Change Your Image
tangmusi
Reviews
The Crooked Web (1955)
This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen
Yes, the cast is great. Yes the first ten minutes or so, up to and including the first twist, is a great movie.
But after that it goes so completely insane in a way that's super not fun or campy or bombastic. It somehow manages to be both boring, and implausible. The plot folds in over on itself. It's just very, very bad writing.
Right now, this has an average of a six. I just think that's way way too high. This deserves a four at best, and so I'm on here to try to push that to happen. I love noir, and I've now watched so many, to relive the high of first seeing the greats. I've seen so many bad ones. This is the worst one I've ever seen.
Chicago Confidential (1957)
Not shot in Chicago
Unlike with the City that Never Sleeps, I didn't recognize a single Chicago location, unless you count still photographs. I think this was made in LA, and I'm bummed because I watched it to see old footage of my city.
It's well acted, and well structured, but the story hinges on a plot point, and some pseudoscience, that are so loopy they would be camp, if it were not for how straight everyone plays it, like a police procedural. If you get a kick of how old science plays out in old movies, or dated, or incredibly fictional science, that might be fun for you.
Plus, the State's Attorney re-examines something on the flimsiest possible basis. We're all used to that, every time someone says they have a hunch in movies, sure. But this is more like "someone who is biased yelled at me," and "leave no stone unturned to the point of being ridiculous."
So, this is a well acted, well structured movie that hinges on a couple of incredibly goofy plot points.
However, it's a blast to see Jack Lambert in this. I always think of him as the Lee Marvin who never made it big. He's similarly born to play toughs.
Vengeance (2022)
Watched the first quarter. No.
I just couldn't get into it. It is filled with flat jokes, and I felt like once he showed up in Texas, it got super condescending. The premise seemed interesting, but the execution was flat. I just saw that this made it onto a Best Private Detectives list on imdb ahead of Knives Out and Devil in a Blue Dress. I mean, that's so so so wrong, I just had to hop on here with my own 2¢.
There's also something to be said for good mystery writing. I saw a movie documentary once where someone said "No matter how bad a mystery movie is I've never seen anyone walk out of one." A well written mystery draws you in with that question, whodunit, and that's what keeps you locked in. This didn't have that.
It tried social commentary, but I felt like that was hollow and not at all well observed. Like, the protagonist keeps saying "100% 100%." It must be meant to satirize something about a certain type of person, but it just came off as sort of sloppy and hollow.
Hey, I couldn't make it through it, so maybe it gets good two thirds in or something. If someone on here mounts a good defense, heck, I'll give it another shot.
But right now it's a 6.8 and that's waaaay to high. It's not at all a better movie than Devil in a Blue Dress, I mean, sheesh.
The Scarlet Hour (1956)
Fantastic Noir
It's beautifully shot and well acted. It's such a wonderfully written movie because, avoiding spoilers, it takes some of the tropes, but it really undercuts them in a way that rings true in our modern world. Sort of. It's really rich and complicated.
I love noir. I watched all the most famous ones, and, hoping for more, I've watched endless obscure ones hoping I'd have more great experiences.
Man, I've seen so many bad ones, plus some with good qualities, or one great scene. A handful were really, really good, and of those, Scarlet Hour is the best.
But hey, give it ten minutes (in HD. It's beautifully shot.) If you're not drawn in, it's not for you.
Lastly, as others I'm sure have commented, Carol Ohmart was set up to be the next Marylin Monroe "but in half the time." That didn't work out. She later said that casting her in this part undercut her future because the character wasn't wholesome.
It's fascinating to watch in that context because Ohmart isn't a character actor. She's 1000% a star. She has a unique style that's very much her own, and this movie showcases that the best.
Ishtar (1987)
It's a great movie.
It's a wonderful movie. Elaine May had a comedic voice, very dry one liners mixed with very silly gags.
It's famous as a terrible movie and it's just not deserved. I wonder if the critics took the wannabe middle aged white guy protagonists a little too personally (and btw I kind of am that myself.)
Or maybe it was ahead of its time? Beatty and Hoffmann play against type. They nail that but they and their music is supposed to be cringe inducing. Maybe the earnest 80s wasn't ready for that?
Charles Grodin is amazing, as are a number of the actors in smaller parts including the emir of Ishtar, and the translator at the market.
This movie is special and deserves a watch.
Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
Convoluted Plot
I found this on a list of good modern noirs, and I'm writing annoyed that I wasted my time with it and sat through the whole thing. The plot is a mess, filled with lots of implausibility and characters who don't follow their own logic. It might still work as a bombastic romp, but it's paced way too slow for that, with lots of slow lingering reaction shots which I think the director thinks are meaningful.
That said, it's lovely to look at and very well acted.