Edgar Soberón Torchia

23 May 2012

As intelligent as one would expect from Welles

Independently produced by Sam Spiegel, "The Stranger" is a fascinatingwork by Orson Welles, only flawed by its anti-Nazi preaching, though Iguess this judgmental posture was common in movies released after WorldWar II. Even a more praised movie as Roberto Rossellini's "Rome: OpenCity" contains such discourses. Welles' visuals are something else.Under the influence of Expressionism (a very appropriate treatment fora story about German "legacy"), his images are elegant, and hismise-en-caméra is as intelligent as one would expect from him. From thefirst time we see the investigator (from his nape), to the followingsequence as a Nazi arrives in Mexico and is followed through eeriestreets full of shadows, the peculiar tone is set, even if most of theaction takes place in a sunny Connecticut town and the story is tolddirectly. Though the movie follows the dictates of so-calledzero-degree style, there are indications in Welles' direction to thestrangeness of the subject: slightly out of focus shots; bizarrepositions of characters' faces in a frame, suggesting dislocation, or avery unconvincing "I will" said by the wife in her wedding ceremony. Inone of the most upsetting scenes, Welles keeps the suspect's face outof frame during most of the dialogue, first as his long shadowapproaches his wife in bed, and she describes a nightmare, until hishand offers her a lit cigarette. Welles also constructs long takes withfew camera movements (as opposed to his famous opening shot in "Touchof Evil"): the conversation between the Nazi comrades in the forest andthe subsequent killing in broad daylight, while birds sing and youngathletes run around; and a checkers game with the investigator sittingwith his back to the camera, creating expectation as he constantlyturns to watch the clock in the church. On the other hand, theenergetic final confrontation is fragmented in shots from all the maincharacters' point of view. After this movie, Welles worked again for amajor studio, when the following year he did "The Lady from Shanghai"for Columbia, another great movie with a memorable final sequence.Again he was misunderstood (especially for his handling of his star andwife Rita Hayworth) and had to wait ten years until he made "Touch ofEvil" for Universal. In my opinion, Welles was most of the time ontarget, and he did not make only one masterpiece. He did quite a few."The Stranger" may not be in that category, but it's pretty close.

23 May 2012

Enhanced Claim an Out-and-out Lie

This review is from: The Stranger (Enhanced) 1946 (DVD) You do not want to buy this Triad edition. At the current time, the best edition of this film is "The Stranger (MGM Film Noir)." I know this for a fact, because I bought the Triad edition, and it was so bad, I returned it, and ordered the MGM release instead. "The Stranger (MGM Film Noir)" was a very, very smart choice. As for this Triad edition, it looks like Triad has changed the title of this dungeon-produced rubbish from "The Stranger (Remastered)" to "The Stranger (Enhanced)." Well, it doesn't matter what they're naming it, it'll be the same rip-off it was on December 16th, when I bought it under the "remastered" affix. I fell for it because the newer release date and the high price suggested that it's one of the hi-tech transfers, with the advanced home theater in mind, implying that it'll look good on your HDTV. But when the DVD arrived, it was a sham, the claim to be "remastered" out-and-out false. Nothing has been done to it, neither "remastered" or "enhanced." It's not even a good print, aside from whatever false claim of enhancements they've made. It's a copy Triad retrieved from the public domain, possibly from a site like Internet Archive, which has a vast library of public domain media anyone can access. This print was dirty and blurry and shaky, and one of the worst DVDs I'd ever seen. The print is so degraded, it doesn't even include the studio banner at the beginning of the film. In fact, it looks EXACTLY like the copy you can download yourself -- for free -- from the aforementioned Internet Archive. Incensed by such an obviously bald-faced misrepresentation, I returned to this page to further investigate this product. Most important was the discovery of this statement in italics at the very bottom of the product description: "This product is manufactured on demand using DVD-R recordable media." DVD-R recordable media are those blank DVDs you buy on a spindle at most retailers. "On demand" means that your Triad edition of "The Stranger" won't even exist until after YOU order it. That wouldn't in itself be a bad thing. But it reveals what sort of operation Triad is, that it's a small-time operation that doesn't have facilities to remaster or enhance anything. What they DO have is an internet connection they use to download stuff from public domain. And what about these 4- and 5-star reviews? Well, let's take a second look. While those "customers" are quick to slap a 4- or 5-star rating on it, none of them actually bothered to mention the image quality of this disc. That's suspicious, because the image is so degraded, any customer who bought it would be sure to note it. An explanation can be gained by clicking on the see-all-my-reviews link next to each name. What you'll see is that all of these "customers" reviewed an inordinate share of Triad releases. In other words, these positive reviews are planted by Triad itself. So what does that tell me? For one, it tells me that there are a lot of films at Internet Archive I can get for free. For another, it tells me you can't trust these positive reviews. In fact, Triad -- which has recently changed its brand in the product description for some of their DVDs to "Public Domain Flicks" -- has gone out of its way to make sure you see nothing else but their phony positive reviews. They've gotten Amazon to delete THIS review seven times now. SEVEN TIMES! I've got to give it to them, they're determined.In conclusion, I asked for -- and got -- a refund, then ordered "The Stranger (MGM Film Noir)." It's cheaper and while it doesn't claim to be remastered (or enhanced), it's been mastered directly from a studio print. And though it hasn't undergone a frame-by-frame restoration, it DOES look good on my HDTV. I was very pleased. The Triad edition is simply unacceptable, and especially at the price they're charging. Normally you'd find a product this bad in a thin cardboard sleeve and dumped in a $1 bin next to the checkout counter. If you want the copy Triad's selling, go to Internet Archive. You'll get it free. _________________________

