...the more I suspect the movie is putting one over on us. I'm not sure what the joke is meant to mean, but I feel certain that Wells was too smart for all the nuttiness to be inadvertent. He MUST have meant the movie to be humorous.
"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on."
Wouldn't the flaws have been executed with more finesse if they had been purposeful? When I saw this the first time, age 11 or 12, I loved it but after a recent viewing, I was so disappointed. I m my memory, it was more suspenseful. I was surprised it had a decent imdb rating. My fondness for the actors would push it up a few notches but from a story telling POV, this is barely a pass. It's just not effective enough in any of its elements for me to believe it's intentionally campy or ironic.
shareI agree. While I quite enjoyed The Stranger overall - despite its many flaws - the tone of the film was very uncertain. It wasn't quite camp enough to be ironic, not quite exciting enough to be a thriller, and not emotionally charged enough to play as a drama. And the politics of the situation were completely ignored. We never actually find out who Edward G. Robinson's character is or what his job is other than to 'find' Rankin. Is he to arrest Rankin? Assassinate him? Gather evidence, slip away, and alert higher powers? It bugged me a bit, but one-dimensional characters usually do.
Some of this might be attributable to the legendary trimming the film underwent, but sadly - unlike Touch of Evil - no version closer to Welles' intention seems likely to ever emerge.
Great performance by Loretta Young in what must have been an exceptionally tricky role to play.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds
I agree, Loretta Young gave a great performance and yes, much as I savor any Edward G Robinson role, his character isn't well defined. You make another good point that the many cuts do not help the flow of the story. On the subject of ironic, it's amazing how many mediocre films, when released to DVD, come with unwatchable extras that include cuts and bloopers. Wouldn't it be wonderful if movies from the 30s through to the 70s came with extras like this? Guess that's why I read many books on film literature and biographies, for a glimpse into this world. I also greatly appreciate posters like you who post thoughtful and well informed comments on the movie boards.
share