Dark Victory (1939) ****

Release Date: April 22, 1939

Running Time: 104 minutes

Cast: Bette Davis, George Brent, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Humphrey Bogart

Director: Edmund Goulding

Watching Dark Victory one would be hard pressed to tell that it was based on a stage play. The film, while not as opened up as an action/adventure film does not have the feel of a filmed play. But it originated as a Broadway production starring the notorious Tallulah Bankhead who originated the role of Judith Traherne before cutting things short after falling sick to a bacterial infection. When it came time to film the movie version Bette Davis admitted she based her performance on Bankhead’s. So enamored was Davis in the stage production that she shopped the idea to every producer on the Warner Brothers lot and succeeded in getting Hal Wallis to buy the rights for her. Early in the filming though she claimed she was too sick to continue and wanted out of her contract in no small part because of a divorce she was going through. Fortunately Hal Wallis saw through this and refused to let her off the hook. The drama in front of and behind the camera was only just beginning.

The film opens with Judith (Bette Davis), a wealthy women and avid horse rider and jumper, arriving at the fields intent on riding one of her horses. As she is racing around the track her vision starts doubling and she fails to make one of the jumps getting thrown in the process. She escapes the incident relatively unscathed but this is just the latest in a series of problems she has been experiencing including frequent and severe headaches. Her best friend Ann King (Geraldine Fitzgerald) insists on Judith seeking medical attention but Judith resists until she has another episode while descending the stairs and falls. The doctor refers her to a specialist, Dr Steele (George Brent), who is planning on leaving his practice behind and leaving the area but after seeing Judith his suspicions of what is happening to her cause him to cancel his plans and take her case on.

A few X-rays later and it is confirmed that Judith will need brain surgery. Judith is terrified of the prospect but Dr. Steele is ably to convince her to go through with it. However, after operating is is determined that while they have stopped the immediate symptoms, what she has is terminal and will eventually lead to blindness and death. Dr. Steele, having started falling in love with the young Judith, elects not to tell her her case is hopeless with the thought that she would be happier not knowing and soon the two are engaged to be married. 

This movie tackles some deep issues that audiences of the time might not have seen much of in their entertainment. There is no doubt it is a somber topic that the film, and the play before it, tackles with delicacy and reverence. Even if we don’t fully understand early on what is exactly wrong with Judith we can still emphasize with her as she tries staunchly to avoid dealing with it because not facing it is easier for her than knowing and living with the certainty of her fate. We see this reaction early on as she refuses to even entertain seeing a doctor after her accident on the horse. It is emphasized even more effectively when she finally sees the specialist and we can see in her every move her fear of what he will have to say. To even greater effect we see the dawning realization in Dr. Steele’s eyes as he recognizes symptoms in her. He says nothing to give it away but we see it in his face that he knows what will be found even before the x-rays can be done.

The film also tackles some moral grounds. The chief of these is whether to tell Judith that her disease is terminal. The Doctor elects to keep this information from her in hopes she will not spend the remainder of her life in disparity and hopelessness. He also has personal reasons for not telling her. He wishes to marry her and fears she will fall further into bad habits should she feel she has no hope of a long life. When she eventually does find out that is exactly what she does for a while, breaking off her engagement with Dr. Steel and getting drunk. What eventually snaps her out of it is a visit from her stable master, Michael (Humphrey Bogart), a man who has loved her for years but has never told her before. When he confronts her about her unruly behavior she breaks down and admits she is dying. Realizing that she is truly unhappy and that she would rather spend her remaining months enjoying her life rather than running from it she apologizes to Steele and they are married. 

Bette Davis was only a year past her Oscar winning performance in Jezebel when she appeared in Dark Victory. There is no doubt one of the draws to this film for her was the chance to gain more Oscar notoriety. It is a meaty roll that required her to be able to express a lot with just her eyes or the tremor of her hands. She nailed it perfectly here and rightfully secured an Oscar nomination for leading actress. Perhaps the only reason she didn’t secure the win was that this film came out in 1939 and there was no doubt Gone With The Wind was going to clean house that year. Vivian Leigh of course took home the prize but when comparing the two performances, Bette’s is more effective and more nuanced. 

