The scene about 2/3's into the movie where Johnny sucker punches Van, just amazing ! The look upon his face as he grabs his hat before they walk out the door. Amazing, ya I said it again. I think they call it acting, and that, he did. I can see why he won a Oscar for his role.
Also the director and the cameramen were no slouches either.
This was a good effing movie. Robert Taylor is right up there with Cagney and Bogart. Van's role is great, just perfect. However, Rob was really good too. He went from heartless gangster to redeeming gangster in the course of the film and Taylor played it well.
Lana and the lady who played "Mae" were very good as well. Everyone just shines in this film.
Van Heflin convinces absolutely as the unstable, sarcastic and faithful Johnny's friend. He is impeccable in this movie; sensitive and lucid as much in the sobriety as in the excesses of alcohol. But who leads here is Robert Taylor, in the credits as well as in the screen. His performance is outstanding. He is exhibited publicly as a ordinary ex-convict applied to their rehabilitation, he is shown as a simple man, docile and even pleasant with a common occupation; taxi chauffeur; but he is in fact, a cold, covetous and arrogant delinquent, besides refined and seductive. The climate that is created when Heflin and Taylor are together, it is so dense, so loaded with tension that I think that Heflin is the true Robert Taylor's partner, non LanaTurner. Great Mervyn LeRoy's movie. To recommend.
shareYes I too wondered about Van Heflin's unswerving devotion to the handsome Robert Taylor. But this was 1942 when things like that, i.e. homosexuality, could only be hinted at.
shareI just watched the film. I also understand why Heflin won the Oscar. And the previous poster is totally right about the obvious gay undertones. Heflin's character was obvioulsy in love with Johnny Eager. There's not only the scene where he hits him; there's also the moment toward the end when he tells him they should leave together, to some sort of paradise filled with lakes and mountains; and finally his reaction to his death. I thought Heflin was about to kiss him in the lips! Such was the intensity of his acting.
shareI didn't get the gay undertones. Will have to watch it again and report back.
shareI just watched this great film on TCM for the second time...I totally agree with the homosexual undertones. I think Heflin was clearly in love with Taylor. I'm not sure if Taylor's character was aware of it. And the part about going to the Rocky Mountains with the trees & lakes almost made me cry as it brought to mind "Brokeback Mountain". I'm a big Robert Taylor fan & this is one of my favs. He's also spectacular in "Waterloo Bridge"
shareGay overtones galore!! pretty obvious why Heflin was drinking. To cover his conflict over having a crush on Johnny Eager: and who can blame him!! Oops I forgot for a second I'm not gay but Taylor is nice looking. Overall a great preformance I think by Heflin. But others I say they don't get it. Eye o' the beholder I guess.
I'm not going to argue whether or not there are gay overtones to Heflin's character. I think it's possible for men to be friends without being homosexuals.
It's become increasingly impossible to make this point because there's so much eagerness to see a homosexual subtext in any movie where the hero has a sidekick.
I suppose you could find a homosexual subtext in "Red River" between Monty Clift's character and John Ireland's character. You could even find it between John Wayne's character and Walter Brennan's character.
I think it's just as possible that Johnny Eager had no friends except the Heflin character and the Heflin character would have wound up in the gutter without the friendship of Eager.
Absurdity: A Statement or belief inconsistent with my opinion.
"I'm not going to argue whether or not there are gay overtones to Heflin's character. I think it's possible for men to be friends without being homosexuals.
It's become increasingly impossible to make this point because there's so much eagerness to see a homosexual subtext in any movie where the hero has a sidekick."
_______________________________________________________________________________
Points taken; it does get frustrating when EVERYTHING adds up, in some people's minds, to repressed or just hidden (by the filmmakers) homosexuality. HOWEVER, I'm sure there were a fair number of gay writers, directors, etc. who couldn't actually put what they really wanted to see up on the screen back then, so they hid it and dropped clues...just my opinion but I'd say where there's smoke there's usually (but not always) fire.
******************************************************************************
"I suppose you could find a homosexual subtext in "Red River" between Monty Clift's character and John Ireland's character. You could even find it between John Wayne's character and Walter Brennan's character."
_______________________________________________________________________________
Just saw Red River all the way thru last week, and I'd say I DEFINITELY got those vibes between Clift and Ireland. Don't know off top of my head who actually wrote it or if they were gay, but Howard Hawks was a "man's man" (no, not THAT kind of man's man!), so I'm sure HE wouldn't have put it in there on purpose...and he was very aware of subtext in movies (re: one of the reasons he hated High Noon), so the "flirtation" between Monty and Ireland could have been my imagination.
