Movies I hate to love : Man with a Gun (1995)

Man With a Gun. Image and October Films presents an Avi Lerner, Danny Dimbort, Trevor Short Northwoods Pictures. Released as a feature film in 1995. Based on the novel The Shroud Society by Hugh C. Rae. David Wyles, director; George Blondheim, music; Laurie Finstad-Knizhnik; Jan Kiesser, director of photography. With: Michael Madsen, Jennifer Tilly, Gary Busey, Robert Loggia, Ian Tracey.

Pros: score, acting, settings, action scenes 

Cons: murky script, murkier look

Neo-noir gone awry

Man with a Gun is an offbeat thriller about a hit man hired by a shady real estate developer who moonlights as a mob boss wannabe. The job is to do in the mobster’s blackmailing wife. The twist is the mark just happens to be the assassin’s girlfriend. Also, said girlfriend has a twin sister. As we might expect, things get complicated along the way.

I can’t quite decide whether MWAG is a neglected minor masterpiece or just a glossed up, schlocky noir parody. Not so surprising then that most of the opinions I’ve read have been mixed to the point of polarized. The movie reminded me of Mulholland Falls, made at much the same time and a more polished film, but similarly criticized for being too much surface but not enough substance. MWAG also has overtones of the much more recent tough guy film Parker, also reviewed in these pages. 

Actually the cast is rather good: Madsen seems a natural for the role of the proverbial hit man with a conscience. And he does the hardboiled voice-over very effectively, in wearier-than-world-weary manner. Loggia is silken smooth as the aging don and Meg is convincing as extreme opposite good/bad sisters.

But the cast may be most noteworthy for Ian Tracy as a mob strongman. Tracey later went on to a huge career in Canada. The writer knows him mostly through the Canadian TV movies Da Vinci’s Inquest and Intelligence.

Canadian-made and notable for its novel Pacific Northwest locales, MWAG was apparently filmed in Vancouver, BC, but the visuals seem to suggest the story takes place in Seattle or Tacoma. As mentioned the film is a neo-noir, with heavy emphasis on the noirish look: Man with a Gun has a murky, smoky patina that makes most classic noirs seem like a Kansas cornfield at noon in July. Recommended, more or less.

style ***
substance **1/2

Drácula es para siempre

Editor’s note: this post is a revised and updated version of a blog post that originally appeared in 2010.

Drácula (1931). 104 min. Filmed at night on the same sets as the original Universal Dracula with Bela Lugosi. Director[s]: George Melford; Enrique Tovar Ávalos [uncredited]. Cinematography: George Robinson. With Carlos Villarías (Conde Drácula), Lupita Tovar (Eva), Barry Norton (Juan Harker), Pablo Álvarez Rubio (Renfield), Eduardo Arozamena (Van Helsing), Carmen Guerrero (Lucía Weston).

style ***1/2

substance ***

Yes, it is better (more or less)

Draculophiles are divided as to which of Universal's early Thirties vampire essays is the superior. Is it the familiar English-language classic, directed by Tod Browning, or its shadow/mirror image, the Spanish-language challenger directed by Melford/Ávalos? The latter film has developed quite a following and is no longer the novelty it once was: it’s very much available via DVD and much discussed both in scholarly and popular sources [1]. Moreover, there's even the occasional theatrical screening.

In the title role of Conde Drácula, the much maligned Carlos Villarías makes a game try, and no, he’s not Bela Lugosi (who is in this role?). But with his tall, aristocratic carriage and rather sinister features he looks the part, and - contrary to the prevailing view - at least in this writer's opinion actually does a pretty good job in the role. Villarías’s hopped up, campy performance actually improves, so to speak, with repeated viewings and fits in with the somewhat overwrought atmosphere of the film. Partisans of the original counter that Lugosi’s definitive performance is the sine qua non which overrides all other considerations, a not altogether illogical argument.