Her growing love for Dr. Steele is equally convincing. Perhaps this is due to the romance that was happening off screen. At the time Davis was just ending affairs with William Wyler and Howard Hughes and going through a divorce from her husband Ham Nelson. She almost immediately fell into the arms of George Brent who was recently divorced himself and their affair ran on for well over a year. The very nature of Dark Victory’s story made it practical to film it mostly in order and so as we see Judith falling in love with Dr. Steele it mirrors what was also happening behind the scenes. 

This was never going to be a feel good film. An ending like that would have cheapened the drama and undermined the whole story. Some of the films best scenes are in its final moments. One should not go into the final act expecting some miracle cure to be discovered and there being a happily ever after. We do get treated to just how happy Judith is in her life with Dr. Steele and how happy he is being with her, no matter how brief that time may be. We also get to see her transformation from thinking just for herself to putting her husbands happiness first, not worrying him about her condition even as it inevitably worsens. These final moments are a revelation and also heart breaking and Bette Davis sells us on the whole thing.

This is the type of movie that nearly everyone can relate to. Those who have been fortunate enough to have not gone through a major illness or known someone personally who has can relate to the fear of the possibility of having such a condition. Diseases like what Judith has can effect anyone at anytime and even now days with all the advances in medicine there is little that can be done when it comes to brain disorders. This is as much relevant and powerful today as it was back then and, coupled with spot on performances by all, is a film that definitely needs to be viewed today.

Swing Your Lady (1938) *1/2

Release date: January 8, 1938

Running time: 77 minutes

Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Louise Fazenda, Nat Pendleton, Penny Singleton

Directed by: Ray Enright

About the only thing positive to say about Swing Your Lady is that it introduced to the world the comedy vaudeville troupe The Weaver Brothers and Elviry. The troupe had been around in infancy since the 1910’s, becoming comedic headliners shortly after WWI with the vaudeville circuit. This would be their first foray into motion pictures. They would go on to appear in a dozen films throughout the 30’s and 40’s. The Weaver Brothers and Elviry specialized in their own brand of Hillbilly music including their use of unique and novelty instruments. Swing Your Lady features this heavily with full musical numbers that stop the film entirely in its tracks yet offer the only moments really worth watching.

Wrestling promoter Ed Hatch (Humphrey Bogart) comes to Missouri with his dim-witted wrestler Joe Skopapoulos (Nat Pendleton) in tow in search of fighters to pit Joe against. When Ed’s vehicle gets stuck in a ditch, blacksmith Sadie Horn (Louise Fazenda) pulls it out with her bare hands. Sensing a star in the making, and a path to some quick money, Ed offers Sadie $100 to wrestle Joe. What he doesn’t count on is the two falling in love and refusing to fight.

There is really very little to recommend in this film. The players are all generic stereotypes, a relic of the silent era. Louise Fazenda comes off particularly one note. She was primarily a silent film star who married producer Hal Wallis and even though she worked consistently until 1939 her main talents lay in the over exaggerations needed to play without dialogue. Her portrayal of of a hick female blacksmith is borderline offensive. Likewise Nat Pendleton plays Joe so stupid as to be unbelievable. These broad performances were played up for comedic effect but just don’t work. 

Bogart is game trying to hold it all together but it is apparent he is unhappy with this role. At this point in his career he was getting frustrated with the types of parts being offered to him. In later years he would refuse to even talk about this film. Even at this point in his career this film was beneath him. He would follow it up with The Return of Doctor X, an even lower point in his early career. 

It’s not all sour milk though. It’s a real delight seeing Cookie (Penny Singleton), NYC girl and romantic interest to Ed, really getting into the hillbilly scene. She provides some truly fun moments and great dance numbers that are way better than the film they are in. She is easily the best thing this film has to offer bringing an energy that the rest of the film is sadly lacking.

