Skip to main content

SIFF 2006, part 7

Screenings: June 11 - Film Noir Archival Presentations

The Man Who Cheated Himself

The Window

It is very lucky that won those passes, because otherwise, I probably wouldn't have decided to pick up tickets to any archival screenings. I have a tendency to assume that anything that has been made is around somewhere and thus, I could just rent these old films. Plus, I hadn't heard of these films, didn't know the stars, etc.

But this was a really great afternoon at SIFF. While the films were not the greatest that I've seen at the festival, the experience was great for seeing two little known noir films in a whole theater of movie fans. But the highlight was definitely Eddie Muller. He was very funny, informative and gave great introductions to each of the films. Most importantly, he talked about the film noir foundation and their efforts to attention to old films. Knowing that hundreds of films are made and that numerous studio projects get shelved and sometimes are never seen by audiences, I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise that many classic films, even some Oscar winning films, have been lost. No one knows where the prints are or even if there are existing prints. But the noir foundation pulls as many strings as they can to find films that haven't been seen in years. It was fascinating to hear about the foundation's work.

As for the films, The Man Who Cheated Himself is exactly what I expect to see when I hear a film described at film noir. It was about a cop, who tries to cover up a crime because of a dame. It had all of those elements that typifies noir; fedora wearing men, black and white, a crime plot, plenty of smoking, and even a femme fatale. This was a very enjoyable film and it was a nice example of Eddie Muller's description of film noir as "when you know it's wrong, but you do it anyway."

But it was The Window that was the highlight of the day. The Window was about a little boy (Bobby Driscoll) who witnesses a murder, but isn't believed when he tries to tell others. The result is a wonderfully suspenseful thriller that has more than a little in common with Hitchcock's Rear Window.

I really enjoyed this film and now that I've seen it, it isn't shocking that this was a huge hit in 1959. What is surprising is that such a commercially successful film that even won a couple of Oscars, including a best child actor award for Bobby Driscoll, but that Warner Brothers would have lost all prints of this film for decades. So if you like suspense or those now rare films of the children in peril genre, try to catch this film if you get a chance.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhastan

Right after seeing Sacha Baron Cohen's film, Borat, I was disappointed. I didn't laugh nearly as hard as I had hoped and it wasn't quite as outrageous as I had expected. But in retrospect, I have to admit the comic brilliance of Borat. Sacha Baron Cohen has adeptly created a film about a fictional man, Borat, from a fictionalized Kazakhastan and used this creation to show the hipocracy of America. Using tactics pioneered by reality television shows, Borat travels across America on a quest to find his true love, Pamela Anderson. On this journey, he meets numerous people who share their thoughts about a multitude of things, exposing the way some Americans really believe about race, class, homosexuality and the other sex. It is a very interesting film. Sure, it gets laughs from ambushing Pamela Anderson with a wedding bag, traveling with a bear, and a bit of naked wrestling, but this film is also very smart in its sly portrayal of the wealth of prejudices that are ali

Horror?

From Blogger I apparently have no clue what a horror movie is. Or at least, when the challenge rolls around and I take the leap and attempt to watch 31 horror movies, I suddenly feel as if I have no idea what that means. There are times when it is obvious that a movie is horror; Friday the 13th, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre . Once I dive into the challenge, I begin to question whether the movies I'm seeing really count. This year, I've seen Buried, Carrie, Clean, Shaven, Nosferatu (1922), Scanners, Sisters , and I sell the Dead . Nate protested Sisters, saying DePalma's movie about a pair of disturbed Siamese twins isn't a horror movie. And he has a point, but how is one supposed to choose movies without having seen them before to really know whether they are horror? Especially since I'm only using the challenge to catch up on movies that I should see because they are classics and to re-watch a few others that need to be revisited. But picking the

My attempt at Filmspotting's Top 5 List

I just finished listening to Filmspotting podcast, episode #296, and I've been inspired to begin a small project. My concept of great cinema has changed now that I live in a place with so many choices. When I lived in Anchorage, I primarily saw movies at the local Art House, Capri Cinema. Rand, being an out gay man, tended to show a lot of GLBT cinema as well as the better known independent/art house films. The years I lived in Columbia, I watched more mainstream film and really, just about everything that came to town that sounded at all interesting. But in Seattle, the choices are overwhelming by comparison. Sometimes I'll see a classic film, or a film with a lot of buzz, and there are a lot of foreign language films, because of the wide variety of cinema I have access to, I am now a very devoted fan of Asian cinema. The filmmakers in Hong Kong, Korea, China, Japan, Thailand are incredible. And this isn't at all limited to the genre films that have made Asian film