MovieChat Forums > Dragnet (1954) Discussion > 'Dragnet' (1954) now on DVD

'Dragnet' (1954) now on DVD

posted 14 years ago by hobnob53
21 replies | jump to latest

Jack Webb's big-screen film version of Dragnet is now available on DVD. It's among the first batch of titles in the "Universal Vault Series", a collection of made-on-demand (MOD) discs sold exclusively (so far) through Amazon.

The "Vault" series, which promises more films in the future, is essentially the same idea as the year-old Warner Archives Collection, bringing out many titles on high-quality DVD-Rs, films which otherwise might never have gotten a DVD release.

Dragnet is the first of this series I've bought and the disc is quite good -- excellent picture (color and sharpness) and sound quality, as good as any regular DVD. No extras of any kind, not surprisingly, but then that's not unusual for older films released on DVD these past few years. MOD technology has advanced to the point where this looks likely to be the more common form of release older films will get from now on. Although some people have qualms about its quality and durability (and price), so far the experiment (here and on Warner Archives) looks promising. At least we're getting the films, which is no small detail.

List price is $19.99. Of course, Amazon's prices fluctuate: the film's wavered between $15.99 and $17.99 since its debut in January. So far it doesn't appear as though this series is available from any other site (I don't know whether Universal sells these titles itself), but of course this may change, as it did with the Warner series.

I have one quibble, as an extreme film purist who believes everything about a movie should be left alone (don't alter scenes, credits or whatnot, and you damn well better not colorize). Dragnet was originally released by Warner Bros., where Webb filmed the original TV show in the 50s. When he moved over to Universal in the mid-60s, that studio acquired the rights to this film. Although the original Warner Bros. logo is left intact at the start of the film, at the end, Universal has blacked out the final credit, which originally read "THE END" with the "WB" logo beneath it, like every other Warner film of the time. We have the closing music but the screen goes dark. The VHS of this film did the same thing, so it wasn't surprising to see it again on the DVD, but still, it's a bit annoying. So I'll be keeping my old off-the-air tape of the film, complete with the original logo at the end, just to prove that it really did exist!

But the movie is very entertaining and, in its way, priceless. I can do no better than quote the entry for this film in Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide: "'This is the city...' While investigating brutal murder, Sgt. Friday and Officer Frank Smith ignore 57 varieties of civil liberties; feature film version of classic TV show evokes its era better than almost anything. Highly recommended on a nonesthetic level." Yes, indeedy. The real-life, real-time L.A. Confidential -- only in this case, on or off the set, the actors lived and worked and ate and slept and walked around, not a fake 50's movie set decades removed in time from its setting, but in the real 1954, facing all the problems that seem so nostalgic or unimportant or quaint to us today. On the other hand, the cops in Confidential were doubtless a lot closer to the real thing than the early robocops Jack Webb peopled his version of the LAPD with. But it's refreshing that even in the '54 film, the police unashamedly evince a healthy disregard for those pesky fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and ninth amendment "rights". "Why is it the law only works for the guilty?" asks a frustrated Joe Friday. "Because the innocent don't need it," replies the sage D.A. Huh? Wha? Howzzat?

In short, great fun. Get the DVD, light up a pack of Chesterfields, and enjoy.

Oh, the movie's incredibly sexist too, even for 1954. The scene in the theatrical agency is horribly, wincingly, insultingly hilarious, for reasons Jack Webb never intended.

[–] whosit 12 years ago

Just finished watching it on Netflix and although the opening credits show Warner (they even list Warnercolor) there are no end titles at all except for the classic Mk VII production hammer sequence. By the way, supposedly those were his hands.

And you're SO right about the talent agency scene. Boy howdy that was a hoot!

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Yeah, I'd expect Netflix would simply be streaming the Universal disc. Oddly, this movie was on the Encore Drama channel in November (its first broadcast in years to my knowledge), and the original WB logo at the end was included, just as the last time I saw it broadcast.

I've heard those were Jack's hands on the mallet, too. I wonder if it was still him doing it on his TV shows in the late 60s, when he was more than a decade older and had smoked a lot more Chesterfields.

A lot of people thought Jack Webb was making a big mistake filming a big-screen version of a TV series people could see at home for free every week. But Webb got people to go to theaters to see it by offering color, 3D (at least it appears to have been filmed that way), and much more graphic violence than he could ever show on TV.

Plus there's one thing about this film that differs it from every other Dragnet radio and TV episode, including the 1966 TV-movie, made from 1949-1970. Know what it is?