Swing Your Lady is an anomaly among Bogart’s oeuvre. The man wasn’t known for musical theater and, after the disastrous results of this one he never went back to the genre. He made few comedies and even the worst of those doesn’t come close to the depths this one plummets to. There is little to recommend here aside from the music and even that is sparse for such a short film. This film was listed amongst the fifty worse films of all time. It’s not that awful but it’s definitely no winner. On a side note, Ronald Reagan makes one of his first screen appearances here.

The Left Hand of God (1955) **1/2

Release date: September 2, 1955

Running time: 87 minutes

Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Gene Tierney, Lee J. Cobb, Agnes Moorhead, E.G. Marshall

Directed by: Edward Dmytryk

In 1947, Father O’Shea (Humphrey Bogart) arrives at a remote mission in China, having lost all of his possessions in an accident while crossing a river during a rain storm. He is welcomed by the villagers who have been waiting patiently for the church to send a new priest after the last one was killed. Almost immediately he is butting heads with the local doctor, David Sigman (E. G. Marshall), who wants to close down the mission because of them many dangers posed by the terrain and the competing warlords. O’Shea insists the mission will stay open and that the church must feel the same as they sent him in the first place. Aside from the doctor there are only two other western residents, the doctor’s wife Beryl (Agnes Moorehead) and a widowed young nurse Anne (Gene Tierney). 

O’Shea manages to impress and delight the local Chinese people with his understanding of their customs and culture, even surprising them by delivering his first sermon to them in both English and their native tongue. His activities among them and respect earns theirs in turn and he is welcomed heartily by all of the parishioners. He also manages to gain the attention and attraction of Anne who finds him attractive but unsure how to react to that as he is a priest and unable to reciprocate. With no one she feels she can confess these feelings to, she is conflicted and confused. Seeing this, Beryl suggests to O’Shea that he take a short trip to a Presbyterian mission nearby and seek help and advice from the minister there who has a lot of years experience in the area. Upon meeting with this minister, O’Shea has a confession of his own. He isn’t really a priest, but an ex pilot who fled the servitude of one of the local warlords, Yang (Lee J. Cobb in yellow face), after Yang’s men killed the real O’Shea. His real name is James Carmody and Yang’s men have figured out where he is hiding and will soon threaten the mission to get him back.

One of the biggest hurtles The Left Hand of God must overcome is the logic behind the story. At no point are we told why Carmody chose to disguise himself as Father O’Shea. He could have more easily posed as one of many deposed Americans left over from WWII. Carmody shows disdain for the slaying of the real O’Shea but it plays more as an opportunity for him to escape the yoke of bondage Yang has on him. It doesn’t help that right from the start it is obvious something isn’t quite right with the new father. He is reluctant to bless his parishioners or to hold the first Sunday Mass. We suspect him almost from the first scene and when things are revealed barely halfway through the film all the energy from the film is let out leaving things to play out without any real excitement anymore. 

Bogart is game in this role but his performance is very reserved. We don’t get to know his character at all and that neuters any real dilemma we should be feeling about him preforming sacred duties of the cloth without the authority of the church. It’s a dilemma that is barely touched on even in the climax. More could have been done with this to better flesh out the drama and the conflict of the spiritual and the physical. The parishioners’ acceptance of Carmody seems to come to easily, too, which hurts the final moments of the film.

There are some strong performances in this film, most notably by E.G. Marshall and Agnes Moorehead. The put upon doctor often clashes with Carmody but is won over in the end. Less easily swayed is Beryl who suspects something isn’t quite right with “Father O’Shea,” only to also suddenly by in his corner in the end. Gene Tierney doesn’t fare as well. Some of this may be from personal issues she was going through at the time. Bogart, having seen similar issues in his own family life, helped her with her performance and pushed her to seek emotional help. She is fine here but underdeveloped.

The concept of God’s help through unlikely hands was not a new one in 1955. It wasn’t even the first time Bogart tackled this concept. His previous picture, We’re No Angels, saw him portraying an escaped convict who helps a struggling family against the tyranny of rich relatives. Here, he saves the faith of a whole village, all while lying about being a man of the cloth. The biggest difference between the two films is that while We’re No Angels was handled tongue-in-cheek, The Left Hand of God plays everything seriously and forgets to have a little fun with the formula. It doesn’t overstay it’s welcome but it’s not much fun to watch either.   

