Back to the Wall (a.k.a. Le Dos au Mur; 1958)

Directed by Édouard Molinaro; produce by François Chavane and Alain Poiré

Jacques Decrey (Gérard Oury), a wealthy industrialist, has been married for eight years to Gloria (Jeanne Moreau), but has recently discovered that she is having an affair with a penniless actor, Yves Normand (Philippe Nicaud). Riven by misery at this betrayal, Decrey decides to make the two pay for their transgressions, and creates an elaborate scheme to ruin them.

A well-plotted and acted movie, Back to the Wall is also well-paced, at least until the last fifth, which seems not to be ill-fitting as much as unnecessary. Nonetheless, it does not ruin the film. The story is a good one. As is usual with tales which involve a character’s intricate plot, that plot does not run entirely smoothly, failing to take into account the ultimately unpredictable nature of people. Interestingly, this does not create complications along the way, but a result different than what Decrey intended, and the audience expects. The story is adapted from a novel by the prolific and best-selling French author, Frédéric Dard.

The acting is very good. Oury may be under-rated in his role. Though he himself became a distinguished actor and director, Moreau was, at this time, and after, the bigger star. Both give excellent performances here, but Oury’s, in particular, must be interpreted by his actions and his voice-over narration. His character remains stolid and largely - at least on the surface - unmoved by events. He must be, in order to conceal his knowledge of his wife’s infidelity, and his plans.

The minor characters are interesting. Claire Maurier plays a café owner with ulterior motives for intervening in the plot, while Nicaud’s character’s dedication to his affair seems less than his enthusiasm for acting. Jean Lefebvre has a slightly comic part as a private investigator, though his character, too, adds something to the movie.

The direction must be commended, as well. This was Molinaro’s first feature, though one wouldn’t know it. It is filmed in black-and-white, with plenty of shadows, which reflect the hidden nature of all that is going on: Decrey’s plot, his wife’s affair, other characters’ duplicity, as well as the camouflage of the Decrey’s married life. The opening sequence is especially good, as we see Decrey set out from his home one night; the sequence ends with him disposing of a man’s body. That in itself is, in a way, a trick of the light, as what happened and how Decrey arrived at that point are not as they appear at first.

A somber, though entertaining, examination of jealousy and revenge, with more than one twist thrown in, Back to the Wall will satisfy crime-movie fans, and those who value a good story in their films. And yes, the title is a double entendre.

Godzilla (2014)

Directed by Gareth Edwards; produced by Thomas Tull, Jon Jashni, Mary Parent, Brian Rogers

Mining in the Philippine Islands releases a giant yet unseen creature, which heads toward the nearest nuclear facility and demolishes it. Fifteen years later, the monster, having fed on the radiation it had unleashed, breaks free of its cocoon. It seems unstoppable, and mankind may have to depend upon the creature’s ancient enemy, an equally powerful being, to destroy it before it breeds and overwhelms the world.

The Godzilla series spans about thirty movies, all of them Japanese until an Americanized version was attempted in 1999. Though the Japanese films varied widely in quality, the 1999 version stripped away much of what made Godzilla an interesting character. She - and in that version he was a she - was not even featured in the climax.

This time, Hollywood gets it right. Part of the success is due to going back, at least in a form, to Godzilla’s roots. In the first movie, from 1954, he was the embodiment of the menace and fear of the nuclear age; born of radiation, he even had atomic breath, like a dragon’s fire. His destructiveness, indiscriminate killing and seeming invincibility were traits of the new weapon, of which Japan, and Japan alone, had had a full taste.

The 2014 version changes the creature’s origins. He is, in this story, a primordial being, evolved in the days when Earth’s radiation levels were much higher (that was, in fact, billions of years ago) and content to live deep under ground or sea, alone and untroubled. His species’ enemy, however, dubbed by humans MUTO (‘massive unidentified terrestrial organism’) is awakened; Godzilla, alerted to this, goes on the hunt.

The nuclear menace is not ignored. Radiation - in the form at hand in nuclear weapons - is still a threat to mankind, because the MUTO feeds on it, and each attempt by man to use nuclear weapons to destroy the monsters just makes them stronger. And a hydrogen bomb, armed and ready, is at one point poised to destroy a city. Like the original film, nuclear weapons just make things worse. Godzilla becomes the champion not of man, but of nature. One character urges the military to put away its arrogance, and let the monsters fight, knowing that that will be nature’s way of restoring balance.