[–] whosit 12 years ago

The difference that I noticed had to do with the beginning of the movie: there was no "This is the city" speech and the story began before the theme music (which itself wasn't quite normal as the dum de dum dum didn't appear until a little bit into the music)

How'd I do?

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Well, you did well, and you make a good point about no "This is the city." But the main thing (which you touched upon) was that in this movie, we see the crime committed. In every other case, we only hear about the crime having happened, then go along with Friday and his #2 as they arrive to investigate.

8/10!

[–] whosit 12 years ago

Funny thing is that this was touched upon in another thread so I dismissed it for that reason. D'oh! (Homer smacks head)

[–] franklinlj 10 years ago

The suppressed preview to Dragnet 1966 shows crimes about to be committed, or right after they are committed. Does that count?

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

"Suppressed preview"? What was that?

As broadcast, the 1966 TVM pilot did not show any crimes being committed, just Friday and Gannon doing their investigation -- which makes sense, since we see the crimes (and solve them) the way the cops would: not being present when it happens, but coming upon it afterward and piecing together the situation.

Actually, there was a 1967 Dragnet in which Friday goes to buy a pack of cigarettes at a laundromat and catches a thief trying to jimmy a coin machine. The guy fires at Friday, who returns fire and mortally wounds the kid. Since the crime scene unit can't find the bullet fired by the crook, Friday is investigated for firing without cause. In the end, the bullet is found lodged in a wall behind a loose wooden shelf, having sped along its underside, lifting the shelf slightly as it went, then stopping in the wall as the self resettled on its supports. Joe Friday is exonerated! Anyway, I suppose that might sort of qualify as seeing the crime being committed, though it's not quite the same thing.

[–] franklinlj 10 years ago

The preview is on YouTube under the title 'Jack Webb Dragnet '66 Opening Sequence'. Crimes galore.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Sounds interesting, I'll take a look at it. Still, it wasn't actually broadcast, so it really wasn't part of the "official" revival of the series. Sounds more like a Jack Webb sales pitch for the show, dropped for whatever reason before broadcast.

[–] franklinlj 10 years ago

Disagree about the talent agency,said why on the 3d thread.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Yes, saw it, disagree, and explained over there.

[–] wrfarley 10 years ago

I should have known I'd find you over here, hob. We always seem to wind up at the same place. Just re-watched my DVD last night and had to comment. Regarding L.A. CONFIDENTIAL, I wish they had followed the cinematic style of this film: flat lighting, straight on camera composition, and period details that seem incidental as opposed to glorious set design.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

We do indeed keep running into one another, wrf. As they say, great minds think alike. Well, yours is a great mind, so we're halfway there.

Of course, when you're living in the period you're photographing, as Webb & Co. were in 1954, everything looks natural because it is natural. It isn't period detail or glorified set design because it's just the regular stuff they see every day, nothing special or something that would draw attention to itself.

Dragnet simply had to film the L.A. of its day, matter-of-factly and without making anything of it. L.A. Confidential had to re-create that era 43 years later, so of course at some level it's going to seem a bit artificial. Add to this the fact that we know it was filmed in 1997, so even if we don't think about that while watching it and simply accept the film as it appears, somewhere within our minds that subliminal knowledge remains, making it not quite as real as the real thing.

That said, I think the period detail of LAC was actually very good and not intrusive or obvious as such things so often are in many movies set in the 40s or 50s or something. It didn't have lots of heavy-handed detail insinuated into the narrative for its own sake. They didn't overdo it, everything seemed to blend in naturally, nothing seemed gratuitous or forced, and the characters behaved pretty normally for 1953. Obviously there were some mistakes here and there, but overall, to me LAC is one of the most natural-looking and -sounding period films around.

As to lighting or camera composition and the rest, L.A. Confidential was of course shot in a more "modern" manner, but I don't think that merely replicating Dragnet's style would have been better. In fact, that might have made the film seem more artificial, as though it was trying to ostentatiously mimic the period style of Badge of Honor...umm, I mean, Dragnet.

[–] wrfarley 10 years ago

hob, I don't know if you ever saw William Friedkin's THE BRINK'S JOB (1978), but that's one of the best "period" recreations I've seen. The look is matter-of-fact. It covers two years: 1938 and 1950. Shot on the streets of Boston, they, of course, didn't have to do much to make the town look retro; but the period was in the details: The cars on the street were ten years older than the year the story took place; most of the cars were also dirty and grimy like they were going through heavy use, period billboards like Phillip Morris are so obscured in the background you may only notice them after two or three viewings, the lighting was flat and dreary, and the movie was cut fast enough that you had to focus on the story and not dwell on the production design. It's a good underrated 1970's film that's hard to find. Another crime period film from the 70's I like is John Milius' DILLINGER which features a terrific Warren Oates (Oates is in BRINKS, too).

