that doesn’t entirely make sense. I don’t think that’s so much the problem with Lady in the Lake. Rather, you don’t really care whether or not it makes sense. A failed experiment from Montgomery – star of Hitchcock’s Mr. & Mrs. Smith and father of Bewitched’s Elizabeth – undoubtedly, and an insufficiently interesting one to make for a conversation piece.



Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

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.