ccthemovieman-1

23 May 2012

Very Disappointing Considering The Three Leads

Since the three stars of this movie are three of my favorites - OrsonWelles, Edward G. Robinson and Loretta Young - this was a majordisappointment. This is one of the few movies I didn't care for but watched THREEtimes. I guess I really, really wanted to like this film, although thefinal time I only watched it because it was part of a film noir DVDpackage set. At least the print was better than the lousy VHS copiesthat were available on this movie. That's important because, being afilm noir, there a number of good night-time shots with sharpcontrasts.I might have thought better of this film had it had a more realisticending, instead of hokey Hollywood-type finish that has a majorcredibility problem, which I can't go into with spoiling it. It alsohad too many lulls in the story. They weren't long lulls, but theyadded up.Despite the story problems, it's always a pleasure to see Robinson - inhis prime, too, a thin Wells also in his good years and attractiveYoung. Too bad their characters are on the dumb side, as is the story.

22 May 2012

Great Movie

I have waited many years to get a DVD copy of this after many viewings from my worn out vhs copy. This is great teaming between Welles and Robinson. The subject is good too. Viewers may also like Hitchcock's Notorius.

gbrumburgh-1

20 May 2012

Atmospheric, but surprisingly superficial post-war Wellesian melodrama that simply lacks a convincing story line.