The Roaring Twenties (1939) ***1/2

Release date: October 23, 1939

Running time: 104 minutes

Starring: James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart, Priscilla Lane, Gladys George

Directed by: Raoul Walsh

Purportedly based on true events The Roaring Twenties starts off stating thus as a reminder to avoid these events in the future. It’s an odd way to begin a film that would already be mired in Hayes Code restrictions that would require such a film to portray these types of consequences anyway. This type of moralizing by writer Mark Hellinger permeates the screen from start to finish, embellished is faux newsreel footage to mark the passing of time and further emphasize the films anti-criminal messages. 

The film can be summed up as the rise and fall of a big shot. Eddie Bartlett (James Cagney) starts the film out as a principled and conscientious soldier fighting in WWI. The same cannot be said for fellow soldier George Hally, a man who has no scruples about gunning down young enemy soldiers mere minutes before the signed truce. He also has major issues with authority figures. Once the war is over Eddie finds that he cannot pick up his life where he left off. His job is not waiting for him and work is scarce. Prohibition begins and Eddie, now working as a cab driver, unknowingly delivers a package of liquor to Panama Smith (Gladys George) and is arrested. After a short stint in jail Eddie and Panama join together in the bootlegging business, using a fleet of cabs to do the delivering and hiring Lloyd Hart (Jeffrey Lynn), another soldier who served with Eddie during the war, to be his lawyer. Eddie rekindles a relationship with Jean Sherman (Priscilla Lane), a woman he corresponded with during the war, who is now working at a nightclub. He provides her a batter position in a Cabernet and intends to marry her once he has saved enough money to quit the rackets. But as with Michael Corleone in The Godfather, Part III, quitting organized crime is never that simple.

The film takes the viewer through the entirety of the 1920’s, commenting on everything from prohibition to inflation, short skirts and other trivial things. At times it seems to want to comment on everything happening at the time, including the films of the era, many of which Cagney had been in. Cagney’s Eddie Bartlett is a better realized character than most of the gangsters and bootleggers from earlier films, though. He is a well rounded character full of conflicts. He has strong moral values yet struggles with a wicked temper. He has no objections to hiring criminals into his organization but turns one away who won’t admit to his guilt. He also refuses to indulge in his own merchandise. “A dress salesman doesn’t have to wear dresses.” 

Eventually he has to pair up with George, who has graduated from saloon keeper to bootlegger himself, in order to provide a higher quality of hooch. But it becomes apparent right away that the violent and amoral George Hally can only make things turn for the worse for Eddie. Late in the film once prohibition is repealed and the stock market crashes George forces Eddie out of his primary assets, his cabs, and leaves Eddie destitute and out of work. Jean has fallen for Lloyd and now Eddie is back to where he was immediately after the war. It all ultimately ends with the fall of our two leads, George and Eddie, in the only way a film like this could end back in the 30’s. It is no surprise yet is no less riveting to watch.  A powerhouse performance by James Cagney in what would become one of his greatest films provides a backbone to what easily could have been another gangster film of the 30’s. Instead, we have a riveting drama about crime and corruption and how even the best of characters can succumb to it if put in the right situations under the right circumstances. This is a cautionary tale that, while a little heavy handed at times, still resonates and deserves the distinction of a bona fide classic.

Passage to Marseille (1944) ***

Release date: February 16, 1944

Running time: 109 minutes

Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Claude Rains, Philip adorn, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, George Tobias, Helmut Dantine and Michele Morgan

Directed by: Michael Curtiz

To refer to this film as patriotic propaganda is to undersell the message it is trying to force upon it’s audience. Warner Brothers was already facing bad blood with the French about previous depictions of penal conditions on Devil’s Island which lead to a two month ban of their films in France. Passage to Marseille seems at times like an answer to that by trying to promote patriotism in France despite the harshness of incarceration on the infamous isle. Even though the film has a real issue with how the story is laid out relying on flashbacks inside of flashbacks it never loses track of that message. We are bombarded with characters who proudly proclaim their willingness to fight for a country that let them down and forgot about them. This is all scored heavily with La Marseillaise and images of Free France.

