Review: Detour (1945)

A low budget, classic film noir.

Directed by Edgar G. Ulmer
Produced by Leon Fromkess
Written by Martin Goldsmith
Starring Tom Neal, Anne Savage, Claudia Drake, and Edmund MacDonald

***

Widely named as one of the quintessential film noirs, this brisk film sees one hitchhiker fall into a world of trouble, only to fall deeper, in just 67 minutes. Tom Neal stars as Al Roberts, a piano player who leaves New York for Los Angeles to join his girl Sue (Drake). On the journey, he manages to hitch a ride with pill-popping, L.A.-bound Charles Haskell Jr. (MacDonald), and Al even drives for the man while he sleeps that night. Then it starts to rain. When Al gets out to put up the convertible's roof, he opens the passenger door, and Haskell falls out, his head striking a rock. Al figures the police will not believe this story, so he hides the body and heads for L.A. with Haskell's papers, clothes, and, of course, his car. Later, at a gas station, Al picks up Vera (Savage), who just happens to be the girl Haskell ditched before his death. She blackmails Al, stringing him along in a plan to sell the car, until she sees that Haskell's sick (and wealthy) father is searching for his estranged son. Al refuses to go along with her scheme for him to impersonate the deceased Haskell to get the inheritance money. If he goes through with it, he will surely be found out, but if not, he still has Vera latched onto him. He must get out, one way or another. 

Now, without its genre to define it, the film is not one of significant merit. In the context of film noir history, it succeeds very well in utilizing the genre's most notorious elements. The film has a relatively innocent protagonist whose unfortunate circumstances get him involved with a venomous femme fatale. It also has smoking, drinking, sweat, tears, blackmail, and murder. One of the film's best qualities is another distinct characteristic of the noir genre, which is its low-key cinematography. Despite its paper-thin budget and only two-week shooting schedule, the film is beautifully shot, incorporating the usual dark shadows that give the film its wonderful atmosphere. The film is also narrated by the protagonist, and Neal gives just the right performance for this material. Savage is also very good as a burned woman who forces her agenda on the floundering protagonist. Another element that really sticks out is the dialogue, which drips of classic noir with lines like "I was tussling with the most dangerous animal in the world, a woman" and "That's life. Whichever way you turn, Fate sticks out a foot to trip you". It meets the criteria for a great noir - and it is; but the film does have a certain cheesiness that mars the overall quality of it. 

Oscar Tally: None

Watch/download this film (legally) for free at Internet Archive.

The Battle of San Pietro (1945) **

The Germans weren’t the only country that made propaganda films during World War II—the United States enlisted top-tier directors like John Huston and Frank Capra to shore up troop morale and to keep the homefront abreast of what was happening in the European Theater, too.  Of course, there was a very significant difference between Joseph Goebbels and John Huston: Huston had a conscience.  It was his understanding of right and wrong that shaped how he composed what is considered the greatest war documentary ever made, The Battle of San Pietro (1945). 

San Pietro is an Italian town located in a flat corridor surrounded by mountains near the Mignano Gap, which leads to the Liri Valley, which at that time was the road to Rome. As Allied Forces made their jump from Northern Africa to Sicily and then the Italian mainland in September 1943, retreating German forces began building parallel defensive points to the south of Rome, which they called the Winter Line.  Unfortunately for San Pietro it was in a strategically important location to the Germans, who built overlooking pillbox fortifications and mined the surrounding hillsides. By December 1943, after a month of fighting, the Germans were holding on for dear life against the Allied offensive.  It was the Battle of San Pietro, which lasted for ten brutal days in early December and cost the 143rd Regiment of the U.S. Army over a thousand soldiers, that led the Germans to retreat further north and set up what would later become the pivotal Battle of Monte Cassino in 1944. 

What makes The Battle of San Pietro so memorable is its gritty realism. Cameramen Jules Buck and his crew filmed right beside the 143rd Regiment as heavy artillery and machine gun fire reigned down on them from overlooking German fortifications. Today people talk about how realistic the battle scenes in Saving Private Ryan (1998) are—well, you don’t get more real than the filming of an actual prolonged assault.  Chaotic in nature and unflinching in the reality of what takes place on the field of battle, this is a testament to the true nature of warfare. There are shots of dead soldiers and rows upon rows of makeshift graves, as well as aerial shots of the completely destroyed town itself. 