A particular disappointment for those who recognize Orson Welles as a filminnovator and genius. Despite many critic's belief that "The Stranger" is aminor masterpiece, the truth is that it's little more than a convolutedpiece of propaganda intended to assuage the feelings of post-war audiences. On the plus side, director Welles does manage to show a stylish touch hereand there, and the stark black-and-white photography evokes a somber andappropriately eerie pall over the proceedings. But nothing can overcome thebanal, increasingly preposterous story line which, by some miracle, receivedan Oscar nomination.Top-billed Edward G. Robinson plays a federal agent who has assigned himselfthe task of finding a heinous, sought-after Nazi war criminal who played aprincipal role in the operation of concentration camps. By cleverlyallowing the "escape" of a minor Nazi figure, Robinson hopes that Nazi minorwill lead him to the whereabouts of Nazi major. As the action unfolds, thetrail quickly leads to a quaint, quiet, seemingly unaffected Connecticuttown.Welles' batting average at this point of his film career was poor. He hadstruck out profitably with his prior three movies, but producer Sam Spiegelgave Welles this final opportunity to prove he COULD churn out a movie ontime and within the budget. For Welles the result was remunerative andcommercially successful. But at such a cost! While the studio wasappreciative, Welles himself called it the worst film of his career and Icouldn't agree more. It probably succeeded because the film's contentstruck a politically correct chord with its 1946 post-war audiences. I canthink of no other reason.Accenting this suspense melodrama with shadowy camera angles and wonderful"portrait-like" close-ups of his stars, Welles shows surprisingly little ofthe inventiveness he is known for. Everything seems rehashed, including astrikingly reminiscent clock tower finale a la Alfred Hitchcock. Moreover,Welles dilutes most of the film's suspense with stale, ineptly drawn, poorlymotivated characters -- most of them sacked with implausible dialogue andsituations. Even the musical score is obtrusive and obvious.Wisely understated, Robinson comes off best here as the dogged agent whoseinstincts do not fail him as he ferrets out his suspect. His character'stone seems balanced, direct, and realistic, which is truly welcomed for heis surrounded by a cast of over-emoters.Welles the director comes off marginally better than Welles the actor. Heplays the small-town professor-turned-suspect as if he were Macbeth in aproduction of "Our Town." His classical demeanor just doesn't jell. Atleast his Nazi isn't a caricature, but his intense, incessant brooding herequickly turns mechanical, registering every sinister act and intention witha wide, fixated, stony gaze. One of his few good moments occurs at a dinnertable sequence when he is allowed to expound on everything from Marxism tothe mental restoration of post-war Germans. Loretta Young is the chief violator of most of the film's acting problems. As the unsuspecting wife of Welles' character who refuses to see theobvious, she is simply unconvincing in her many scenes, unleashing aplethora of emotions, none of them coming from anywhere real. Her reactionsare over-baked and, at times, unintentionally amusing as she feigns shock,disbelief, false bravado, and everything else under the sun. The dialogueserved on her certainly doesn't help either. But the most frustrating aspect of this film is that Welles, in order toadvance the plot, allows his characters to do such silly, unsubtle,nimble-minded things. Neither Robinson's methods of tracking down his mannor Welles' ability to elude the ever tightening dragnet are done with muchintelligence. One wonders how they ever achieved their stations in life. And poor Loretta! She is practically offered up as a sacrificial lamb justto expose her husband's true identity, when other methods could haveutilized just as well! While "The Stranger" cannot seriously damage Orson Welles' reputation as amasterful but frustrated filmmaker, it certainly does nothing to enhanceit.

Devin

20 May 2012

Suspenseful and Entertaining

This film has its faults, but they are easily forgiveable--and Orson Welles proves that he is one of the single coolest men in Western history with his performance in this film. The story is extremely interesting, the acting is great at times, and the directing has its astonishing moments, but they don't all come together to make a great movie--just a very good one. Orson's monologue about Germany rivals his other famous monologue in 'The Third Man'. The over-the-top ending is definitely fun, even though it seems to be lacking something.I recommend this film to those of you who are ardent movie fans, not just the typical movie-goer.

KFL

18 May 2012

Full marks

Atmosphere, storyline, and the performances of most players receive fullmarks. Camera-work is also very good. Some symbolism is a bit heavy-handed,especially Kindler's finally being killed by the avenging angel of the clocktower.The choice of a sleepy little town in Connecticut was especiallysignificant. The people here can't begin to imagine the evil that occurred aworld away ("I've never seen a Nazi"), making it that much easier forKindler to escape suspicion. Only Wilson (Edward G Robinson) knows whatKindler is capable of; and Kindler's evil appears that much more profoundwhen contrasted with the simpleminded good-naturedness of thetownfolk.