The story is pretty light here. It boils down to five convicts serving hard labor on Devil’s Island for various crimes. The leader of the group, Jean Matrac, (Humphrey Bogart) was a journalist outspoken against the Munich Pact who was framed for murder to shut him up. The others: Marius (Peter Lorre), Garou (Helmut Dantine), Petit (George Tobias), and Renault (Philip adorn) are serving for other petty crimes. All of the express their hatred of the Nazi’s and their desire to fight for their country. They are recruited by Grandpere (Vladimir Sokoloff), an elderly man who decides to help them escape their imprisonment so they may join the war effort. This escape leads to them adrift on a raft for two weeks before being picked up by the tramp steamer, Ville de Nancy and it doesn’t take long for the men to be identified as escaped convicts.

When word gets back to the steamer that France has surrendered to the Nazis and a collaborationist government has been set up, Captain Malo (Victor Francen) decides not to deliver his cargo to the Germans. Major Duval (Sydney Greenstreet) in turn attempts to stage a coup to seize the ship only to be defeated by the combined efforts of most of the crew as well as substantial support from the five convicts, earning them a degree of trust amongst the loyal crew of the Ville de Nancy.

Most of the story is told in extensive flashbacks. We get these layered upon each other in such a way that a casual viewer may become lost. These flashbacks tell the story of Matrac and his fellow convicts contextualizing where they stand in their devotion to their country. Matrac himself is not as sold on patriotism as the others as he is wrongfully imprisoned leaving behind a wife and child. However when push comes to shove he picks up a weapon and defends his country along with the others. Even the main plot of the story aboard the Ville de Nancy is a flashback, a story being relayed to a journalist by Captain Freycinet (Claude Rains) just prior to an air attack in which Matrac is participating in as an aerial gunner. 

This story could be confusing but is told well enough that those paying attention will have no issues following the chronology. The film does suffer from it a little however as it fails to suspend it’s artificiality and contrivances because of it. History buffs will also be drawn out of it by it’s many liberties taken with events and details. For the non-discerning eye though it is just an oddly paced patriotic propaganda film. It’s also relying heavily on the goodwill of audiences who loved Casablanca two years earlier by featuring most of the cast together again. It never seems to soar though the way Casablanca did and ultimately ends up being a curiosity only ranking as passable entertainment that doesn’t quite hit the mark.

Crime School (1938) **1/2

Release date: May 28, 1938

Running Time: 86 minutes

Starring: Billy Halop, Bobby Jordan, Huntz Hall, Leo Gorcey, Bernard Punsly, Humphrey Bogart, Gale Page, Weldon Heyburn, Cy Kendall

Directed by: Lewis Seiler

The second pairing of Humphrey Bogart and The Dead End Kids (billed and advertised as The Crime School Kids to avoid legal issues with United Artists) is an odd duck. For one, The Crime School Kids received top billing for this film, overshadowing even Bogart for that distinction. Bogart was not quite at the top of his game at this point in his career having just turned in supporting rolls in Stand-In against Leslie Howard and the much maligned Swing Your Lady. The Crime School Boys were also on the downward swing and several were released from their contracts only to be quickly resigned when they made a film with Universal that was a big hit. This was the film that lead to those contracts being released in the first place. Part of the problem is that the film doesn’t give us a strong story to hang the antics of the Crime School Kids. Bogart’s miscasting doesn’t help.

The story is pretty thread-bare. The Crime School Kids: Frankie, Squirt, Spike, Goofy, Fats and Bugs live in the slums. To make money they work for a junkman (Frank Otto) selling various items they “come across” in their wanderings. When the junkman refuses to pay them what was initially promised a scuffle breaks out and Spike strikes the man over the head causing him to fall to the ground unmoving. The boys are quickly arrested but none of them are willing to squeal forcing the judge to send them all off to reform school. 