While the film was held back from general population until after the war in Europe ended in May 1945, it was used as a training film for the army.  General George Marshall said it was the type of film that would make soldiers take their training more seriously—I would hope so!  The finished product that was shown to the American people was narrated by Huston himself and exalted the courage and tenacity of the 143rd Regiment.  It also had a bit of an anti-war feel to it, which brought Huston some criticism from the Army.  To me, this is the least offensive thing about the documentary.

What I find more disturbing about this documentary is the overtly religious music and imagery that Huston uses.  There is no sanctity in war and it always bothers me when anyone attempts to say that God favors one country over another in acts of death and destruction.  When you end a film by saying that the children of San Pietro will wake up tomorrow and it will be as though the bad things never happened, and then you show an image of Saint Peter, I think you may have overstepped just a tad.  Ah, but isn’t that why war propaganda films are made in the first place?

074. The Last Bomb

074. (01 Mar) The Last Bomb (1945, Frank Lloyd) 60



An engaging look at the final assault on Japan, The Last Bomb's real intrigue is its Technicolor footage of firefights and bomb drops. This is rather remarkable material as you see the bombs drop and impact the ground in real time. Lloyd contextualizes rather well, giving a sense of what daily life is like for the men who fly these planes and how risky that can be. There's also always an explanation of what target is being hit with the exception of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The atomic bomb drops are almost afterthoughts, taking up the last minute of the film before the end title.

I Know Where I’m Going (1945) **

The Archers, Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, collaborated on eighteen films over a thirty year period (1939-72).  While their first true “Archer” production (where they share writing, directing and producing credit) didn’t come until 1943 with The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, they had previously worked on four films together.  Usually, it was Powell who did the bulk of the directing and Pressburger who came up with the story ideas and handled most of the production chores (especially when it came to editing and music incorporation). Some of their endeavors are quite memorable, like Black Narcissus (1947) and The Red Shoes (1948), while others are easily forgotten, such as The Battle of the River Plate (1956) and Ill Met By Moonlight (1957).  Somewhere in-between their masterpieces and their flops is located I Know Where I’m Going! (1945), which stars Wendy Hiller as a young woman who’d rather marry for money than love.

Manchesterian Joan Webster (Hiller) is supposed to marry wealthy industrialist Sir Robert Bellinger (Norman Shelley’s voice—he’s never seen) on the Isle of Kiloran, but the weather (or fate) in the Scottish Hebrides has other plans.  For some reason I’ve never really liked Hiller. I don’t know exactly why, but I think it’s her voice—it just rubs me the wrong way. Still, she was a decent actress who was nominated for three Oscars (she won one for Separate Tables [1958]) and she worked in the industry for nearly sixty years.  In I Know Where I’m Going! she does a nice job of portraying her character’s steely determination to not be sabotaged by love (and an island full of eccentric Scots).  However, I like her much more in the beginning of the film when she is calling her bank managing father “Darling” (George Carney) than I do when she is risking poor Kenny’s (Murdo Morrison) life to get across to Kiloran. 

Roger Livesey (an Archer veteran) gives his usual steady performance as Torquil MacNeil (what a name!). A kilt-wearing naval officer, Torquil is the broke Laird of Kiloran (FYI a laird is one step below a baron) and the owner of the Isle of Kiloran.  He sees in Joan a woman he would like to tame, but unlike Petruchio, he attempts to do it with kindness and patience. Too bad his childhood friend Catriona (Pamela Brown) is married, because she is much prettier and, more importantly, way more interesting than Joan.  It just grates on my nerves when the supporting actress is more enjoyable than the lead actress (see Kristen Scott Thomas and Andie MacDowell in Four Weddings and a Funeral [1994]).  In addition to Livesey and Brown’s nice acting turns, Captain C.W.R. Knight is a hoot as Colonel Barnstaple, a falconer with a delightful sense of style.

