The first half was about whether Bogart was accused of murdering the waitress he took home to his house that night. Then we don't get an answer as to who committed the murder and the second half is this love interest between him and this other girl that doesn't go anywhere either. I'm confused.
shareMJB784,
I am sure you will understand In a Lonely Place if you
1. Watch it again.
2. Do NOT multitask
3. Do NOT fall asleep.
I would agree with the original poster but I did nod off slightly, watched it at 3 am. I gave it a 6 because to me it was more drama/romance than noir/thriller/crime. I have no idea why it is so highly regarded with other noirs of the time.
share[deleted]
I don't think thats what he meant.
share6 out of 10? Because the film is too unique?
shareI did word it wrong, Sunset Blvd, Notorious, and Spellbound are drama/romances that I love from the noir category, it isn't the fact it had drama and romance, it is the fact that it relied heavily on those aspects where I think Bogart fails, he is a stiff, tough guy actor and his best roles are that of the tough talking bad ass hero. The script was dull and seemed to drag and overall it seemed like a lower effort from a time when Hitch, Wilder, and Welles were making noirs that stand better than the average movie made today. People regard it as his one mature role, but I don't think that does him good with his style of acting.
Sorry if I confused you guys, I probably posted that the same night I viewed the film.
No offense, but did the original poster watch the movie at all?
It isn't complicated. The murder caused the meeting of Bogart and Grahame. The killer remained in question throughout the movie and after Grahame fell in love with Bogart and began to see his violent side, she began to question his innocence. At the end, Kessler confesses to the killing, after Grahame's doubts caused them to break up. Hence the end where she tells Capt Loughner that the news that Bogie was innocent would have meant everything a day ago but meant nothing now.
[deleted]
I love Bogart movies & finally got to see 'In a Lonely Place' tonight altho watching it on 'Crackle'dot Com which kind of sucked. Bogart was great as always & one of his best performances IMHO. The movie did surprise me especially for a 'Who-Dunnit'. I suspected at least 3 people for sure and was dismissing this movie as having a 'shaggy dog ending'. I started thinking 'lame,... I already know who the murderer was etc..' It did turn out to be true who I partially suspected (out of 3 people) but the final End of the Film surprised me and tidied things up nicely. Not going to give the killers identity away but on a side note, Bogart was a highly intelligent emotional violent SOB from the very start of film & I couldn't see 'his lady' sticking with him after witnessing all of this. Thankfully, the ending was very refreshing/honest. Very ahead of it's time and I really liked this movie.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't ~ Bart Simpson
In real life, many women still stick with violent boyfriends and husbands. I can only give a few of the many reasons. Sometimes they stay out of misguided love, sometimes it's out of fear or financial dependency, sometimes they stay because they think they can change the bums. My wife used to be a counselor for battered women, and she met women who had been abused for decades before they finally sought help.
shareI agree, this was a pretty simple movie to decipher. I loved the movie but I HATED the ending (I'm a sucker for a happy one, esp. with Bogie). But just because I didn't like the ending, which I wouldn't change one bit, I think this is a great movie!!!!
shareFrom the viewpoint of Laurel, it was a happy ending. She absolutely, positively had to get away from Dix. Laurel was lucky to get away with her life - from our modern viewpoint, we can see that Dix showed all the classic signs of a control freak abuser.
If this film were made today, it would most likely end with Dix strangling Laurel to death. That is certainly the logical (and honest) end point of this narrative. Dix stopping himself was a big relief to me as a viewer, but it did seem like a fake, tack-on ending.
I believe this screenplay was based on a stage play? If so, does anyone know Laurel's fate in the play?
I doubt Laurel was happy that her relationship with Dix ended, but it was a necessary ending for her, for both her mental and physical health.
Dix wouldn't have killed Laurel. He would have come to his senses and stopped assaulting her because he's not psychotic. He's not a murderer. The movies end was honest.