18 May 2012

A very good film-noir

This is a very good film and one of the lesser-known film-noirs. Orson Welles is an escaped Nazi war criminal named Franz Kindler who hides out in a bucolic Connecticut town under an assumed name. He believes he can finally put his dark past behind him since nobody knows his true identity. He becomes a teacher at a prep school for boys and marries a supreme court justice's pretty but somewhat naive daughter Mary, played superbly by Loretta Young. Edward G. Robinson is also terrific in his role as a war crimes commissioner on Kindler's trail who shows up in town as an antiques dealer. Welles and Robinson's characters play a cat & mouse game that ends in a dramatic climax atop the town's clock tower. At times Welles' performance comes off as a little over the top and the film can seem slightly melodramatic, but I believe those factors enhance the dense and brooding atmosphere. This is a good film with a simple plot and on cue performances that allow us to see the characters' motivations without being distracted by unimportant details. Richard Long and Martha Wentworth also star. Highly recommended!

17 May 2012

Wells was a ham on purpose

He realized Edward G. Robinson and Loretta Young could steal films from others easy so he had to make sure his character (who isn't in every scene) counted for a lot. Besides he maintains quite a stiffness through several scenes to make sure his Rankin-Nazi character never becomes too likable (unlike Charlie Kane in Citizen Kane). As for the plausability of the plot. It may interest everyone to know gangster Al Capone's own brother, Richard Hart, was bodyguard to President Calvin Coolidge in real life. Excellent film with (then) state-of-the-art camera angles.

16 May 2012

A clockwork oddity

Orson Welles's 1946 film noir seems to have been largely inspired by Hitchcock: the basic plot of a murderous wolf among the trusting lambs of an American small town (and a few other story points) owes much to SHADOW OF A DOUBT, while the heroine's central dilemma seems lifted from SABOTAGE. (There are other debts, too, to such films as DOUBLE INDEMNITY, with a central investigator played by Edward G. Robinson trying to gain the trust of the villainous protagonist.) On paper, this film's basic set-up may sound irresistible: Welles plays a high-ranking Nazi fugitive hiding in a small Connecticut prep school town while posing as a teacher, and his unsuspecting wife (Loretta Young) must decide what to do when his identity is revealed to her by the investigator. There are all kinds of amusing Gothic touches--a buried body hidden in the woods, a deathtrap involving a high ladder, and a mammoth medieval Glockenspiel installed in the town clock tower that plays a deadly part at the film's conclusion--but it all seems undigested and poorly executed. Welles took this project on to prove he could direct a film on time and under budget, but he seems to have suffered from the constraints put on his imagination. You keep glimpsing great ideas, and there are some excellent camera shots that rival some of his best work, but it all seems finally to disappoint in the end.Part of the problem lies with the performances. Welles himself seems unconvincing in his role as the architect of the Final Solution, and sweats too much and gives away too much. Loretta Young, who so often seemed as if she could do so much more than she was asked in the usual fluffy fare Hollywood handed her, gives a wildly erratic performance as the tortured wife. As usual she's superb in her smaller scenes (particularly near the film's beginning, when she gains just an inkling of what lurks sub rosa), but in two of her biggest scenes--when Robinson reveals to her the truth about her husband, and a terribly conceived scene where she attempts to rush into a death trap and is stalled by the complaints of her housekeeper--she fails to bring her part off. Still, there's much of interest here, especially if you're a Welles fan, and the screenplay does some very clever things involving moral ambiguity among all the characters (as the film progresses, both the wife and the investigator begin to behave cruelly and inhumanly, suggesting their own mutual identification with the enemy).

