Deep Valley (1947)

Directed by Jean Negulesco; produced by Henry Blanke

Libby Saul (Ida Lupino) is a shy young woman living with her parents in a dilapidated farmhouse on the coast of California. Her mother and father haven’t spoken to each other for years, and the former never leaves her room. Libby’s only friend is her dog. One day, she goes to view the construction of a highway near by; some of the men working on it are prisoners from San Quentin. During a landslide, one of the convicts, Barry Burnette (Dane Clark) escapes. Feeling an affinity for a person trapped in a life without a future, Libby assists Barry to get away, hoping to go with him and start afresh together.

With the inevitability of the story’s ending – at least within the confines of the 1940s production code – Deep Valley has to rely on other elements for its appeal, and it’s principally Lupino on which the movie leans. Lupino, from an historic English acting family, called herself ‘the poor man’s Bette Davis’. In fact, I think she was, if not more talented than Davis, rather more versatile. Here, she successfully passes herself off as a twenty year old girl (she was just about thirty) but, more than that, confidently portrays a woman who grows strong when given the possibility of a real future.

It’s in the performances that Deep Valley has its strengths. Henry Hull and Fay Bainter play Libby’s parents, and they do an excellent job of creating, initially, two people for whom most audiences wouldn’t have the time of day. Cliff Saul is a lazy, selfish man who does the minimum amount of manual labour necessary. Ellie Saul is a half-hearted hypochondriac whose main emotion is self-pity. Yet, when roused to fend for themselves, they change and become almost likeable, perhaps reverting to the young people they once were.

Clark gives a good depiction of a man who keeps trying to do what is right, but finds his violent nature a constantly destructive force. Wayne Morris is along as the usual decent fellow the heroine should have fallen in love with.

What hurts Deep Valley is the script. While the elder Sauls convincingly change for the better, it is due to the actors that we believe this. The script does not provide enough motive. Similarly, Clark’s feelings for Libby – and even hers for him – come across as superficial. Barry and Libby give the impression that they love what each represents to the other, rather than the person. This may very well be the intention of the story (though I doubt it) yet we aren’t shown this aspect. As a result, the audience doesn’t have an investment in the romance.

As well, there is no conflict for Libby between the dangerous criminal for whom she has fallen and the upright engineer who would be a wiser match. There really isn’t a purpose given to the latter character.

There is also the strange aspect of the setting. The story is placed, like the novel by Dan Totheroh, on the coast of northern California, near Big Sur, where genuine highway construction occurred in the 1930s. There are references to Monterey, and, as mentioned, San Quentin Prison. The farm, as may be seen in the opening credits, is on the very shore of the sea, surely neither a safe nor a productive location for a farm. Yet the film’s title, and the dialogue, refer to a valley, and to a mountain to which Lupino flees to be alone. A minor character calls the Sauls ‘hillbillies’. I kept thinking that the story would have had a bit more credibility if located in the Appalachian Mountains, or the New England woods. (Thew poster suggests Monument Valley, Arizona...)

Deep Valley, though benefitting from very good acting, ends by being a predictable, rather turgid drama.

Man Hunt (1941)

Directed by Fritz Lang; produced by Kenneth Macgowan (associate producer)

Big-game hunter Alan Thorndyke (Walter Pidgeon) has penetrated to within five hundred yards of Hitler’s Bavarian retreat and has the dictator in the sights of his precision rifle. He pulls the trigger on an empty chamber, then slips a live cartridge into the weapon. At that moment, he is discovered. After being tortured, he escapes, but even his return to England brings no safety, as German assassins dog his every step.

Man Hunt doesn’t preserve much beyond the general plot of Geoffrey Household’s 1939 novel Rogue Male, but it nonetheless creates an entertaining adventure, one that deals subtly with its characters in ways not always seen in light thrillers. It is, in fact, the people who make the movie, more than the plot.