Godfather_corleone, your post proves how little attention you paid, and if you really did sleep during the movie, you shouldn't have rated it or reviewed it. You're just being halfarsed. There is no way Bogie was stiff in this, and in fact gave a much more powerful performance than usual, considering he actually had to show a diverse range of emotions this time. He is also tougher and more of a bad arse in this film than any others I've seen him in, so your point is moot anyway. I can understand your disappointment if you were looking for a typical crime noir film, but this film is very much noir, albeit one more heavily focused on romance than crime. The problem is people always assume noir needs femme fatales and constant murders, but the truth is it just has to be dark in tone and content. The way the relationship developed throughout the film, and the films bleak ending make that genre card as good as any.
shareAt least the film honestly showed the effects of "battle fatigue," which many post-WWII films pretended didn't exist. Many WWII veterans would have lived happier lives if they'd been given the help they needed. Sadly, veterans with battle fatigue (now called PTSD), were regarded as cowards, weaklings, or nuts. It's only improved a little since 1945. Bogart showed a deeper, more effecting side than in most of his other films. Many Bogart fans hate seeing him as a vulnerable man, but I enjoyed it.
shareTalk about hitting Bogie on the head- HE IS A Stiff,Tough guy actor and usually plays Tough Talking Bad Ass Cynical Heroes -so whats new. I mean that is what he did-There is Duke Mantee and Turkey Morgan & Baby Face Martin & Sam Spade & Rick Blaine & Phillip Marlowe & Dobbs & Frank McCloud & Dixon Steele & Charlie Allnut and Lt. Cmdr. Queeg, Harry Dawes and Eddie Willis basically all fast-talking cynical men- But "we'll always have Paris"....
shareI completely agree!
Before I watched 'In a Lonely Place' it was hyped up by friends. After finishing the feature, I was left scratching my head. "Did I, uh, miss something?" Occasionally there are some memorable shots(need with mention the wonderful opening?), but on the whole it's only a few steps above 'Run for Cover' in my book.
While I respect Ray's pacing, it's never really struck me as revolutionary, but rather antiquated.
Bogart's fine, just seems like a standard role for him. Besides 'Johnny Guitar', I'm missing something from this apparent auteur-who Godard has been quoted as saying, "Cinema is Nicholas Ray"-but I haven't found it.
I'm more than open to suggestions...
"Everyman is an island? I'd like to think I'm more of an archipelago."
If you thought the second half of the movie was simply about a love interest you fail. If you don't think they eventually tell you who committed the murder, you fail again.
share
The OP also has to understand how the mounting pressure and paranoia resulting from the murder mystery plot affects Bogart's mindset and puts a strain on his relationship. The way these two plots collide with each other is one of the film's strengths and you can't divide them so cleanly.
I am no man. I am BEDDINI!
We know who did it by the end, so you should probably re-watch.
Few points to keep in mind:
1.) This is a noir in the sense that the hero is classic noir. Good at heart, but flawed and battle-worn, cynical but likable, etc.
2.) This is a very strange noir in the sense that the murder is put in the background, and a genuine love story intersects with it.
3.) Murder is incidental. It is only a catalyst for events that threaten the central relationship. The movie is both a noir and a comment on noir, deconstructing the hero by devastating him, and using the femme fatales not as dangers, but as people the hero unknowingly destroys. It is a deeply disturbing movie, very similar to Ray's Bigger Than Life, in that it deals with the fundamental concepts of relationships (and love in general) and attaches cynicism to them, all while unflinchingly and logically leading them to an end.
Talk about hitting Bogie on the head- HE IS A Stiff,Tough guy actor and usually plays Tough Talking Bad Ass Cynical Heroes -so whats new. I mean that is what he did-There is Duke Mantee and Turkey Morgan & Baby Face Martin & Sam Spade & Rick Blaine & Phillip Marlowe & Dobbs & Frank McCloud & Dixon Steele & Charlie Allnut and Lt. Cmdr. Queeg, Harry Dawes and Eddie Willis basically all fast-talking cynical men- But "we'll always have Paris"....
I felt that throughout the first part of the movie I believed in Dixon's innocence because we saw the dead girl leave like Laurel did. But, we didn't actually SEE the murder committed and as the movie progressed and I saw another darker side to Bogart so I also began to have some doubt.
By the end of the film I felt that like Kesler, who confessed to the murder, Dixon WAS was capable of the same thing when he began to strangle Laurel and at some point she would have possibly ended up like the hat check girl if she married him.
A great film exploring anger management issues that so many people have.
Please put spoiler notices before revealing plot details!
shareART is not for all
shareLess than half actually. Most of the first half was a setup between Dix and Laurel. The answer to who committed the murder is revealed in about thirty seconds flat. So quickly, in fact, that I missed how the killer had gotten shot, only that "they pulled a bullet out of him," as the cops say.
It is odd, I agree, but by revealing only that Dix is indeed innocent, the movie concentrates on the deteriorating relationship between Dix and Laurel, not the murder that caused them so much trouble.
So though you are catching grief for missing the "reveal," it is understandable. They didn't spend a lot of time on who killed, but rather that Dix was innocent after all. And once you know who the killer is you also know why.
Watta ya lookn here for?