TigerMann

14 May 2012

Unheralded thriller from Orson Welles

While "The Stranger" isn't Welles' finest film, there are certainlymany elements within to make it memorable.The story revolves around a War Crimes agent (Edward G.Robinson) searching out the identity of a former Nazi responsiblefor many of the atrocities committed during the holocaust (OrsonWelles). His investigation leads to a small town in Connecticut,where he discovers a suspicious newlywed school teacher withone identifying characteristic: An obsession with clocks. Much ofthe movie is Robinson's struggle to uncover and prove Welles' trueidentity, leading to an epic finale atop a clocktower."The Stranger" is based on previously published material, butWelles goes a long way to make the movie his own. As a director,Welles knew how to compose a shot, and "The Stranger" featuressome great camera work. Particularly interesting to me was theuse of mirrors to convey Welles' dual role as respected teacher,mentor and husband ... and as a Nazi executioner, and torturer.Also in the plot there's an on-going checkers game betweenRobinson and the owner of a local general store. During the finalact, Welles plays checkers all afternoon with this fellow to use asan alibi. Though I can't say for sure, I'm going to assume that thecheckers games are symbolic of Robinson's pursuit of Welles.Most consider Welles' first movie, "Citizen Kane" to be not only hisgreatest achievement, but also one of the greatest Americanmovies ever to be made. I'll say nothing to refute that, but "CitizenKane" also led to Welles' undoing. Could he possibly ever top thescale and brilliance of Kane?It's hard to say. Personally, I enjoyed his adaptation of Kafka's "TheTrial," starring Anthony Perkins. In it, Welles attempts to fit in thatepic scale of "Citizen Kane" with Kafka's subversive plot and storyof a man standing accused for a crime he cannot comprehend. It'sWelles at his audacious best.But I digress.All in all, "The Stranger" is a great movie for a quiet evening spentat home. As a double feature, try this movie along with "The LadyFrom Shanghi," starring Welles and his ex-wife Rita Hayworth.Another great film noir, though it suffers from extreme studioediting.

mononotstereo

14 May 2012

Not to be confused for an Orson Welles film

There are, of course, many curious ironies in life. Orson Welles, one ofcinema's great auteurs, suffered from more than his fair share of these inhis career. Most people know the story about how his first film ispossiblethe greatest American film ever made, and almost as many know that despitethis fact, he rarely worked in the mainstream of American movie-makingagain. Relieved of his hitherto unprecedented deal with RKO picture afterjust two completed films, Welles found himself by 1946 already strugglingtofind work in Hollywood (a misfortune that would plague him for the rest ofhis career, and one that he eventually gave up on to make his later filmselsewhere), performing a magic show and, in these circumstances, agreeingtostar in and direct what was by his standards a run-of-the-mill thriller,TheStranger. His last 'studio' picture, The Stranger was also the mostsuccessful film Welles made in his lifetime, and, almost inevitably it isalso the worst film he made.The first thing that distinguishes The Stranger from almost all of therestof Welles' creative output (and quite literally the first - the creditstellus so) is that, although taking the leading role and directing, Welles hadno part in writing this film. Now Welles could not ever be classed as oneofcinema's great writers, but he was certainly - like Kubrick who followedhim- a great adapter. And like Kubrick, Welles was only truly happy andeffective when he complete control over the creative drive of a production(this was equally true of his hugely successful time in the theatre). As aresult, The Stranger, both in terms of his acting and directing feels likeWelles on autopilot. Indeed, where it does raise itself above similarfilmsof the period (and it does so on many occasions - this maybe his leastaccomplished work, but it is still much more than the work of othercomparative cinematic mortals), the effects and camera trickery feel likeatired retread of the techniques pioneered to such dazzling effect in Kane.The use of dissolves (most notably in a playful opening sequence),overlapping dialogue and shadow are undoubtedly a cut above the standardthrillers of the time, but often serve to remind you that you could bewatching Kane or The Magnificent Ambersons instead.The plot centres around escaped Nazi war criminal Franz Kindler (Welles),who has managed to pass himself off unnoticed in the small town of Harper,Connecticut as university professor Charles Rankin. His coup de grace istomarry local dame (and daughter of a Supreme Court judge no less) MaryLongstreet, thus putting himself above suspicion. However, the arrival inthe town of a fellow Nazi, who himself had been released by Allied forceswith the express intention of leading them to Kindler, sets off a chain ofevents that leads to the unmasking of Kindler, and the inevitablenail-biting finale. Although written without a great deal of flair, theplotis suitably taut, and allowing the audience to know the precise identityof'the stranger' from the outset is a refreshing change from other genrepieces.The acting alternates between servicable and even enjoyable (in the caseofEdward G. Robinson's tenacious and supremely-confident-of getting-his-mangovernment agent), to the down-right lousy (Loretta Young asRankin/Kindler's loyal bride). Welles himself is not immune, as hisperformance strays from delightfully sinister at times - the meeting withhis fellow Nazi Meinike is a joy of silliness - to the just plain silly,andeven wooden at times (not something you'll see written very often aboutWelles's acting). Stories from Welles's formative years in theatre recallhow he often devoted so much of his time to the direction and every otheraspect of a performance that he neglected to rehearse his own role at all(invariably the lead), rarely to positive effect. His performance herereminded me of these tales, as one can imagine Welles walking onto setjustminutes before a scene, learning his lines on the spot, and delivering aperformance that reflected the amount of preparation that went into thescene. One of the film's more memorable scenes (and as such serves to actasummary of the film's shortcomings as a whole) sees Rankin/Kindler deliveradamning indictment of the German race's tendency towards fascism in ordertomaintain his persona in the presence of Robinson's ever-watchful Wilson.Thespeech has resonance with Welles's famous speech from The Third Man (madethree years later) on the ethics of his 'business', ending with it'smockingof the Swiss, with their five hundred years of democracy producing naughtbut the cuckoo clock. However, while that scene memorable takes place intheferris wheel high above Vienna, this scene is confined entirely to thedinner table, with Welles allowing the words quite literally to do all thetalking.As it stands, The Stranger is something of an enjoyable curate's egg of amovie, dealing as it does with the immediate post-war period, as people'slives returned to normal (although how much they changed in Connecticutfromwar to post-war is probably negligible anyway), and stories still aboundedof Nazi plots to start another war and whether democracy would be possiblein Europe. As said previously, the plot is suitably taut, and holds theattention until the - rather obvious and cliched - finale. However, ifthisrun-of-the-mill in thriller terms, it is the cinematic equivalent offilm-making whilst blindfolded, with both hands tied behind the back andstanding on one leg for Welles. While it is a crying shame that he wasprevented from making more films, particularly in his own country, we canonly be thankful that Welles never sold his soul to the studios to make acareer on this standard.

