The Second Woman (1950)

The Second Woman (later re-released with the title Ellen) is a 1950 United Artists release that has languished in obscurity and that’s rather unfortunate.

The opening is obviously and I would assume deliberately reminiscent of Hitchcock’s Rebecca. A woman tells us that she keeps remembering a house, a house named Hilltop, now just a ruin.

There are moments that will call to mind several other notable movies of the 1940s, including other Hitchcock movies.

We get a scene with a man seemingly over come by carbon monoxide fumes from a car with its engine kept running in a garage.

A woman is told that she should leave her house immediately because she is in extreme danger.

We need to be wary of taking anything we see in this movie at face value.

Then we go into a flashback which occupies most of the movie’s running time.

Ellen Foster (Betsy Drake) meets Jeff Cohalan (Robert Young) on a train. He’s charming and friendly and he seems to be trying to pick her up (and she seems to like the idea) but there’s something slightly odd about him. He seems a bit distracted, a bit moody. As if something was haunting him.

They’re both heading for the same small town.

Jeff is an architect and apparently a very successful one. He’s well-liked but people worry about him. He has never been the same since the accident in which his wife was killed. Nobody likes to talk about the accident and Jeff certainly doesn’t want to talk about it.

But Ellen has fallen head over heels in love with Jeff and there’s no way to restrain a woman’s curiosity.

Jeff invites her to look inside Hilltop, the house he designed and in which he lives. That causes some surprise to the locals - Jeff has never allowed anybody inside Hilltop.

Jess seems to be getting more distracted and disturbed. And strange things keep happening to him. His much-loved horse breaks its leg. His dog is poisoned. There is worse to come. The painting is a particular puzzle. It’s one of Jeff’s prized possessions but the colours have started to fade. Ellen is convinced there’s something very significant about this painting.

And as Ellen says, it just isn’t possible for anybody to have that much bad luck. There’s something sinister going on. Everything that Jeff loves dies. Dr Hartley (Morris Carnovsky) is concerned that Ellen might be in danger. That seems more and more likely.

One nice twist is that we cannot be certain that Ellen is the one in danger. Events seem to be heading inexorably towards disaster but we don’t know from which direction the danger is coming and we don’t know the motive.

There are several plausible explanations for these strange events. The movie does a pretty good job of keeping us in doubt about the actual explanation.

The plot twists are handled quite deftly. There’s some decent misdirection. Mostly it relies on an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia that builds gradually but inexorably.

I loved Jeff’s cliff-top modernist house (I dislike modernist architecture for public buildings but I have a real weakness for modernist houses).

I have issues with Robert Young in his 1930s movies. He tries too hard and he’s too hyper-active. By 1950 however he had learnt to tone things down and he gives a fine subtle performance here. Betsy Drake is a likeable lively heroine.

This is a psychological thriller at times veering toward psychological horror and with some hints of the gothic. There are obvious echoes of Rebecca but also of Suspicion and Spellbound and maybe Laura.

This movie ticks just about all my boxes. I enjoyed it enormously. It deserves to be much better known. Highly recommended.

My copy of this film, which obviously had fallen into the public domain, is in one of those Mill Creek 50-movie DVD sets (in this instance their Mystery Classics set). The transfer is quite good.

Nightmare (1956)

Nightmare is a 1956 film noir written and directed by Maxwell Shane. It is based on a Cornell Woolrich novella and it’s very difficult to make a bad movie when you have a Woolrich story as your source material.

What’s interesting is that Shane’s first feature film, Fear in the Night (1946), was based on the same Cornell Woolrich novella. A decade after that film Shane decided that he could do a much better job with the material and Nightmare is certainly more ambitious and more accomplished. Nightmare would be Shane’s final feature film so his directing career began and ended with the same story.

For his 1956 remake Shane switched the scene of the action to New Orleans which was a rather good move. For some reason New Orleans had been under-used as a noir location but it’s the perfect setting for a movie with a slightly spooky mysterious vibe.

It also offered the opportunity to give the movie a more jazz-fuelled feel.

Stan Grayson (Kevin McCarthy) is a jazz musician and he’s just had a terrible nightmare about killing a man in a strange mirrored room. In the struggle (in the nightmare) Stan rips off one of the buttons of his victim’s coat. What worries Stan is that when he wakes up he is clutching that button. He also has a key which he has never seen before. Could Stan be a murderer? But why would he have killed a man he has never seen before?