Upon arrival it doesn’t take long for the boys to run afoul of the harsh warden, Morgan (Cy Kendall) and before the first night is through Frankie tries to escape. He is swiftly caught and flogged, left in bed battered and in need of medical attention. Meanwhile, newly appointed superintendent of the state reformatories, Mark Braden (Bogart), visits the school and is appalled to find the conditions the kids are living in. They are served poor quality food and forced to wear uniforms that don’t fit. When he finds Frankie in the hospital ward, his wounds untreated, Mark has seen enough to take action. He quickly fires half of the guards, the reformatory doctor and Morgan, retaining the head guard, Cooper (Weldon Heyburn). Mark takes control of the reformatory himself and attempts to win over the boys but finds himself facing an uphill battle with the jaded youth. Meanwhile, Cooper, and Morgan, are concerned that Mark will discover discrepancies if he looks too closely at the books.

The title of the film, Crime School, is a bit of a misnomer probably to make the film seem more exciting to 30’s audiences. Aside from brief mentions of people “graduating” reform school into a life of crime, nothing much plays into that name. Warner Brothers tried to play that title up by rebranding The Bowery Boys as The Crime School Kids in this film and Angels With Dirty Faces later the same year but that name was unpopular and eventually the troop ended up with the moniker The Dead End Kids. They would star alongside Bogart in a total of three movies: Dead End, Crime School and Angels With Dirty Faces. This would be the only time among the three films where Bogart played a heroic figure.

Bogart seems comfortable enough in the roll of the noble superintendent, determined to do right by the boys in his charge. It’s a roll that comes across a little too bland to really offer any actor much of an opportunity to shine, though. He isn’t sleepwalking through the part but he’s also not doing much to create a real character. Instead, he’s just a one-dimensional do-gooder who is just there to advance the story and provide a contrary perspective to the adage that growing up in the slums means you will never amount to anything other than a petty criminal. Likewise Cy Kendall and Weldon Heyburn play cookie cutter baddies without an ounce of nuance to them. 

After the previous years Dead End it is a little disappointing watching The Crime School Kids’ follow-up film. The kids themselves are good as always but the rest of the film lets them down. There are some truly great moments peppered in here such as Frankies desperate attempt to climb a barb wire fence to escape but these moments are not enough to sustain this movie. It’s perfectly adequate but that’s about it. 

Key Largo (1948) ***1/2

Release Date: July 16, 1948

Running Time: 101 minutes

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Edward G. Robinson, Lauren Bacall, Lionel Barrymore

Directed by: John Huston

The final, and best, collaboration between Humphrey Bogart and Edward G. Robinson, Key Largo can be chalked up among the best films starring either powerhouse. It was based on a play by Maxwell Anderson that opened nearly a decade before and retains some of the feeling of a play. But where other films have suffered from this Key Largo flourishes, primarily because it  benefits greatly from the stuffiness and claustrophobia that is inherent in many filmed plays. That atmosphere plays into the story’s strengths and elevates it above similar filmed plays like The Petrified Forrest. 

Key Largo begins with Frank McCloud (Bogart), an army veteran, traveling to Key Largo, Florida to meet the father of George Temple, one of his army friends who perished in the war. He’s also there to pay his respects to George’s widow. The two live in a hotel on the island that is in the process of buckling down in preparation for an oncoming hurricane. Frank’s welcome is a little cold from the guests of the hotel who immediately seem cold and unfriendly with the exception of Gaye Dawn (Claire Trevor) an alcoholic woman who can’t function without being constantly inebriated. The others, Toots (Harry Lewis), Curly (Thomas Gomez), Ralph (William Haade), and Angel (Dan Seymour) insist that the hotel is closed and Frank would be better moving on. A sixth guest remains unseen upstairs in their room. 

Frank receives a more warm welcome from the hotel’s owner, George’s father James (Lionel Barrymore) and his daughter-in-law Nora (Lauren Bacall). The two have been starving for information about Nora’s deceased husband and are excited to meet Frank, especially after he proves to them just how close he was to George during the war. James, who is wheelchair bound, invites Frank to stay on at the hotel once the hurricane passes but Frank is reluctant to accept the offer. 