As for the supporting roles, the jury is still out. Much has been made of the women’s sexier wardrobe in the Spanish version, and no doubt the women are more provocatively attired. But their acting is also far more expressive, matching perfectly the film’s sensual, hothouse gestalt. Likewise, there’s a case for Pablo Álvarez Rubio’s hysterically intense Renfield being a match for, or possibly eclipsing, Dwight Frye’s famous turn in the role. Along the way there are a few inevitable clinkers, in casting and otherwise: the mental asylum attendant’s comic relief never really works, and nurses who wear high heels is quite the reach, even for a horror film.

It's also debatable whether the latter's greater length, by nearly one half hour, is a plus or minus. But as for style and general atmosphere it’s pretty much no contest. The English language version creaks along, looking more and more an antique as the years recede. The more fluid Spanish entry, by contrast, seems relatively modern, not only for its stylistic felicities but also its languishing, pre-Code eroticism. As the first sexy vampire film, Drácula anticipates by decades the current popularity of sexed-up vampire fiction and various other forms of paranormal erotic fiction such as werewolf, succubus, et al [2].

Desire never dies

Moreover, in its conflating of sex and vampirism, Drácula paved the way for the next two entries in the Universal vampire series which portrayed the undead in, relatively speaking, more sympathetic terms while managing to sneak in a good bit of sensuality and psychoanalysis. With Dracula’s Daughter (1936) and its homoerotic overtones, our heroine seeks release from her vampiric urges, which she refers to as an obsession. It’s tempting to view said urges as code for her ‘unnatural’ desires which are the true source of her angst [3]. Thus the title character in Daughter is both cinema’s first lesbian vampire as well as and the first neurotic vampire, and her mental state actually looks back to Eva’s conflicted feelings in Drácula.

Louise Allbritton in Son of Dracula

The next entry, Son of Dracula (1943), gives us a similarly offbeat - albeit different kind - of love story, complete with another sexy vampiress, this one with a kinky fascination for the other world and immortality. Likewise Drácula may be seen as the prototype for the more explicit Hammer lesbian vampire films of the Sixties and Seventies. Its prescience might even be seen extending as far as films like The Hunger (1983).

But, as the man said, I digress. While there's much to savor in both early Thirties Dracula's [4], for me, and for now, Viva El Drácula!  

[1] For one scholarly approach, see Robert Harland’s masterly "Quiero chpar tu sangre: a comparison of the Spanish-and English-language versions of Universal Studios' Dracula,"   Journal of Dracula Studies, v9 (2007), pp. 29-38.
[2] With its creative use of shadows and lighting effects, Drácula also may well be the first vampire noir, a trend that was followed up in subsequent vampire films like Dracula's Daughter, Mark of the Vampire, and Son of Dracula.
[3] Commentators have focused on the notorious scene in which the Countess Zaleska seduces the young model. However, an arguably more overt lesbian context occurs later in the film at Castle Dracula, where the sinister Countess has whisked away Dr. Garth’s Gal Friday Janet. In this brilliantly edited sequence, the Countess longingly and gradually bends over the helpless girl, coming ever closer as she’s about to put the (vampiric or otherwise) moves on her. Will the good doctor intervene in just the nick of time?
    Similarly, Dracula's Daughter can also been seen as the first vampire film which more or less equates vampirism with drug addiction.
[4] Right or wrong, with subsequent viewings I further appreciate how good the Spanish Drácula is and regard it as the true first Dracula film. Consequently the English-language version, for all its creepiness, seems more and more a curiosity, a filmed play, if you will, redeemed only in part by Lugosi’s matchless take on the role.

Gloria Holden in
Dracula's Daughter (1936 )

Movies I hate to love : House of Dracula (1945)

    It’s no secret that House of Dracula is a silly film which recycles tired, very tired, material. And yet – there’s something irresistible about its campy mix of goofiness and ponderousness. It’s difficult to put a finger on it but for me it’s the combination of good production values, in some cases quite good, combined with a terrible, ultra-contrived story and resultant muddled script. It’s a jangly combination to say the least. Yet despite, or perhaps because of this unwieldy witches brew, HoD has over the years garnered a mild cult following.