Stan decides to ask his brother-in-law Rene Bressard (Edward G. Robinson) for advice. Rene is a Homicide cop. Rene assures Stan that he’s just suffering from overwork. Then Rene, his wife Sue, Stan and Stan’s singer girlfriend Gina (Connie Russell) go on a picnic. Trying to avoid a downpour they are led by Stan to an empty house. Stan has never been to this house but he knows how to get there and he knows where the spare key is hidden. There’s a mirrored room in the house - the room from Stan’s dream. And that mysterious key fits the locks in that room.

Rene now figures that Stan really is a murderer and Stan figures the same thing. But there are major plot twists to come.

Stan of course has considered the possibility that he has gone crazy. There are other possibilities. The nightmare was obviously very significant.

Changes were made to the plot for the 1956 remake and both film versions differ in some ways from Woolrich’s story.

One thing that should be noted is that the poster for the movie (reproduced on the Blu-Ray cover) gives away the entire plot of the movie. I’m not going to do that but if you’re concerned about spoilers just don’t look at that disc cover!

Kevin McCarthy is excellent as the confused and worried Stan, a nice guy whose whole world is suddenly falling apart. Edward G. Robinson gives one of his kindly wise older man performances, mixed with one of his aggressive tough guy performances.

The actresses are fine but the focus here is very much on Rene and Stan and McCarthy and Robinson are both so good that the female stars inevitably get overshadowed.

This is a visually rather impressive movie. The New Orleans locations are used well. The camerawork combines with the music to give that crazy disturbing jazzy feel that the story requires. There’s a nice use of mirrors. Not just the mirrored room, but there’s another very cool mirror shot early which doesn’t advance the plot but just adds subtly to our sense of unease.

There’s a lot of Freudian stuff. It’s half-baked Freudianism, but Freud’s Freudianism was half-baked as well so it doesn’t matter. Freudian nonsense always adds some fun.

You might think I’m being persnickety about that poster but I do think it weakens the movie. The movie works better if you don’t know the answer to a couple of the key questions which cause Rene and Stan so much anguish and bewilderment, and the poster makes those answers much too obvious. Perhaps Shane really did want us to know the answers, but the way he structures the movie suggests to me that that was not the case.

Is this film noir? I would say no, but it’s definitely noirish. Always bear in mind that the movie was made in 1956 when no-one had heard of film noir, so it was never intended as a film noir and there’s no sense complaining that some of what are now seen as essential noir ingredients are missing. This is an entertaining psychological crime thriller and it’s recommended.

Kino Lorber have provided a very nice Blu-Ray transfer.

Spellbound (1945), Hitchcock Friday #9

Alfred Hitchcock’s Spellbound presents some challenges to a modern viewer. It’s about psychoanalysis. Audiences in 1945 would have taken psychoanalysis quite seriously and considered it to be science. Nobody today takes Freudian psychoanalysis seriously. This means that a modern viewer is likely to find much of the plot to be absurd and silly. The movie is going to have a camp vibe which was obviously not intended.

Fortunately this is a Hitchcock movie and Hitchcock didn’t care too much about the plots of his movies anyway.

Dr Constance Petersen Ingrid Bergman is a psychiatrist at Green Manors Hospital, a mental hospital. The director of the hospital, Dr Murchison (Leo G. Carroll) has been forced to relinquish his post after having a mental breakdown. His replacement, Dr Anthony Edwardes, is about to arrive to take over. Dr Edwardes (Gregory Peck) is much much younger than anyone expected.

He takes an immediate shine to Dr Petersen. Dr Petersen has dedicated herself to her work and has had no time for nonsense like love. She’s likeable enough but she takes her work very very seriously. She’s bookish and intellectual. But young Dr Edwardes sweeps her off her feet. She realises that she is capable of love after all.

There is however something not quite right about Dr Edwardes. He’s jumpy. Silly little things upset him. He cracks up in the operating theatre. Dr Petersen is head-over-heels in love with him but she’s not a complete fool. She realises that whoever this man is he’s not Dr Edwardes (we later find out that his name is John Ballantyne).

He admits that he’s not Dr Edwardes but the trouble is that he does not know who he is. He has amnesia. And he has quite a few other issues as well.

The real Dr Edwardes has vanished. The assumption is that the imposter has murdered him. The police are now hunting him. Dr Petersen has decided that the imposter is sick but harmless. She assumes he’s harmless because she’s in love with him.