As the winds begin to pick up the final guest of the hotel makes his appearance. Johnny Rocco (Edward G. Robinson) is a former heavyweight gangster, a relic of the Prohibition Era who has found himself being kicked out of the United States. He is hiding out at the hotel, waiting out the storm as well as a visit from some contacts intent on buying counterfeit money from him, before setting sail back to Cuba. His ultimate goals are a little vague but there is some talk of re-establishing prohibition so that a select number of gang leaders can profit again from the racket rather than the self-destructive way it happened the last time. It is a weak motive that feels exactly like it is, a pipe dream and maybe Rocco even believes that a little, even as he is fleeing back to Cuba.

The rest of the film is taught and intense as Rocco holds everyone hostage inside the hotel while the storm prevents anyone from leaving. Things are not rosy for Rocco though as the claustrophobia brought on by the storm starts to wear on his state of mind, driving him to be more and more uneven as the hours pass. This coupled with his natural cruelty leave Frank, James and Nora as well as a captured deputy, Sawyer, in fear of their lives. 

Key Largo is a beautifully made film that almost gets away with faking it’s location. Discerning eyes will easily be able to tell that the entire film was made indoors, including scenes depicting the breach and ocean. Yet despite that it never feels small scale. There is no doubt this is a stage play adapted for the big screen yet, obvious sets or not, it feels at times more open than a typical play. Once the action moves entirely indoors though things change and it takes on a much different tone. This is intentional and as the characters start feeling trapped inside, so do we. This is well staged by a director who knew what he wanted to portray and exactly how to do it. Lip service is given about how stuffy the atmosphere inside has gotten despite the storm and the nighttime and the farther into things it gets the more the characters, Rocco especially, start perspiring. This helps sell the idea that Rocco is starting to feel the claustrophobia as he is trapped inside the hotel just as much as his hostages.

Rocco’s grasp on sanity is tenuous from the start and Robinson plays it to the hilt. We get glimpses of it early on in his contempt for Gaye. At first he seems more put out by her and her alcoholism, mocking her in front of his men and the hostages. Later, we get to see just how deep his inhumanity really goes. In one of the best scenes in the whole film he pushes Gaye into singing one of her stage tunes for the whole group with the promise that if she does he will allow her to have a drink, something he has withheld from her for several hours to the point she is shaking and desperate. She agrees and performs a song for the group, unpolished and poorly. Afterwards, Rocco mocks her attempt and refuses her the drink on the pretense that she doesn’t deserve it for such a lousy performance. Frank, pitying her, pours her a drink anyway, incurring the wrath of Rocco for his display of mercy. 

There is a sub-plot about some Seminole Indian friends of James Temple who usually use the hotel to shelter from hurricanes. Two of these are escaped convicts whom James has agreed to hide under the understanding that after the hurricane they will turn themselves in to the law. Rocco refuses to allow them access to the hotel and they must ride the storm out just outside the doors. This sub-plot really doesn’t go anywhere other than to provide a scapegoat for a murder later on as well as to demonstrate the humanity and good-natured personality of James and his daughter. For large stretches of the film we forget they are even outside during the events. It feels a little tacked on but otherwise serves it’s purpose, as little as that is. 

This is an actors film. It is filled with moments and monologues that could easily be used in a awards ceremony reel. Surprisingly only Claire Trevor came out of it with any real recognition securing a win at the Academy Awards for best supporting actress. Her afore mentioned musical number definitely helped her secure that win. But Bogart and especially Robinson are equally good here. There is a real nuance to Robinson’s portrayal here that heartens back to his earlier gangster rolls without falling back on stereotypes. Likewise, Bogart is great throughout as the war veteran who is conflicted about whether he is to be the hero or step back and wait things out. 