mstomaso

14 May 2012

Excellent, timeless and improbable noir thriller

To view The Stranger in its proper context, the audience must recallthat the film was released a little over a year after the end of WorldWar II - a time when most Americans were preoccupied with three majorfears - nuclear war, Nazis and the spread of communism. The Strangerexploits the second of these. Orson Welles plays Franz Kindler/CharlesRankin - a Nazi who has settled in small town America and recentlywedded the lovely Mary Longstreet (Loretta Young). Kindler's pastbegins to catch up with him as a trap is set involving one of his Nazicolleagues, and it quickly becomes clear that Kindler is an obsessive,ruthless, sociopath. Edward G. Robinson's Mr. Wilson is a smart,likable, War Crimes Commission Inspector who is sent out to discoverwhat the trap has ensnared.Welles and Robinsom engage in a subtly vicious cat and mouse game, withYoung and her brother (played by Richard Long) somewhere in the middle.The acting is superb, the directing great, the cinematography iswonderful and the script is excellent. Despite the somewhat unlikelyplot, the whole story feels very believable because of Welles'extraordinary directing, the solid script, and the effusive talent ofthe principal cast. Although some have commented negatively on Welles'performance, I believe that he nailed the characterization ofKindler/Rankin in this film, and acted (though more subtly) right atthe very high standards set by Young and Robinson. Young's role wasprobably the most challenging of the lot, and, as usual, she gets itvery right and manages to evoke all of the sympathy the role demands. Iwill also briefly mention the one little performance surprise this filmoffered me - Richard Long. Long plays a college-aged brother of Young,and gives a very strong supporting performance in this highlyuncharacteristic role.Although widely regarded as a minor success in Welles' vast repertoireof good films, I believe The Stranger should be reconsidered for abetter rank in the Welles canon. Although elements of the story aredated, the themes are timeless, and this film would make a fine remakewith minor plot modifications.

brences

13 May 2012

A Nazi architect of the Shoah, known only by name, is pursued by a Nazi hunter in post-war New England.