Either psychiatric ethics were very loose in the 1940s or Dr Petersen is the most unethical and unprofessional (and recklessly irresponsible) psychiatrist in history. She’s not only prepared to let a man who might be a murderer escape from the police, she escapes with him. And she allows herself to become hopelessly romantically involved with him even though she’s treating him as a patient.

Even allowing for the fact that psychoanalysis is inherently absurd the movie’s treatment of the subject is ludicrous and silly beyond words.

A minor problem is that both Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck are just a little too young for the rôles they play. We’re supposed to believe that Dr Petersen is not just a qualified psychiatrist but an experienced one. Bergman was 30 and just doesn’t quite convince us that she could hold such a responsible position at a major mental hospital at that age. Gregory Peck was even younger and there’s no way on earth he could get away with masquerading as an eminent psychiatrist.

Bergman is also perhaps a little miscast. She is not the slightest bit convincing as a psychiatrist.

That’s perhaps not entirely her fault but due more to the chaotic mess of a script penned by Ben Hecht. Hecht contributed some of the most embarrassing dialogue in movie history. Bergman is a fine actress but nobody could deliver some of these lines without sounding ridiculous. She does her best and it’s to her credit that her performance works at all.

So Spellbound has all the makings of a total trainwreck. In spite of this there’s plenty to enjoy here. Hitchcock gives us his usual moments of visual brilliance. There’s some good suspense. The Salvador Dali-inspired dream sequence was daring and original at the time and it’s still quite impressive even if it’s silly and outlandish.

Hollywood went gaga over psychiatry movies in the 40s. None of those movies can possibly be taken seriously but most are fun to watch. Otto Preminger's Whirlpool is the only one that can be taken semi-seriously and it's a much better movie than Spellbound.

Spellbound was a huge hit in 1945 and a critical success as well. Today it is best approached as a beer-and-popcorn movie. If you have plenty of popcorn and a lot of beer you’ll enjoy yourself.

The Brighton Strangler (1945)

OK, stop me if you’ve heard this one before, but there was this actor who played a murderer in a long-running play and he developed this strange compulsion to act out these murderous impulses in real life. Well that’s basically the plot of RKO’s 1945 programmer The Brighton Strangler. The movie is however rather better (and a good deal more entertaining) than it sounds.

Reginald Parker (John Loder) has achieved stardom on the London stage playing the lead in the hit play The Brighton Strangler. He’s about to marry Dorothy Kent (Rose Hobart), the author of the play. Things are generally looking very good indeed for him. And then a bomb drops on him. Literally. This all takes place during the Blitz and when a bomb hits the theatre Reginald Parker gets a very nasty hit on the head. And it’s that blow on the head that causes all the trouble.

Parker doesn’t remember his name or where he comes from or what he was doing before the bomb hit. He does remember other things though, but unfortunately he can’t distinguish between actual memories and theatrical memories. He has some very vivid memories, and those memories are of strangling people.

He wanders into Victoria Station and there’s a young woman, a WAAF named April Manby, buying a ticket to Brighton. His memory tells him that Brighton means something and that this chance meeting means something - this young woman is like the woman in the play. They get to know each other on the train journey (just like in the play) and he meets her family and is invited over for dinner.

These coincidences make the play seem more and more like reality to him. He remembers the name of the protagonist in the play, Edward Grey, and he is convinced that he is Edward Grey. And there are things he must do. There are wrongs that must be righted. Those who have done great injustices to Edward Grey in the past must be punished. The first to be punished must be the mayor.

It’s unfortunate that Chief Inspector Allison (Miles Mander) is not a fan of the theatre and so he doesn’t notice anything odd about the fact that there’s a hit play about stranglings in Brighton and now he finds himself investigating murders by strangling in that very place.

Meanwhile Edward Grey has other scores he has to settle.

When it comes to movies dealing with psychiatry or abnormal psychology or amnesia or similar topics I’m strongly of the view that the sillier the treatment of the idea the better. When such ideas are dealt with seriously they don’t work terribly well. When they’re dealt with in an outrageous and completely ludicrous manner they tend to be enormous fun. Best of all is when a movie tries to deal with these subjects seriously but the results turn out to be totally unbelievable (a good example being Hitchcock’s Spellbound). The Brighton Strangler takes its premise at least moderately seriously but luckily it all becomes totally absurd and unlikely. That’s what I like about this movie. It cheerfully stretches credibility way beyond breaking point and it keeps on stretching it and it does it with a straight face, and the more it does so the more fun it is.