It's funny, but can you imagine what a period film shot today of the the 1980's would look like? Except for changing the cars and excessive use of hair gel, a filmmaker wouldn't have to do too much to create that thirty year old world. The point being, the times may be a'changin, but not as drastically as it used to. 1950-1980, huge cultural shift. 1980-2014, not so much.

Back to DRAGNET, my favorite dialogue. To paraphrase:

MAX TROY: Gee, fellas, I'd like to help you out, but a fella gets pretty tired being grilled all night. I'll keep my ear to the ground and be in touch. You guys know where to find me.

JOE FRIDAY: Yeah, right down the hall.

TROY: What?

FRIDAY: You only gave us your name and phone number. There are some other detectives who want to talk to you.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Yes, I think you're right about The Brink's Job, wrf. That's exactly what I was getting at: making the past seem real -- lived in, as it actually was, not simply putting a few old cars on the street or giving people the right hair style.

On which, for decades period movies have always paid much closer attention to men's hair styles than womens': A movie shot in, say, the 50s or 60s but set in the 30s or 40s always had women wearing hairstyles from the decade the film was made, not when it was set. Men's styles seemed to be more acceptable, though granted there was less obvious change in them over the years.

But one film that reversed this norm was The Way We Were, a movie I've never been fond of. There, they went out of the way to make the women's hair just right for the different decades in which the film was set. But throughout the men's styles were straight 70s -- completely unreal for the periods depicted. Strange. The rest of the period detail was pretty good.

Recently I watched The Hindenburg again and what always impressed me about this mixed movie was its attention to period detail. Especially the street scenes: for establishing shots lasting not more than a few seconds on screen, the filmmakers made sure that not only the cars, but the dress of people seen even at a distance, was all true to the time. I was especially impressed by a three-second shot around the Lincoln Memorial, all from a distance and of no import to the film other than showing we're in D.C., where they nevertheless made sure to have several 30s automobiles and people clearly (if distantly) clad in 30s-style clothing. Can't fault them on that count.

As for your observations about the relative changes in 1950-80 vs. 1980-2014, I tend to agree, with some changes. A film from 1950 looked dated by 1960 because so many outward styles had changed. But 2014 doesn't look so immediately different from 1980. It's only when you get into some of the technical devices -- computers, cell phones, etc., etc. -- that the small but major differences become noticeable. Repeats of 1990s programs like Seinfeld and Law & Order look dated today whenever they make a call!

Here's my favorite exchange between Friday and Max Troy, in front of that boxing arena after Friday's ordered him to empty his pockets for the umpteenth time:

Troy (holding out the contents of his pockets): "Where do I put all this?"

Friday: "The ground will hold it."

Followed closely by the scene that night at his home, where Troy gets out of his car, sees Friday and Smith behind him, then empties his pockets on the hood and assumes the position as they drive up. "Good night, Max."

[–] bradford-1 10 years ago

Many months later. Was I not listening closely, or does the familiar "dum-de-dum-dum" theme not show up until the very last scene? It's like the film keeps holding back, holding back, until finally as Friday and Smith walk into the soggy street, "dum-de-dum-dum" breaks loose.
"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?"

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

I never thought about that, bradford-1, but you're right. The "dum-de-dum-dum" doesn't appear until the end. Very different from the TV series. That and the fact that we see the murder actually commtted at the beginning. In every TV episode the crime is always committed off-camera; we only see the aftermath. Something else unique to this movie.

[–] bradford-1 10 years ago

A movie I saw last week, "The Lone Ranger and the Lost City of Gold (1958)," does the same thing. For about 80 minutes, there's lotsa music, but no "William Tell Overture." Not until the last scene, when our heroes ride off into the sunset.

"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?"

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

The "dah-de-dum-dum" opening was actually first heard at the very beginning of The Killers (1946). Composer Miklos Rosza used it right at the start, when "Universal International" comes on the screen, and you hear the theme again when the killers appear later in the film. Its tempo was somewhat faster than in Dragnet. Webb adopted and adapted it for Dragnet.

[–] rbuzby 10 years ago

The film was made in the time period it depicts, but most of the scenes were done on sets, not in the real city.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Of course it was mostly shot on sets (like most movies), but it still reflects its time and place. (Also like most movies, other than period pieces.) When the cast and crew left the studio for the day, they walked out into the Los Angeles of 1954, its beliefs and mores, which they shared.