Friday, March 1, 2013

The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946) **

the-postman-always-rings-twice-1-1024

(This is my contribution to the John Garfield Blogathon.)

I have seen three film versions of James M. Cain’s 1934 novel, The Postman Always Rings Twice. Director Tay Garnett’s 1946 version is not my favorite—that honor falls to Luchino Visconti’s Ossessione (1943)—but it is still entertaining to watch.  The acting is superb, and the cinematography The Postman Always rings twiceis classic film noir.  Still, there are pesky plot development inconsistencies that make me not appreciate this as much as others do.

John Garfield plays Frank Chambers, a drifter who sees a “Man Wanted” sign hanging in front of a hamburger stand/gas station.  In typical noir fashion, this sign has two meanings.  One, the proprietor, Nick Smith (Cecil Kellaway), needs help pumping gas and flipping burgers. Two, Nick’s much younger and way too attractive wife, Cora (Lana Turner), needs a man to sexually satisfy her.  From the moment Cora and Frank meet you know things aren’t going to end well—he plants a kiss on her within minutes of meeting her.  Eventually, they decide the only way they can be happy is to get rid of Nick. Yet, like any good noir things never turn out happy.

This was probably the best performance Lana Turner gave in her career. Often she got away with just looking pretty, but here she gives a nuanced portrayalpostmanalwaysrings of a complex woman.  Yes, her Cora is sexy, but she’s also a woman who wants to build a successful business. She truly look conflicted about engaging in an affair with Frank, while at the same time it’s obvious she is filled with lust.  Her character’s ethical dichotomy is often emphasized by whatever color she happens to be wearing: white or black (though white seems to be costume designer Irene’s hue of choice).  Contrasted against the dark sets and lighting, Cora in white looks as though she is emanating heat—perhaps that was the point.  Anyway, Turner does a fabulous job.

Dark and brooding parts seemed to suit Garfield. He brings a touch of unbridled sexuality and a heap of self-loathing to his role of Frank. His fire plays very well off Turner’s ice, and the end result is a whole lot of steam.  While I don’t think his role was nearly as demanding or complex as Turner’s, he does play the anti-hero well. What I always admire about Garfield is his ability to play unlikable characters in such a way that you don’t completely hate them. 

Postman_Rings_Twice_46-cronynI couldn’t talk about the film’s superb acting without mentioning Hume Cronyn. He plays one of the most hard-ass shyster lawyer’s ever.  His Arthur  Keats is so smarmy and unethical that all you can do is admire his bravado.  Cronyn had a habit of taking small parts and making them memorable (think Brute Force, among many). For me, he’s the best thing about The Postman Always Rings Twice.

No noir would be a respectable noir without atmospheric cinematogrphy. Sidney Wagner (a.k.a Syd Wagner) is not as well known as Gregg Toland, but he was more than capable of expertly framing shots and working with shadows and light. His 20070712044439lana_turner_in_the_postman_always_rings_twice_trailer_2work on both Northwest Passage (1940) and Dragon Seed (1944) earned him Academy Award nominations, and his camera work on The Cross of Lorraine (1943) was stellar, too. Here he employs tight framing and harsh lighting (both dark and bright) to create an uneasy mood. 

What I don’t like about The Postman Always Rings Twice is the contrived plot developments.  For example, what old man in his right mind would suggest his hot, young wife go for a midnight swim with his hunky assistant? He deserved to die! And, wouldn’t someone plotting a murder notice that the District Attorney (Leon Ames) was following them before they decided to stage an accident? Oh, and when and how did Cora become pregnant if she and Frank were on the outs for months after her trial? I could have lived with one of these annoying questions, but all three together just pissed me off. 

Overall, The Postman Always Rings Twice is an entertaining movie with standout performances.  It is also a film that suffers from idiotic plot devices. 

23 comments:

  1. I never did think that Lana's character was in love with Garfield's character, it all happened too fast. She was like a spider waiting for someone to come along to kill her husband.

    What I did like about the film.. Something, was always happening, First.. they get caught doing the murder. After, the trial, just when you think the movie's over, a new plot with it's twists and turns and double crosses, turn up...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right, something always seems to be happening. I think Cora was looking for a man who could make her happy (in many ways) and when Frank came along she was more than ready.

      Delete
  2. I agree, OSSESSIONE is the best version and deserves to be better known in this country. I enjoy this version for many of the reasons you mention, however, for me, Turner who is gorgeous here, is the problem. She is too gorgeous, too stunning to be believeable as a truck stop waitress. You never forget she is Lana Turner "movie star." One other thing to note is that Cora wears all white until the plan to murder her husband is in motion, then her wardrobe switches to black, similar to Janet Leigh's white bra and slip in PSYCHO before she steals the $40K when her bra and slip are now black. Nice visuals bits by the directors.

    I'm really glad you were able to see "Ossessione" a great film!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kim,

    Don't get me wrong, I like the film and Garfield fits his role perfectly. Cronyn is very good also. Enjoyed you review!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, John. Ossessione is an excellent film--most everything Visconti did was brilliant.