    Despite the title it’s really more a Wolfman story than a Dracula story. I recall that the original title was The Wolfman’s Cure. With HoD the Wolfman saga now comes full circle from the original scientific slant of the proto-Wolfman Werewolf of London a decade prior. But the performance of the torpid Lon Chaney, Jr., does the Larry Talbot character no favors. In his entrance he looks more like a mafioso garbed in black suit and white tie and sporting dyed black hair and mustache.

    The other nominal leads inhabit their roles competently if in rather somnambulist fashion. An exception in the proceedings is John Carradine’s svelte, oily voiced Count, probably the best Dracula of the post-Bela Lugosi and pre-Chrostopher Lee era (then again there weren’t many others in them years). But for me the best acting is done by Lionel Atwill in one more turn as Universal's resident police chief, and the fetching Jane Addams as the most beautiful – and most sympathetic – hunchback in cinema history. 

    But the real strength of HoD is its noirish look and creepy set design [1]. Nary a shadow, staircase or off-kilter angle is missed and it all has a wonderfully murky, echt Germanic feel to it. Most of the scenes take place at night and there’s plenty of fodder for sinister camerawork, especially in the good/bad doctor’s mansion cum castle. Especially effective is the scene of the requisite mob of villagers chasing Dr Edelmann through the streets with plenty of chiaroscuro-esque angst that would do Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari proud. 

    Alas, the special effects are not one of the production triumphs, in particular the hokey electronics light and buzzing show that was so effective in films like Bride of Frankenstein. Here they are decidedly minor league. But I do have to give a nod to the nifty dream/hallucination sequence in which among other phantasmagoric images we see a cured, statuesque Nina walking proudly and wearing what appears to be a frilly wedding gown. The Frankenstein monster appears for only a few minutes and manages to stagger a bit and smash some lab equipment before perishing in the final de rigueur fire and collapsing building.

    

I'll play if you'll sing.

Deservingly, the most famous scene and probably the best in the entire film, is where Martha O’Driscoll plays the Moonlight Sonata while the hovering, infatuated Count more or less hypnotizes her into playing something far darker and more sinister [2]. Of course she doesn’t recognize the music and has never played it before. But a crucifix serendipitously intervenes and the Count slithers away. Whether this Dracula genuinely had the hots for her or she was merely the victim of convenience – or both – is left a little unclear, as are many of the details of the inter-relationships of the characters in HoD.

    [1] Film noir’s debt to the 1930s Universal horror film has yet to receive the scholarly treatment it merits.
    [2] The sequence recalls a similar scene in Dracula's Daughter (1936), only that time the vampire played the piano. It's also a nod to a sequence in The Uninvited of a year before in which composer Ray Milland plays "Stella by Starlight" at the piano and the music takes on a darker life of its own.

Revenge noir, neo style

Parker. Starring: Jason Statham, Jennifer Lopez, Michael Chiklis, Nick Nolte, Patti LuPone. Directed by: Taylor Hackford. Based on the character created by Donald Westlake. Running time: 118 minutes. Summary : an unscrupulous real estate agent (Lopez) assists uber-cool tough guy Statham on his revenge quest.

style ***1/2

substance ***

pros : Lopez, Statham, LuPone, direction

cons : familiar story; murky ending; a little long

I just saw the film Parker and enjoyed it very much: it's well acted and directed, with lots of style and atmosphere. There are great on-location scenes in Ohio and, later, Palm Beach, where the film really hits its stride. 

Jason Statham makes a perfect Parker. Indeed, the character might well have been written with him in mind. He’s smart, world weary, intense, stubbly-faced (of course), and always one step ahead of his rivals, well, most of the time. Basically he's the incarnation of the likable criminal. Parker also boasts a terrific supporting cast, especially Parker's future father-in-law Nick Nolte and the Jennifer Lopez character’s slightly ditzy but appealing mother (Patti LuPone). But the real standout is Jennifer Lopez; she not only looks great but does some terrific acting as well, showing a range of emotions which often imply much more than what’s said.