The Stranger is a remarkable film for several reasons. One is that itdemonstrates Orson Welles' considerable talent for designinginteresting lighting effects, for wonderful visual composition, and forcreating an atmosphere pregnant with menacing possibilities. Second, isthat it contains film footage (however brief and sanitized) of corpses"manufactured" in the Shoah (more widely known as the Nazi Holocaust).In this connection, it also plainly presents Nazism as essentiallyanti-Semitic, and even contains mention of concentration camps and gaschambers.The latter of these two reasons may seem unremarkable now, but as astudent of the Shoah and the history of its handling in popularculture, I was stunned to find this issue addressed in such a directmanner in a Hollywood movie from 1946. After all, even documentariesconcerning the Shoah, a decade or more removed from those events,barely mentioned that the principle victims of the Shoah were Jews (see"Night and Fog", Alain Resnais' otherwise excellent 1956 effort). Fearsof post-war indifference due to anti-Semitism even led Simon Wiesenthalto spread the untruth that as many as six million non-Jewish peopleperished in the Holocaust (of the 6-7 million estimated killed, thevast majority were Jews).Perhaps it is this treatment of the Shoah, and the chance to play aNazi-hunter, that explains the presence of Edward G. Robinson in thispicture (he was born a Romanian Jew named Emanuel Goldenberg). Thepresence of this immensely talented actor begs for an explanation,sadly, because aside from the reasons noted above, the film is simplyterrible.The writing, acting (even from Robinson), and direction are about assubtle as a poke in the eye. Every predictable emotion and obviousmotive by every character is announced in ridiculously overplayedgestures and movements, accompanied by tedious, wooden dialog, and thenexplained outright to the audience in yet still more tedious dialog.Imagine Citizen Kane remade using a version of the script that wasdesigned to make the plot and all the characters easily and fullyunderstood by dull-witted eight year olds who suffer from attentiondeficit disorder. (No offense to such people, I just don't want to seemovies made with them as the target audience.) In the mini biography ofthe screenwriter Victor Trivas here at IMDb, it suggests that he wasnominated for an Oscar for his work on this film. If that is true, theAcademy Awards very narrowly missed its own Milli Vanilli scandal (thepopular music group that won a Grammy only to have it revealed that the"artists" so awarded did not actually do their own singing). EitherTrivas regarded movie goers as complete idiots, was himself a completeidiot, or had his work ruined by complete idiots. This screenplay issimply terrible, and even great acting and direction (neither inevidence here) could have saved this movie from being lousy because ofit.If you are a fan of the film noir cycle for its visual style only, anOrson Welles completist, or interested in popular culture treatments ofthe Shoah, check it out. Otherwise, I would recommend two hours ofrandom television viewing first.

12 May 2012

The Stranger by Andy

This is one of those old movies that you have seen before that you remember and would like to see again.

occupant-1

11 May 2012

When movies had content...

... it could drive the action like no 'Terminator' script canmuster. TheNazi-on-the-run character is actually given a motivation, rooted inhistoryalmost too gruesome to contemplate. To comment further would ruin it - gorent it. The few lines about motivation for conquest are almost asilluminating as a second reading of MEIN KAMPF - the one where the pointstarts becoming clear, and can scare even the jaded modern.

11 May 2012

This is the copy you want

Now that MGM is putting out an official release of this one, you should probably skip this version and buy that. However, I liked this disc which did include a trailer unavailable elsewhere.

drystyx

10 May 2012

Masterpiece is everything better known Welles works claim to be

Make no mistake, this is by far the best movie Orson Welles everdirected or played in. This unheralded classic is what the overratedCitizen Kane aspired to be. If you are disappointed by the hyped upWelles movies, give this one a try. Welles plays a Nazi war criminalwho is engaged to the beautiful daughter of a supreme court justice.This is the only real flaw in the movie, since any war criminal wouldwant to keep a lower profile, even though few, if any, people alivecould identify the war criminal (as is the case in this movie.) E.G.Robinson plays the hero, a Columbo type chaser of Nazi war criminals.Welles was always at his best portraying the bad guy, and Robinson,known more for gangster roles, was at his best portraying the prototypefor what Peter Falk later turned into Columbo. The mood is spectacular.It contrasts the evil and danger that can even infiltrate a scene thatwould seem to be the safest. Of course it is the performances of screengiants that give this movie an edge, particularly Robinson.