John Loder is excellent. He very wisely underplays slightly which makes the madness of his actions much more creepy. Even when he’s totally off his rocker he seems quite calm and sane. June Duprez as April is a more than adequate leading lady. Miles Mander was one of those reliable English character actors who could make minor characters such as Chief Inspector Allison so delightful.

The temptation with this kind of story is to throw in lots of dream sequences (as in Spellbound). There are a couple of very such sequences to give us the idea that poor old Reginald Parker’s mind has slipped its moorings but they’re kept to a minimum (which is probably wise on a tight budget).

Max Nosseck was a competent B-movie director and he gets the job done although perhaps a slightly less pedestrian approach might have paid dividends. The air raid scene is admittedly pretty well done.

A couple of years later the same basic idea was used, with some considerable success, in a Ronald Colman vehicle called A Double Life.

The Brighton Strangler was released on DVD in Spain but doesn’t seem to be available elsewhere. I caught this one on TV.

The less seriously you take The Brighton Strangler the more you’ll enjoy it. Recommended.

Mirage (1965)

Mirage is a 1965 suspense thriller directed by Edward Dmytryk. Although in fact the exact genre to which this film should be assigned remains uncertain for much of its running time. It’s part psychological thriller and part crime thriller with suggestions that it might at any moment veer off in the direction of the espionage thriller, the techno-thriller or even science fiction.

Gregory Peck stars as David Stillwell. At least he believes his name is David Stillwell. That’s about the only thing he’s fairly certain of and he’s really not at all sure even about that.

David Stillwell has had a rather puzzling day. People keep greeting him as though they hadn’t seen him for a long time, even when they saw him the day before. And then there’s the girl on the stairway who is sure she knows him. He’s equally sure he’s never met her. They met on the stairway during the blackout, the blackout being another puzzling thing about David’s day. The power went off all over the building, just about the time that noted do-gooder Charles Calvin jumped from the 27th floor.

Calvin’s suicide is definitely puzzling although David is fairly sure it has nothing to do with his problems. But then, given that David cannot remember anything at all that happened prior to the last two years, and can remember precious little that has happened since, he can’t possibly say there can’t be a connection.

And did I mention the guy who pulled a gun on him in his apartment? The guy who told David he was about to take a trip to Barbados where he would meet the Major. And he was to be sure to bring his briefcase with him, although this is another puzzle because his briefcase is completely empty.

It’s not surprising that after a day like this David Stillwell should decide to see a psychiatrist. Only the psychiatrist doesn’t want to see him. David decides the next best thing would be a private detective. That’s what private detectives do for a living, isn’t it? Find out stuff about people. So a private detective should be able  to tell him who he is. Unfortunately his confidence in this particular PI, Ted Caselle(Walter Matthau), is not enhanced when Caselle tells him this is his very first case.

There is only so much even the best PI can do. Ultimately it’s up to David to remember whatever it is that he doesn’t really want to remember. It’s something that shattered all his illusions and exposed the hypocrisy of the professional do-gooders of this world. His big problem is that remembering is only going to be possible if he can stay alive long enough and there are obviously people who do not intend that he should survive. 

Gregory Peck is ideally cast here as a regular guy who responds to his extraordinary circumstances in a very ordinary way. He is scared, confused and angry. Peck has no trouble convincing us that he is one very confused guy, and being Gregory Peck he’s also a fairly likeable kind of guy so the audience is going to be on his side from the start.

Walter Matthau provides some low-key comic relief although Caselle is not played entirely for laughs. It’s not that kind of film. It’s an intense kind of film so any overt comedy would be out of place but Matthau’s brand of sly understated humour provides a welcome break in the tension.

Diane Baker as Shela has to be mysterious, which she manages well, and she also has to be a kind of low-key femme fatale (I’m using the term low-key a lot but that’s the sort of movie it is). It’s a generally effective performance.

Edward Dmytryk had plenty of experience with this type of movie (having directed film noir classics like Murder, My Sweet and psychological dramas such as The Caine Mutiny) and he’s always in full control.

Universal’s DVD release provides a rather grainy anamorphic transfer. The graininess may be inherent in the source materials and may well have been a deliberate choice. It certainly doesn’t detract from the enjoyment of the film.