You can draw your own conclusions about Walter Brennan's character having no teeth and how that might have played into a gay-thing with The Duke's character (I know, I hate myself for even typing it)
********************************************************************************
"I think it's just as possible that Johnny Eager had no friends except the Heflin character and the Heflin character would have wound up in the gutter without the friendship of Eager."
_______________________________________________________________________________
I didn't recall right away the comment (brought up in another post), by Heflin, about getting away to an island (just the two of them), so I'd have to see it again and think on it, but I don't remember getting a gay vibe between Heflin and Taylor, so I agree with you there.
Besides, the version of Lana Turner in Johnny Eager could have turned anyone straight! (I'm joking, of course...she WAS freakin' hot, though!)
"How do you feel?"
"Like the Kling-Klang King of the Rim-Ram Room!"
Does it explain a lot if Heflin is gay? Duh. Hell, yeah. Could they have made him gay, with the Production Code? Absolutely not. Does the fact that he isn't said to be gay mean, therefore, that he is not. No, it sure as hell doesn't.
Did they intend the audience to take his character that way? I have no idea, but they'd have to be idiots if they didn't know that some in the audience would do so.
Would he be gay if the movie were made right now? I suspect so.
The character is hardly just a "sidekick." His feelings are so intense, his focus on Johnny is so unswerving, so serious, and so all-consuming (he has no other concerns), and he is willing to do so much for him (to the potential sacrifice of himself) that if he isn't in love with him, what do you call it? He might as well be. I say he is. Johnny is his whole world. If most men had a best friend who acted that way, they'd wonder. My own take is that Johnny's own love for him is so great (if only a fraction of what he's getting) that he doesn't want to think about it any more than some people here do.
But for what reason wouldn't they go the whole nine yards and say he is? I say it's The Production Code. If audiences do (and did) read him as gay, it wouldn't be the only time they ever read between the lines in Production Code movie. I'm as sophisticated as anybody who saw this movie in 1942, and I say that's love if I ever saw it.
I saw this for the first time last night - what a great film! And while I sometimes roll my eyes when viewers are over-eager to point out homosexual themes, I definitely sensed gay vibes from Heflin's character: the devotion, alcoholism, erudition, etc.
After the scene where Taylor punched Heflin who then moped off, he later returned and joked that, like Taylor's former lovesick "inamorata", he came back because he'd forgotten his purse. If that's not a big hint in a 1941 film, I don't know what is.
I find it pretty ironic how the most reasonable character was always drinking. Jeff was my favorite character in the movie by far.
Science Fiction Horror
Heflin was great in the film, and was a truly great character actor in general. Heflin was also great in "Shane" and in "Airport," among others. I didn't see any gay undertones to his character. He liked and was very loyal to Robert Taylor, who was very good looking. Why does the character have to be gay? He had no gay mannerisms or speech.
It's nothing like, for example, Clifton Webb's portrayal of Elliot Templeton in "The Razor's Edge." Maybe that's a bad example, since Webb, gay himself, was playing a character, already described as gay, albeit in an understated way, in the book. I just don't see any gay undertones in "Johnny Eager."
[deleted]
I just saw this for the first time last night. Great movie.
And it DRIPS with gay overtones. In fact, I don't think there's any question that Johnny and Jeff slept together at least once (and played the "I was really drunk last night" card later).
Pretty potent stuff for 1941, and it must have just gone over the heads of the censors. The filmmakers knew exactly what they were trying to say.
And for once, a well deserved Oscar (Heflin)!
Heflin wasn't effeminate, so no, he wasn't like Elliot Templeton. But come on, they have to give you Ellot Templeton before you'll pick up on anything?
shareYou have your opinion; I have mine. I believe two guys can be close friends w/o being lovers, even when one of them is exceptionally handsome. And I can't see gay undertones or overtones in a 1941 film. There were many interesting facets of Heflin's magnificent performance; I just didn't see any indication of homosexuality in either the characters of Heflin or Taylor.
Elliott Templeton is only an example. But I don't spend time trying to be a smarty and looking for gay undertones when none exist. The film was extremely enjoyable and the cast was excellent w/o interjecting a suggestion that Eager and Hartnett were sleeping with each other (once or more than once). With all of his Eager's gfs, including Ms. Mines (lol), how would he have the time (lol)?
I suggest we agree to disagree. That is if you can disagree without insults.
Ummmm. Gay. Duh.
share