09 May 2012

COULD THERE BE A NAZI WAR CRIMINAL TEACHING SCHOOL IN OUR TOWN TOO ?!

FORTUNATELY WE WON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH NAZI WAR CRIMINALS - JUSTICE & TIME HAS TAKEN CARE OF THEM ALL!WHAT "THE STRANGER" STARRING, ORSON WELLES IS ALL ABOUT: Orson Welles plays a college professor, [Charles Rankin]. He lives and works in a rural Connecticut town and is about to be married to Mary (Loretta Young), a truly wonderful young woman who's dad just happens to be a U.S. Supreme Court judge. Sometime after the war during a sunny afternoon, a shaky German named Meineke [Konstantin Shayne] arrives in town and soon turns up at Rankin's home where Mary is hanging drapes. Rankin, soons arrives and appears upset by Meineke's presence. Not wanting to speak to this "German" in front of Mary, Rankin summons the stranger for a walk in the woods. There we learn that professor Rankin is actually the infamous Nazi war criminal Franz Kindler. Conscience-stricken by his own criminal wartime activities, Meineke has come to Connecticut to plead with his former master, Kindler, who we know as Rankin, to do the right thing and turn himself in. The professor, however, has not seen the light, and responds by brutally slaying his old comrade. However, their is a loose-end for Rankin [aka-Kindler]. Mr. Wilson, [Edward G. Robinson] a War crimes investigator that deliberately freed Meineke to lead him to Kindler [aka- Rankin] pays a visit to the whole town [it seems], posing as an antiques dealer. For the entire film, Wilson's investigation and Mary's conscience are closing in on Rankin [aka-Kindler] and eventually led to the films climax. CAST OF "THE STRANGER" Orson Welles - Franz Kindler/Prof. Charles Rankin Edward G. Robinson - Wilson Loretta Young - Mary Longstreet Philip Merivale - Judge Longstreet Martha Wentworth - Sara Richard Long - Noah Longstreet Byron Keith - Dr. Jeff Lawrence 1 MAJOR AWARD FOR "THE STRANGER" - BUT AN IMPRESSIVE ONE! Best Original Story (nom) Victor Trivas/Orson Welles 1946 Academy

mackjay

09 May 2012

As Dark as Noir Gets

No question about it, "The Stranger" is film noir.This oppressive narrative is shrouded in what must surely be among thedarkest visual styles ever. Outdoor, sunlit scenes are few and far between.Most of the picture takes place inside the shadowy mansion of LorettaYoung's guardian, inside the town's general store, or within the nearlypitch-black church steeple, where the film climaxes in a highly dramaticmanner. This movie is noir, without a doubt.Orson Welles, Edward G. Robinson and Loretta Young--are all beyond criticismas well, giving finely tuned, subtle performance.Also standing out is a very young, understated Richard Long--proving he hadacting chops way back then. Bronislau Kaper contributes a score to rival other, more highly-regardedcomposers. There are moments in it of ethereal beauty as well as intensedrama.Yet, apart from its visual style, how is "The Stranger" noir? The answer maylie in another question: who is the hero? If it's the Welles character, thenhe is an anti-hero and it fits pretty well. However, his new wife, played byLoretta Young, finds herself in a situation most noir, when Welles confessesthe murder to her (and later plots her death as well). But Young does notseem like the main character in this tale, nor does Robinson, who is clearlya heroic figure. Perhaps what makes this one noir is the visual style incombination with character situations that complement eachother."The Stranger" is only a few short steps below "Touch of Evil" in the Wellespantheon.