Initially, there seems to be confusion as to Thorndyke’s motivation in ‘hunting’ Hitler, yet the reason for this is logical, for Thorndyke himself is confused or, perhaps, dishonest in his thinking. This contributes to the story later on. But there is also truth in the conversations that Thorndyke has with the German Air Force officer who later calls himself Quive-Smith (George Sanders).

Thorndyke’s personality is an interesting one for a hunter, as he is a hunter now only in spirit: he contends that he has become so good at hunting and shooting that to kill has become cruelty. His success is a ‘mathematical certainty’, and therefore his skills give the quarry no chance. Consequently, he has ceased killing and engages only in ‘sporting stalks’ - tracking his prey as if to kill it, but confining himself to the knowledge that such a kill can be achieved, without actually achieving it. Does this apply too to his ‘sporting stalk’ of the German dictator?

There is also the interesting character of Lord Risborough, Thorndyke’s influential older brother, a diplomatist who, it’s implied, was part of the negotiations that led the débâcle of the Munich Crisis. He is dismissed by Quive-Smith as superficial and idiotic. Indeed, the viewer may infer the same when he first meets Risborough. But when he and his sibling discuss the situation, we learn that the older gentleman knows very well what the Nazis are and how they work. As a diplomatist, however, he must present quite a different picture.

Something should be mentioned about Jerry Stokes (Joan Bennett), the Cockney girl who aids and falls for Thorndyke. She manages to convey a vulnerability along with a resourcefulness and forthright nature that is quite credible.

Naturally, all of these characters must be portrayed well enough to make the audience accept them as real, and the actors are up to the challenge. Pidgeon is very good in the lead role, and appears in an extended sequence with Roddy McDowall, with whom he worked in the same year’s How Green Was My Valley. (That’s McDowall’s sister, Virginia, in a tiny bit as the postmistress’s daughter.) And Sanders offers one of his best performances as the air force officer (obviously seconded to a security section) who relentlessly pursues Thorndyke. He makes Quive-Smith charming and almost likeable - as Sanders frequently does with his villains - but also believable. He is as committed to supporting evil as Thorndyke is to fighting it.

The script is less stellar but certainly well-devised. While Thorndyke and Jerry’s interaction is good, the number of times they take leave of each other becomes a bit tiresome. The ending, which is not the usual definitive finale that thrillers usually have, may be reflective of the uncertainty of war, in the midst of which this film was made.

Some disadvantages include the unconvincing Cockney accents on some bit players (Bennett’s is fine) and a few of the scenes set in the East End of London. The reconstruction of an underground station in very convincing, however.

Over all, though, Man Hunt is a superior action movie with more thought than average put into the characters. This, and the actors involved, make the film an enjoyable experience. 

 

Flaxy Martin (1949)

Directed by Richard Bare; produced by Saul Elkins

Walter Colby (Zachary Scott) is a mob lawyer who wants out of his job. His boss, Hap Richie (Douglas Kennedy), isn’t pleased about it; neither is Colby’s girlfriend, Flaxy (Virginia Mayo), who enjoys the money Colby makes, but is also two-timing him with Richie. Together, that pair set out to punish Colby by setting him up for murder. But Colby isn’t a successful gangland fixer for nothing: he’s smart, and now he’s angry, and when he escapes from custody, he has vengeance on his mind.

The preceding short synopsis of Flaxy Martin makes it sounds rather routine, and in some ways it is. Certainly for the first third of its running time, it is just marginally interesting. But in the second reel, things improve, and the film becomes an enjoyable revenge-tale with plenty happening.

Despite Mayo’s top billing, and her character’s name as the film’s title, the story really centres on Scott. He’s a very watchable actor, and teeming him with Dorothy Malone, as someone who takes a chance on helping Colby, creates good chemistry and propels the second half of the movie.

This is not to write Mayo off. She portrays her character very well, though the amoral femme fatale probably wasn’t a stretch for her by this time. (In the same year as Flaxy Martin, she portrayed James Cagney’s girlfriend in White Heat, and was in three other films.) Flaxy is the catalyst for events and, though there are hints that she has a conscience – somewhere very deep down – there is really nothing to prevent viewers from wanting her to get her just desserts. And a solid portrayal of the title personality is needed for the story.