Key Largo has a reputation for a reason. It is a taught film full of claustrophobic atmosphere and many great moments. It is never boring and never runs out of steam. Then ending is a little rushed but otherwise is satisfying if not really surprising. Ultimately it is a well directed and well acted stage play that doesn’t expand the staging yet doesn’t need to. It is a satisfying watch and rightly deserves it position as a true classic of the era.

The Barefoot Contessa (1954) **1/2

Release Date: September 29, 1954

Running Time: 130 minutes

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Ava Gardner, Edmond O’Brien, Rossini Brazzi, Warren Stevens

Directed by: Joseph L. Mankiewicz

The Barefoot Contessa is a prime example of style overshadowing substance. It is a gorgeous film to look at and the stars are beautiful, too. The acting all around is good to excellent. So why is it just a middle of the road film? What is it about this film that prevents it from being one of the greats from it’s era? 

This is the story of Maria (Ava Gardner), a stage performer at a restaurant in Spain who attracts the attention of film producer Kirk Edwards (Warren Stevens), who is in the country scouting out some new talent for a film he is making. In tow is his chosen director Harry Dawes (Humphrey Bogart), Oscar Muldoon (Edmond O’Brien), and a starlet whose only purpose in the film is to demonstrate how ill tempered Kirk can be when he feels someone is insulting him in any way. 

After seeing Maria perform, Kirk sends Oscar to try and get Maria to sit with them but he fails. Harry, who is more savvy and less excitable manages to get her to accept the invitation but the mannerisms of Kirk coupled with the abruptness and lack of tact from Oscar causes her to flee the table rather than listen anymore to them. Harry tracks her down to her home and manages to convince her to accept the opportunity to try out for the new film, leaving behind an abusive mother and a downtrodden father.

Naturally, Maria wows the filmmakers and lands the film. This leads to more starring rolls that propel Maria to movie star status. But Maria is not like the typical starlet obsessed with film success and her public image. When news that her father has murdered her mother back in Spain she drops everything to fly home and support her father despite how this may negatively impact her image. Likewise, she finds little to no enjoyment from the immaturity of the men who flock around her at gatherings.

The film opens and closes with Maria’s funeral, a bookend tactic that serves to drench the entire film with a sense of dread and uncertainty. We know immediately that everything in the rest of the film is leading up to her ultimate demise. This makes it difficult to enjoy much of the proceedings because we know where it is all leading to. Early on when Harry first gains an audience with Maria we see that the two have great chemistry together. It is palpable and the banter between them says more than just the words alone. It would be a sheer delight to watch this without the fore knowledge of where this ultimately leads.

The directing really lets this film down. Filmmaking 101 will teach you a fundamental truth: show, don’t tell. This truth is all but ignored in this film. Major important events happen off screen, portrayed by a sentence or two in dialogue, or (even worse) voice over. In one scene Maria gives a spectacular performance in the courtroom defending her father but we never see it or experience it in any way. We hear about it in voice over  narration by Oscar Muldoon as he watches it play out. There are many such instances like this that are unsatisfying and keep us at arms length. 

It is obvious that Mankiewicz fell in love with the duo of Harry and Maria as these scenes provide us with carefully crafted dialogue that nearly always hits. It is during these moments that we feel closest to Maria as a person and not as a film star. In fact the film never lets us see Maria as the latter. This starts out as intriguing but never pans out and thus leaves us frustrated and at arms length. This is not a knock on Ava Gardner’s portrayal. She is spot on playing a nationality she was not and delivering a strong, yet fragile woman is a foreign world. The blame is entirely on Mankiewicz who elected to explain everything through awful voice overs rather than find a more natural and satisfying way to get these things across.

The final result is an unsatisfying picture that tells an intriguing story in such a way as to dissolve nearly all the intrigue and interest through some very clumsy filmmaking. It is too long by nearly a half hour and tells you in the first minute that this is not going to have a happy ending. Tragedies can and do work in films but they require a skilled hand at developing characters we care about and can get invested in. This film keeps us at a distance at all times, drawing us a little in during just a handful of scenes between the two stars before kicking us back onto the sidelines. In the end it is just too difficult to get invested in what we already know is going to happen in the end.