One can nitpick about this or that plot problem, but Michael Curtiz-like, director Taylor Hackford keeps things flowing so well, with the tension & story twists in the foreground, that we really don’t bother to ask too many questions. Thus the film breezes along in its deceptively leisurely 118 minutes. I did wonder why Statham ended up in a Covington, Kentucky, hospital when he and his partners in crime had just committed a robbery, presumably only a few minutes prior, in Columbus, Ohio. Whatever.

The only major credibility problem I had was how Statham could choose the anorexic blonde over a smoldering real woman like Jennifer Lopez, especially after he’s seen her undressed, to say nothing of Jennifer’s heroics in putting herself in harm’s way to help him out. Moreover, Statham and Lopez simply have a lot more on-screen chemistry than Statham and Emma Booth. BTW speaking of the Jennifer Lopez character it seems she could do a lot worse than the cop so obviously besmitten with her.

Parker isn't exactly profound or original, and, truth be told, has much the patina a well produced television program. But it's one bobsled ride of a movie, intelligent, well-crafted and worthy of more critical and popular respect than it's received. In sum, Parker is a terrific slice of neo-noir served up icy cool.

La Habana noir : Lady Without Passport (1950)

I just caught this little-known (to me anyway) quasi-noir on TCM a few days ago. It’s the story of a tough but charming INS agent (John Hodiak), who is sent to bust up an illegal immigration ring in Bautista-era Cuba. Along the way he meets and falls for a mysterious WWII refugee (Hedy Lamarr), at the same time crossing swords with ever sinister bad guy George Macready. 

Lady Without Passport is on balance a fun movie : a tasty combination of romance* and film noir, done in the semi-documentary style popular in movies of the late Forties and early Fifties. It has the customary MGM gloss which tends to tone down the noir grittiness, bringing to mind The Bribe by the same studio, which also starred John Hodiak in a similar role (in that film Ava Gardner was the femme fatale; lucky John!). But MGM never had that much success with noir; perhaps the studio was just too civilized to capture the genre’s existential angst. Here the picture has the requisite gloomy look and familiar character types, but lacks the sinister undercurrent and aforementioned existential uneasiness.

Anyway there’s still much to savor in LWP. While clearly not the zenith of either Miss Lamarr’s or John Hodiak’s career, the film nonetheless has a quirky charm that makes it eminently watchable as it anticipates, by a decade, Our Man in Havana, another amiable if not quite memorable film.

Miss Lamarr is beautiful as always, but this was late in her career and she has a worse for the wear look which actually serves the character rather well. Her slinky cigarette girl costume recalls her role in White Cargo as the über jungle temptress Tandelayo (poor John Hodiak didn’t have a chance). 

Hodiak is perhaps best-known as the edgy socialist who becomes Talulah Bankead’s romantic interest in Lifeboat. In the noir context he is probably best remembered for Somewhere in the Night. His dusky looks work to his advantage in Havana as he poses as a ... Hungarian. And though not a conventional good-looking leading man there’s plenty of chemistry between him and Hedy. And of course there’s Macready, in a role similar to the character he played in Gilda, as the head of the human smuggling ring. He makes a deliciously effete villain. 

But the real star of the film is the all too fleeting on-location atmosphere in pre-Fidel Cuba, in which Havana is presented as a kind of sleepy, benign playground. The result is that it all tends to whitewash the rampant corruption that was going on. Probably the best, and most noirish scene is the racy dance number performed by Nita Bieber in a smoky mambo club -- pretty spicy stuff for the 1950s. There’s also, toward the end of the film, the novel setting of the Florida Everglades where a real jungle, with its own lethal charms, stands in for familiar noirish urban jungle. Also deserving mention is David Raksin’s jazzy Latino score.

The film is both pro INS and relatively sympathetic to the plight of the undocumented alien, giving the story an uncanny timeliness in our current political climate.

Further reading : Ruth Barton, Hedy Lamarr : the most beautiful woman in film, University of Kentucky Press, 2010, pp. 177-179.

* Then again all noirs are, at their core, romances, however offbeat.