The writing is good in other ways. Though some reviews have stated that there is not enough of the monster, Godzilla wisely creates three-dimensional characters: Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston), a nuclear engineer obsessed with what turns out to be a MUTO, his son, Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a U.S. Navy officer caught up in events, and Ishirō Serizawa (Ken Watanabe), leader of Monarch, an international organisation studying Godzilla. Greater emphasis on the monsters would have allowed for more special effects, but would have dragged the movie into tedium.

It should be pointed out that Godzilla is given a character to an extent, as well. He is not the jokey hero of mankind that he became in the later Japanese movies, nor the enraged killer bent on annihilating everything in his path from the 1954 original. Neither good nor bad, he is a force of nature; humans seem not to be of account to him, their ships and automobiles strange little animals and his buildings just part of the landscape. There is an intriguing moment when he appears actually to see a human being, and the two look to share a moment of weary sympathy. That is the extent of his concern with humanity.

The director makes the interesting, and correct, decision not to show Godzilla immediately. Though well-known to audiences, to suggest such a thing would have been to wink at the movie, and to include the real world beyond it. Instead, we catch glimpses of the monster: his trademark dorsal scales; his silhouette in the ocean; even when he at last confronts the MUTO, we are given quick views of their battles - through closing doors, on a tv set - until their climactic encounter. This builds suspense for the final showdown, and is greatly in the movie’s favour.

An entertaining and involving film, Godzilla doesn’t suffer from too little of the monsters. With three or four big action scenes, there’s plenty of excitement and, since the players and the director treat the subject seriously, the movie becomes an exciting story that adults and older children can enjoy.

The Clay Pigeon (1949)

Directed by Richard Fleischer; produced by Herman Schlom

Jim Fletcher (Bill Williams) wakes in a hospital to find that he’s about to stand trial for betraying his comrades in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp, an action resulting in the death of his friend. He can’t remember what had happened, so he flees the hospital and sets out to discover the truth. With the reluctant help of his late friend’s wife (Barbara Hale), who believes him to be a traitor, Fletcher has to outrun the authorities and some mysterious killers to clear his name.

What starts out as a promising film noir - albeit with a premise that was probably well-used even by 1949 - loses its potential as it goes. This is surprising, considering the writing and directing talent involved.

The screenplay is by Carl Foreman, who also wrote High Noon and The Guns of Navarone, and adapted 1950’s Cyrano de Bergerac. The dialogue in The Clay Pigeon is nothing outstanding, but what is disappointing is the story-line. If you can’t guess the villain within seconds of seeing him, you’ve probably never seen another film noir - or crime movie. I kept waiting for the villain’s personal motive to be made clear, or even implied, but this was never forthcoming.

The over-all plan behind the frame put around Fletcher is simplistic, and explained in about a minute and a half in the movie’s dénouement. This was a story that called for a more complicated plot, yet seemed rushed, as if Foreman were apathetic about it, and wanted to get on to other things. The Clay Pigeon was early in his career, it’s true, but it certainly is not like anything that came after. As well, the transition of Hale’s character from suspicious and hateful to sympathetic is too easy and rapid.

Richard Fleischer too is known for some good work, such as 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Tora! Tora! Tora! and Soylent Green. He is, perhaps, not considered in the top tier of directors but nonetheless has done better than this. Though The Clay Pigeon was early work for him, as it was for Foreman, he had an atmospheric and equally low budget movie in the same year - Follow Me Quietly - which, though flawed, was more entertaining.

The acting here is good but not exceptional. Williams might come across as benevolent and innocent with his baby-face, but he is able to give a semi-tough guy portrayal. Hale, unfortunately, is not effective as a leading lady, and is better in supporting roles. The two leads were married at the time of this movie, and remained married until Williams’s death. Their son is actor William Katt.

Predictability, lack of imagination and simplistic plotting ruin what might have been a decent crime film, and what could have been saved in The Clay Pigeon is thrown away by lacklustre direction and writing.