The story itself is pretty good, after, as was mentioned, the first third. Events might cause the viewer to wonder how smart Colby is – at one point, he implicates himself in a murder to help Flaxy – but if he didn’t doubt his girl’s fidelity, there would be less reason to question his intelligence. Even so, Colby’s folly is a flaw.

The script in general is better than the dialogue, which is largely bland. The characters are well-drawn, though the fact that they are also not really well-defined does not work against the story. Malone’s Nora Carson is a bit of a mystery, wholesome and seemingly the stay-at-home type, yet going from job to job, place to place. Her past is deliberately kept shaded, and it works. Elisha Cook Jr, like Mayo, plays a character he was accustomed to playing, and, like Mayo’s, he makes the viewer want him to get his.

One of the disadvantages of Flaxy Martin is that it looks cheap. Despite the trio of leads and a couple of well-respected supporting players, the sets are generic and sparse, all of the exterior urban scenes being shot on a lot. As well, the direction is mediocre, and the use of music is awkward (eg. sentimental tunes while Flaxy is double-crossing someone is likely not meant to be ironic.)

All in all, however, Flaxy Martin is a good film noir; nothing to watch a second time, but entertaining, with a satisfying ending.

Undercurrent (1946)

Directed by Vincente Minelli; produced by Pandro S Berman

Living contentedly with her father (Edmund Gwenn), Ann Hamilton (Katherine Hepburn) is a young woman with few dreams, who believes she’s destined to be an old maid. Then she meets handsome and wealthy engineer Alan Garroway (Robert Taylor), who sweeps her off her feet and, after a swift courtship, whisks her away to live in Washington D.C. as his wife. Slowly, however, Ann realises that Alan harbours an obsessive rivalry with his long-vanished brother, Michael, and eventually learns that that obsession could destroy the happiness she has suddenly found.

Undercurrent starts off promisingly, and even continues well enough, but its progress is hampered by several factors, the most obvious of which is its resemblance to Rebecca (1940). That the missing brother is not seen - until well into the movie’s third reel - while he nonetheless has an effect on the major characters is so much like the Hitchcock film that this one could have been titled Michael. Like another film, The Second Woman (reviewed on this blog in January of this year), which was even more like Rebecca in its premise, Undercurrent does go its own way after a while, and in particular has a different resolution. Nonetheless, the plot is close enough to Rebecca’s to be distracting.

Another problem is the movie’s length - or, rather, the story’s length. At just short of two hours, Undercurrent is not an overly long film, but the story should not have gone on as it did. It does not suffer from unnecessary padding, but there are a couple of times when the viewer feels an ending should have occurred, but didn’t. The story’s events could have been more economically arranged without detriment to the script.

The acting is better than the story or script; it would be hard for it to be otherwise when the leading lady is Katherine Hepburn. She does a fine job of portraying a timid woman, one who looks to a man for decisions. This is a contrast to most of her roles, though she had one somewhat similar in The Rainmaker (1956), though in that case, the character’s maturity provided a fragile strength. While different, Hepburn carries it off, and indeed, it is necessary that she does so for the story-line. The change that Ann undergoes through the film is not one of character as much as realisation; she doesn’t really become stronger, but what she is forced to understand creates a slightly different person.

Taylor also does well, though, since his performance benefits from showier, more robust emotions, he may have had an easier time of it than Hepburn. In any case, the two leads work successfully together. Third billing goes to Robert Mitchum, who, like Hepburn, plays against type, a quiet, subdued performance that is effective.

The direction was a departure, too, for Vincente Minelli, who was previously behind the camera for a number of comedies and musicals. He does a good job creating tension, and if there is still vitality to the film after it starts running out of story, it is largely due to him.

Undercurrent is a good movie, but not a very good movie. It profits greatly from the three stars, and certainly is helped by the director, but the story is too familiar, and it continues long enough for the viewer to sort out the lies and rumours that fill the screenplay. Good efforts are damaged by a script that wasn’t intriguing or sharp enough for its length. (Jayne Meadows has a substantial part in this, her first movie; look for Barbara Billingsley as a party guest, and that’s Hank Worden delivering the telegram at the beginning.)