Mirage is an effective offbeat thriller that keeps the audience guessing. We really have no idea where this movie is going until quite late in proceedings. There’s more than a hint of film noir (or possibly neo-noir, this being 1965). Highly recommended.

5 Against the House (1955)

5 Against the House was released by Columbia in 1955 and it seems to be accepted as a film noir largely because it was directed by Phil Karlson, who made so many fine noir movies.

Al (Guy Madison), Brick (Brian Keith, Roy (Alvy Moore) and Ronnie (Kerwin Mathews) are Korean War veterans attending Midwestern University under the GI Bill. Al is engaged to Kay Greylek (Kim Novak), a nightclub singer. Brick saved Al’s life in Korea, but Brick has never recovered from the war. He’s a walking time bomb. Early on in the movie we see him almost kill a guy over a woman.

Al is not a complete fool. He knows that Brick is a psycho case but since Brick saved his life he feels responsible for him. Al had been an officer so he feels a double responsibility as both an officer and a friend. He thinks he can keep Brick out of trouble although so far he’s had mixed success in this endeavour.

During the summer break the four friends head to Reno. At a big gambling joint called Harold’s (a western-themed casino) they overhear a chance remark by a cop that robbing Harold’s would be completely impossible - the security is tighter than Fort Knox. Ronnie takes that as a challenge - nothing can be impossible.

Ronnie comes up with a fool-proof plan to rob Harold’s. Not that Ronnie has any interest in being a criminal. His parents are rich and he’s doing well at college. He regards it all as a harmless prank. They will steal a million dollars from Harold’s and then give the money back. No-one will get hurt and since they are going to give the money back they won’t really be committing a crime. They can hardly be arrested if they don’t keep the money. That’s Ronnie’s theory anyway, and he convinces Roy and Brick that it’s a swell idea. College students have never been renowned for their common sense, even those who are in their 30s and should know better.

The problem is that the plan requires four guys. That means they need Al. Al is much too sensible to have anything to do with such a hare-brained prank but Brick assures Ronnie that once they’re on the road to Reno again he will talk him around.

While Ronnie is planning the perfect crime Al and Kay are having relationship problems. Incredibly time-consuming relationship problems that pretty much chew up the whole of the first half of the movie and make this one of the slowest moving heist movies ever made. Al and Kay just never stop discussing their possible future marriage. Finally, after forty minutes of mind-numbing tedium, the actual plot starts to kick in. Even when it does kick in it still has to stop from time to time so Al and Kay can discuss their relationship problems for the ten thousandth time.

When we do finally (and mercifully) get to the heist it’s reasonably clever and moderately exciting. While Ronnie and Roy still think it’s a harmless college prank and Al and Kay (who has come along for the ride so that she and Al can discuss their deeply fascinating relationship problems) have no idea what is being planned things have been happening inside Brick’s brain. The truth is that Brick is a screw-up and always has been a screw-up. The only thing he was ever good at was being a soldier and he wasn’t even any good at that, ending up in the psycho ward at a military hospital. Brick knows he’s never going to graduate and he’s never going to be a lawyer and that the rest of his life will be a never-ending saga of angst and self-pity. Ronnie’s prank robbery is his one big chance of success. Brick is a classic noir loser, although he’s even dumber than the average noir loser.

Al is kind of a noir hero as well in the sense that his misguided sense of loyalty to Brick gets him involved in a real robbery in which real people, including himself, could get killed.

The focus is not so much on the heist as on the personalities of the vets, in particular Al and Brick, and the problems they face adjusting to normal life after their experiences in Korea. This might be in some respects a film noir but it’s also one of those 1950s angst movies. In fact it’s perilously close at times to falling into that most tedious of all movie categories, the Social Problem Movie.

Guy Madison as Al is adequate if rather bland. Kim Novak is quite good as Kay - it’s not her fault that the screenplay by Stirling Silliphant and William Bowers gets bogged down in Al and Kay’s profoundly uninteresting marital dilemmas. Alvy Moore as Roy is an irrelevant but harmless comic relief character. Ronnie is potentially the most interesting character. If he really intends the whole thing as a prank why does he become so obsessed by it, even to the extent of spending a good deal of his own money on the preparations and risking his friends’ lives? Sadly Ronnie’s issues never do get explored and Kerwin Mathews isn’t given the chance to display his acting chops.

