The Maltese Falcon (1941) ***1/2

Release date: October 3, 1941

Running time: 101 minutes

Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Elisha Cook, Jr.

Director: John Huston

Five years before Humphrey Bogart slipped into the role of Raymond Chandler’s quintessential gumshoe Phillip Marlow, he appeared as another famous literary sleuth, that of Sam Spade, a private detective cut from the same cloth almost to the point of being the exact same character, at least on screen. Torn from the pages of Dashiell Hammett’s novel, which took some inspiration from the author’s own experiences as part of the Pinkerton Detectives, the 1941 version of The Maltese Falcon can be looked at as the definitive version of this novel brought to life. It had been filmed once before a decade previous and while that version remains more faithful to certain elements of the novel that the Hayes Code prohibited the more recent version from depicting, it is not as effective of a translation as the one from the 40’s.

The story begins with a woman identifying herself as Ruth Wonderly (Mary Astor) who hires Spade (Humphrey Bogart) and his partner Miles Archer (Jerome Cowan) to tail a man. She overpays for the service, something that leaves the two detectives suspicious but still willing to take the case. Shortly thereafter both Archer and the man he was tailing are killed and Spade must unravel a mystery involving murder, theft and a mysterious black statue with a strange history, a statue of a Falcon that several colorful characters would do anything to obtain.

Similar to The Big Sleep, The Maltese Falcon is filled to the brim with twists and turns to the narrative. What makes this film work where The Big Sleep stumbles is that those twists are much more easy to follow and thus avoiding confusion. Raymond Chandler famously got lost himself in his own prose forgetting to even resolve certain scenes in the novel The Big Sleep. There are no such instances in The Maltese Falcon. When The End pops up on screen at the finale here there is no confusion about who did what, how and why. It is all wrapped up neatly. Yet, to it’s strength, it doesn’t fall back on an exposition dump of everything that happened throughout the whole mystery as many Agatha Christie mysteries did. Things unspool throughout the entire film and the audience can begin to understand what’s going on without being able to easily guess the final mysteries ahead of time. This makes for a fresh, exciting experience that is even more rewarding upon multiple viewings.

When people think about all the crime noir films that came out of the era most of the tropes came from this film. In fact, looking back on this film without taking history into context, this film could come across as riddled with cliches. That would be short shifting the film, though. What made those tropes cliches was the myriad of films that came after attempting to cash in on the formula that worked so well here. Everything from the beautiful woman, here played by Mary Astor, who hires a detective for a job that turns out to be more than they bargained for, to the mysterious foreigner (Peter Lorre), to the valuable object behind it all. All of that can be found in many of the films that followed. But what makes The Maltese Falcon stand out among them. It wasn’t the story; after all it had been filmed ten years prior. It was a coming together of some of the most interesting and talented performers as well as a new director who had a clear sense of rhythm and a keep eye for directing his talent.

There is no doubt John Huston was a powerhouse director in his time. The man helmed such amazing films as The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Key Largo, The Asphalt Jungle, The African Queen, The Man Who Would Be King, and Prizzi’s Honor. He had a long and varied career that spanned five decades and worked with the likes of John Wayne, Jack Nicholson and Albert Finney. He could do dramas, comedies, musicals and just about any film genre. But every great director has to start somewhere so he began with a remake of a decade old movie that failed to get a release because of “lewd” content. One mandate to getting this film remade was it had to hew close to the novel yet skirt the Production Code that kept the original from being seen again. How this was done is a testament to the strength of the new director who also wrote the screenplay.

When writing the screenplay for the 1941 version of the film primarily what was done was taking the original screenplay from the earlier film and excising anything that was deemed inappropriate for the modern 40’s audience. This included dropping several sexually suggestive moments as well as some homosexual subtext regarding Gutman (Sydney Greenstreet), Cairo (Peter Lorre), and Wilmer (Elisha Cook, Jr). Some of the subtext made it through irregardless but it is toned down to the point of going unnoticed when presented to the Hayes Board. It takes the material down a bit but never takes away from the excitement of the drama.

John Huston wasn’t the only newbie on the scene either. Sydney Greenstreet also debuts here as Gutman a.k.a. The Fat Man. Greenstreet was primarily a stage actor at the time having worked in that venue since 1902. This was his cinematic introduction and he proved to have tremendous stage presence. Because of the lateness of his start in films he was only able to act in that medium for eight years before his deteriorating health forced him to retire. Still in that short time he starred in many classic films including Casablanca, Across the Pacific, Conflict, and Passage to Marseille, all with his costar Bogart.

But the real star of the picture is,of course, Humphrey Bogart. Anyone can spout off rapid fire dialogue. It takes a master at the craft to take a character that on page threatens to be one note and imbue it with such charm and charisma. He also manages to add a degree of vulnerability to the character. Consider the scene when he explodes at Gutman, yelling after yet more subterfuge and questioning from the Fat Man. As he exits abruptly, Bogart’s mannerism changes from the faux rage he was displaying mere seconds before to a nervous laughter followed by his hands shaking as the situation he had just extricated himself from starts to settle on him. It is a subtle and brilliant performance. 

Sam is a cold and calculating character yet he manages to string everyone along as he manipulates those around him into slowly revealing the nuances of the case before him. He is cold and calculating, only showing real emotion to his secretary who has to put herself in danger while aiding his investigation. Even the way he interacts with his former partner’s widow, whom he may have been having an affair with, is cold and calculating. Yet we are never really kept at a distance from him. We know he has an honor code and even when it seems to those around him that he can be bought, we as an audience never believe it. This culminates with the final moments of the film when he finally reveals to the police the final mystery, the one that jump started the whole story to begin with, who killed his partner. It is brilliantly staged and acted by all parties and nicely closes out what was already a superb film.