      Delete
  4. Kim, I haven't seen "Ossessione," so this is my favorite version of the film. The Nicholson/Lange version did nothing for me. Probably what I like most about this one is the Lana Turner/John Garfield chemistry. Steam heat. There's another element in this film that attracts me and that's the sparsely inhabited and windswept California seacoast setting. Heightens the mood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should see Ossessione, Eve. It is a riveting film. You Californians love anything that shows off the beauty of your state. :)

      Delete
  5. You have piqued my interest -- I must find and view Ossessione. I concur -- Hume Cronyn delivers the best performance in this film. I always thought growing up this was a WB film. It has more of a Warners feel than an MGM vibe. Perhaps due to Garnett and Garfield.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does have a Warner Bros. feel to it, doesn't it? Ossessione is just so raw and visceral that it puts all other versions of Cain's novel to shame.

      Delete
  6. Kim - nice post, as always. Garfield & Turner were so unbelievably hot in this that nothing else really seems to matter. However, I do agree with you about Cecil Kellaway. In what universe would he have bagged Cora? It would have been a little more believable if the actor was a tad more attractive (just not as sexy as Garfield). This is one of those films that I can watch many times - great chemistry class.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kellaway was miscast in this. Perhaps a cleaned up version of Walter Huston (or eve L. Barrymore) would have been better. Garfield and Turner did have great chemistry in this and I think that's what carried it.

      Delete
  7. Great review, Kim...and a wonderful addition to the blogathon. Thanks so much for participating and providing this terrific write-up.

    I am a huge Lana fan, and I think she often gave great performances; however, I lean to the kinds of melodramatic films she did, so she always pleased me. The chemistry between her and Garfield is amazing in this film. That wouldn't be anything odd, except that Lana's daughter, Cheryl, said in a documentary I watched that her mom was unhappy about the casting of Garfield. Cheryl said that Lana griped, "At least they could have found someone attractive." And I'm thinking "Lana, what ARE you talking about? Garfield was gorgeous!"

    Yes, Hume Cronyn was as slimy as they come, wasn't he? Definitely, the stereotypical lawyer.

    Thanks again for being a part of the blogathon. I appreciated having you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're welcome, Patti. I have to say, I never found Garfield all that handsome, but he did have good chemistry with Turner.

      Delete
  8. This is a very good review, Kim, and I can definitely sympathize with your exasperation over some of the plot contrivances. Garfield and Turner do smolder up the screen, though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wow, that was an amazing review and exactly why I didn't attempt one...I couldn't even come close! I've never seen "Ossessione" but I'd really love to, I'd heard good things about it and you've confirmed that it's definitely a must see. I'll have to track it down.

    Good point about Cora's pregnancy, I hadn't thought about that. I did always wonder if the old man knew he couldn't satisfy her and figured she could have a fling here or there!

    Thank you so much for stopping by my blog! I appreciate your nice comment. We share the same last name too:)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Victoria, I'm sure you give yourself less credit than you deserve about reviewing. The more you do it, the better you become.

      Delete
  10. I love both this and 'Ossessione' - Garfield and Turner do make a smouldering couple in this film although I must agree that Cecil Kellaway is miscast. Great review, Kim, which makes me want to watch both versions again and also catch up on the more recent take that I have somehow never seen!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Judy. The 1980s version isn't really that good, so I'd pass on it and rewatch Ossessione.

      Delete
  11. Kim, a carefully considered reaction to the film. Garfield is one of my favorite actors, so I had no problem with him here. Lana Turner, on the other hand, strikes me as very much the studio-manufactured star. I agree, though, that her work here is, along with "The Bad and the Beautiful," the best of her career. My problems with the film (it's been awhile since I saw it, so I can't comment on the plot contrivances that bothered you) revolve around her casting in the role and particularly Cecil Kellaway's. I think you put your finger on it when you called her character icy, whereas to me she should be smoldering. And I just can't imagine any circumstances under which these two would have married. Unlike some others, I found way too much MGM slickness to call this real film noir. That slickness seemed conspicuously at odds with the grittiness of the plot.

    That's certainly not the case with "Osessione," which has all the requisite grit (including a very earthy actress in the Lana Turner role) and also the benefit of location shooting. Also, Visconti was a far better director than the proficient but unexciting Tay Garnett. Overall, I like this version, but compared to the Visconti version, it's pure Hollywood confection. I just wish that RKO or Warners had made the film in true noir style, with Garfield in the lead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent points, RDF. Visconti is one of the best Italian directors ever (along with De Sica) and he always had a feel for how I film such look and the mood it should express. Garnett's attempt at noir is less than effective.

      Delete
  12. I think you liked this one better than I did, but then again I got a bit carried away by their stupidity, which annoyed me a great deal. As noir goes it was okay, it just pales in comparison to Ossessione.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, Ossessione is far superior to this, but John Garfield makes it an interesting watch. Plus, this is probably one of Lana Turner's best performances ever.

      Delete