The central character is Brick and Brian Keith does a reasonable job. Brick is a walking disaster and it might have been interesting to find out exactly where and how he became such a mess. This was the mid-50s, a time when Hollywood was getting very excited by psychiatry, and the movie accepts the standard psychiatric view that no-one is responsible for their own actions. We’re all just children and we need to rely on psychiatrists to tell us how to live. The best thing for Brick would be to go back to the hospital and spend the rest of his life as a big baby in a nice safe padded cell.

Phil Karlson was usually a very reliable director of this type of movie but this time he gets bogged down quite badly and the movie never generates any real excitement. This may well be his worst movie.

This is one of the five movies in the Columbia Film Noir Classics I boxed set. It’s a nice anamorphic transfer (the movie was shot in widescreen) but there are no extras apart from a trailer.

5 Against the House is really a bit of a yawn and cannot seriously be recommended.

The Dark Mirror (1946)

I’ve spoken often of my love for classic Hollywood movies dealing with psychiatry.  The Dark Mirror is another prime example of this genre.

Scripted by Nunnally Johnson and directed by Robert Siodmak, this 1946 movie also deals with another subject that fascinated Hollywood in the 40s, the double. Especially the feminine double. Movies like A Stolen Life and No Man of Her Own gave us women who had assumed different identities. In The Dark Mirror, as in A Stolen Life, the women are sisters, in this case identical twins.

When a doctor is murdered it seems like an open-and-shut case. The police have three eyewitnesses who swear they can identify a woman seen fleeing from the doctor’s apartment. But three other witnesses will swear they saw the same woman four miles away. The explanation is that Terry and Ruth Collins (both played by Olivia de Havilland) are identical twins. One twin was leaving the doctor’s apartment while the other twin was walking in a park four miles away, but the witnesses can’t tell which twin they saw. And the sisters aren’t saying. The police can’t get an indictment because they don’t know whose name to put on it. It’s the perfect crime, and if there’s one thing Detective-Lieutenant Stevenson (Thomas Mitchell) hates it’s the idea of a perfect crime.

Stevenson persuades psychologist Dr Scott Elliott (Lew Ayres) to help him crack the case. Dr Elliott is an expert on twins. The Collins twins become part of his study on twins. Dr Elliott soon realises that one of the twins is dangerously insane, but which one is it? He thinks he knows, but does he really? To complicate matters further, Dr Elliott falls in love with one of the twins. How will the insane twin react to this, since both twins are in love with Dr Elliott?

Terry and Ruth have always been romantic rivals but with the doctor’s murder it’s now apparent that the rivalry has taken on deadly overtones. Lieutenant Stevenson fears for the safety of both Dr Elliott and the sane twin.

Olivia De Havilland is not a favourite actress of mine but she’s quite effective in this film, wisely not overdoing the crazy stuff. In fact she plays both twins the same way which certainly heightens the suspense. Right up to the end we’re never quite sure which twin we’re watching. It’s a subtle performance in a role which most actresses would have approached with a much more grandiose technique but de Havilland knows what she’s doing. Lew Ayres is adequate and Thomas Mitchell is, as always, a joy to watch.

Robert Siodmak was always a stylish director and while The Dark Mirror isn’t as visually dazzling as some of his movies he still does a fine job. Nunnally Johnson’s script has enough half-baked psychiatric nonsense in it to keep fan of psychiatry movies very happy indeed. Even Rorschach ink-blot tests, which are always good for a laugh. And Polygraph tests! The psychiatric silliness is laid on nice and thick. The script  takes its subject deadly seriously, which makes it even more fun.

While this movie is sometimes described as film noir it’s more of an over-the-top crime melodrama or a psychological thriller than a true film noir fans. Noir fans will probably enjoy it anyway.

Mirrors of course play a key symbolic role in the story and the movie both begins and ends  with mirrors.

Conerstone Media’s Region 2 DVD release is barebones but quite cheap and picture quality is good.

Despite the half-baked psychiatric ideas, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say because of them, The Dark Mirror is a very entertaining movie. Madness, murder and psychiatry make an irresistible combination. Highly recommended.

The Cobweb (1955)

Hollywood in the 40s and 50s made many attempts to deal with the subject of psychiatry. One of the most entertaining is MGM’s 1955 effort, The Cobweb.