Man Up (2015)

Directed by Ben Palmer; produced by James Biddle, Emma Jouannet, Nira Park and Rachael Prior

Nancy (Lake Bell), a single 34 year old Londoner with a non-existent love life, is on her way to her parents’ fortieth wedding anniversary when she meets buoyantly optimistic Jessica (Ophelia Lovibond), who gives her a book on relationships. In an attempt to return it, Nancy meets Jack (Simon Pegg), who assumes she is his blind-date, Jessica: the book was his means of identifying her. Though she wants to correct the mistake, Nancy finds the things Jack does and says appealing; she takes a gamble and pretends to be Jessica, setting the stage for an adventurous night when everything wrong might just turn out right.

Though the set-up – and some of what follows – seems a romantic comedy cliché, Man Up rises above such limits, thanks to the writing and, in particular, the two stars. Pegg is probably better known for broader comedy, even farce, but here, he is in the sort of rôle that Hugh Grant made his own in the 1990s, though his style of delivery is faster. He is very effective and comfortable in the part.

Though Pegg has top billing, due to his longer and better known career, Bell is the one to watch. She makes Nancy both confident and anxious, too strong sometimes, too diffident at others, but always winning and fun. (Personally, it’s easy for me to like a woman who carries a picture of her cats in her wallet and declares that she wants people to ask about them.)

The casting of the two leads is perfect: they have instant and lasting chemistry throughout the movie. The audience believes that these two enjoy one another’s company and feel a tremendous affinity for each other. It must be stated as well that the film is aided by neither star being normal romance-movie material. Pegg is shortish and, despite being only 44 at the movie’s release date, his baby-face is surprisingly lined. Bell, for her part, is not conventionally beautiful, but is lively, funny and attractive. (A scene in which she emerges from a washroom, having composed herself after a hectic argument, is well-directed: Jack sees her suddenly in a new way, as does the audience.) Though both see potential, neither Nancy nor Jack is immediately attracted to the other: the mutual appeal grows gradually at first, exponentially later.

The writing matches the performances. As stated, some of the situations are stereotypical for the genre – even if the couple’s initial meeting was reportedly based on an incident in the writer’s real life (though she didn’t follow through with the mistaken identity) – but how the characters react is realistic and adult. Indeed, this is much more a mature comedy than many with alleged adult characters. These people have achieved a certain status in their lives – despite set-backs – and know what they want: they are just very wary of life. And unlike many comedies, Nancy and Jack change through the film, and not just in their relationships. (Though viewers should be warned that there is very adult-themed language throughout.)

There is cleverness in the screenplay, too, such as Nancy’s pretence of being a triathlete (which Jessica is). At one point, having to race to a destination, she runs, bikes and, in a manner of speaking, ‘swims’ there. And some contrivances, such as Jack’s ex-wife (Olivia Williams) showing up at the bar to which he takes Nancy, are not so incredible as we initially think, if we pay attention to what’s said.

Something that should not be under-estimated is the effect of the script incorporating a surprisingly large number of supportive and sympathetic characters. (This doesn’t include the repellent Sean (Rory Kinnear); he is, though, more a plot device than a character.) This aspect is rather refreshing, when modern movies, seem filled with dysfunctional and uncaring families and people.

Lastly, a word should be added about the direction, which keeps the 88 minute film moving quickly, even frantically at times. There are some fun touches, such as Nancy and Jack’s argument during a frenetic dance, their points and counter-points keeping time to their actions. And whoever decided to have the American Bell speak with an English accent did the movie a service. Not only is it very convincing (Bell has as many voice-acting parts to her credit as live-action parts), but having her character American would have injected an element that could not have been ignored yet would have proved a distraction to the plot.

While using the framework of a routine romantic comedy, Man Up is different than most, and becomes a romantic comedy for those who don’t like romantic comedies.