What I think sets this movie apart from a number of others during this period is it’s cinematography. This was most probably cinematographer Erwin Hillier’s best work over his thirty year career.  It is said the he didn’t use a light meter at all, which must have made his task more difficult than usual, especially when you consider the weather conditions.  There are many long distance shots that capture the overall majesty of the Scottish shoreline.  As someone who has spent time in the Scottish towns of Carnoustie and Killin it was a reminder of just how beautiful the land of Scots can be.  Hillier also used a hand-held camera to capture some of the close-up shots—most notably the ones of the boat struggling against the Corryvreckan whirlpool.  Interestingly enough, what most people don’t know is that Livesey never once set foot in Scotland for any of the location shots because he was doing a play in London at the time they were shot. 

Overall, I Know Where I’m Going! is a somewhat enjoyable light romantic comedy.  Other than some very fine photography, there is not much else that stands out.  Still, it was nice to learn a little bit about Scottish customs, and the bagpipes weren’t played so much that I  wanted to hit mute too often, either.

The Lost Weekend

The Lost Weekend, 1945
Directed by Billy Wilder
Nominated for 7 Oscars, Won 4

Synopsis: Don Birnam is an alcoholic. He's been clean for 10 days, while under strict supervision from his brother, Wick, and girlfriend, Helen. But when Wick plans a weekend for them in the country, he evades it last minute, while his brother goes on. Leaving him alone for 4 days. Needless to say, he goes on a drinking rampage. Told in flashbacks of his past, and living in the present, we get a sense of who Don Birnam really is, and wonder if he'll ever stop.

This movie was quite a depressing one, I must say. We are first introduced to Don, packing away for his country weekend vacation and we immediately know something isn't quite right with him. Wick, his brother, seems to be keeping a close eye, and they keep mentioning "his current state" and "the last few days". And suddenly we realize it. We see Don luring up a bottle of alcohol that's been dangling out the window, while his brother goes to answer the door. We're dealing with an alcoholic.

Immediately, we are staring to see who Don is. He's a smooth talker, persuading his brother to go to the orchestra with his (Don's) girlfriend Helen, on account of wanting time to himself after "all he's been through". He persuades the cleaning lady to tell him where Wick hides the money he pays her with. And he's a smart dresser. He's a writer, and he's living in New York.

Throughout the film we see Don take many trips to the bar just down from his apartment, buying beer wherever he can, all the while the bartenders being warned about him, though Don is able to pay, so they can't deny him. We see Wick quickly give up on Don. He's been looking after him for far too long, and decides to go on the trip without him. He states it would be better for them all if Don were dead, which was brought up as a possibility if Wick leaves him alone for days at a time. Only Helen cares for him, and tries to look out for him. Throughout the film, we see flashbacks of how Don and Helen met, how he was an alcoholic even then, and just how much alcohol screws up your life. You steal, you blow off friends, parties and socializing to drink. It consumes you as you consume it.

What I found interesting about this film, is that Don was a very real person. We understood him, in a funny way, knew that he would steal money from a lady's purse to pay his drinking bills, not be able to resist the urge to buy more drinks, and to not call Helen back. In a weird way, this made sense to the watcher. Don wasn't being shown as the stereotypical alcoholic, who is messy and smelly and disgusting. But he was shown as a real man, who suffered, though it may not always show on the outside. We knew he would blow off time with people to drink, and we almost understood why. He knew he was going to steal, and once again, we understood that too. It brought alcoholism down to a very real level, which is incredible, since it was made so long ago, when addictions were still a touchy subject.

 Billy Wilder, the director, brought us down to the same level as Don, making the film so believable. And during the 40's, addictions like alcoholism weren't things that were talked about. They were closet issues, and never brought up. This was a controversial thing, to bring to the theatre. But without a doubt, it is an incredibly made film.

Ray Milland, who plays Don, is truly incredible, and rightly won Best Actor for the role. He transforms from put together man, to drunkard so well and so believably. He tiptoes the line between both and shows just how much alcohol can ruin your life, without being preachy about it, but showing alcohol addiction as it truly is.

I was impressed by this film. Black and white films and just old films in general never seem to really capture my attention, but this film I was concentrated in. I watched every minute, and truly believed it all. A better film from the "golden olden days".

8/10