Vincente Minnelli directed. Minnelli is (quite rightly) revered as one of the masters of the musical genre but he deserves to be equally well remembered for his melodramas. And The Cobweb is mostly certainly a melodrama.

The Cobweb deals with one of the most important challenges faced by psychiatry in the 1950s - interior design. Yes folks, this is the epic Battle of the Drapes.

Dr Stewart McIver (Richard Widmark) is the head doctor at an exclusive mental hospital, Castle House. McIver believes passionately in patient self-government. The patients, through the Patients’ Committee, should make as many of the their own decisions as possible. And no decision could be more vital than the choice of the new curtains for the library.



The activities director, Meg Rinehart (Lauren Bacall) comes up with a brilliant plan - the patients will make the drapes themselves. One of the patients, Stevie, is an artist who’s had a nervous breakdown and thinks his work is futile. If they can get him to design the drapes it will help to snap him out of his mood of hopelessness.

Unfortunately the hospital’s financial manager, Victoria Inch (Lillian Gish), has already decided to order the curtains from a local company. She’s just interested in getting the cheapest deal. Meanwhile Dr McIver’s wife Karen (Gloria Grahame) has become involved in the drama as well - she wants to order fancy drapes from Chicago.



The drama of the drapes triggers off huge power struggles within the hospital. The medical director, Dr Devanal (Charles Boyer), supports Miss Inch. He has given up most of his responsibilities to Dr McIver. He signed a contract with McIver that gave McIver most of the powers he had previously wielded. Devanal was once a brilliant young psychiatrist. Now he’s burnt out and spends his time drinking and chasing women. The Battle of the Drapes will give him his last chance to reassert his authority and put Dr McIver in his place.

The curtains become a symbol for whatever it is that everyone in the hospital wants. For Dr Devanal it’s a chance to regain his power. For Dr McIver it’s a chance to show that his theory of patient self-government is viable. For Miss Inch it’s an opportunity to assert her own power. For Karen McIver it’s the opportunity to revitalise her flagging marriage.  For Meg Rinehart it’s part of reconnecting with people again, after the loss of her husband and son in a car accident.



For the patients it’s a symbol as well. For Mr Holcomb it’s the chance to assert his position as chairman of the Patients’ Committee. For Stevie it’s the chance to revive his career as an artist. For Mr Capp (Oscar Levant) the whole drama reinforces his cynicism about life. For agoraphobic Sue (Susan Strasberg) it’s the chance to help Stevie, with whom she’s fallen in love.

In any battle there are casualties, and the Battle of the Drapes is no exception. This is a battle in which no quarter will be given. To the victors will go the spoils; for the losers there is only the bitterness of defeat.



This is a melodrama but it is also a black comedy, and a very funny one. And it’s also a satire on psychiatry. The psychiatrists claim to be able to cure others but they can’t even get their own lives in order. At one point Stevie tells Karen McIver that he can’t tell the patients from the doctors in this madhouse. Karen tells him that it’s easy - the patients get better.

Richard Widmark is surprisingly good as the well-intentioned Dr McIver. Charles Boyer is effective as a man who has lost everything but his pride and he is about to lose that as well. This was Oscar Levant’s last film and this performance was a high note on which to go out. John Kerr is also good as Stevie. Lauren Bacall gives a moving performance as a woman who desperately needs to rejoin the human race and open herself up to her feelings again. Unfortunately when her emotions are reawakened she chooses an inappropriate object, Dr McIver. Look our for Fay Wray in a small role.



The outstanding performance, as so often, comes from Gloria Grahame. She’s all frustrated emotions and even more frustrated sexuality. In almost every scene she is hot and sweaty and behaves like a female cat on heat. This has an effect on almost every male except her husband.

The Cobweb is a wild ride through the madhouse of psychiatry. It’s very funny, very camp and generally enormous fun. Minnelli always approached melodrama seriously. No matter how crazy these people are, both the patients and the doctors, their problems are real to them. The situations are crazy, with people getting outrageously worked up over curtains, but do get obsessed with things as silly as this. There are no villains in this film. People behave badly, but they have their reasons and they are not motivated by malice. As usually happens in real life, chaos is caused by people who are pursuing ends that seem quite reasonable to them even if they appear bizarre to outsiders. The Cobweb is enormous fun and is very highly recommended.

The Warner Archive made-on-demand DVD provides an excellent 16x9 enhanced transfer preserving the original Cinemascope aspect ratio.