Can't stand Sam! - Wait Until Dark (1967) Discussion

[–] mojo2004 13 years ago

A friend of mine had seen this years ago and I hadn't. While telling me the story she was still very angry about the way Sam made Suzy come to him. I remember her saying she would have beat the sh!t out of him if it had been her. (lol)

"It's like yelling at babies for not changing their own diapers!"

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning 13 years ago

It's good to know that I am not the only one who has felt that way. Any time I have discussed that scene with someone they give me this nonesense about Sam only wanting Susy to be self sufficiant. I say she had proved it by coming out of that whole ordeal alive! LOL!I say he should have run to her in relief when he saw that she was there!

"Please excuse me for overhearing. I had my ear pressed to the door."

reply

[–] stuffic 13 years ago

I agree completely. Calling her like she's a dog or something. After everything she had been through, he's still teaching her self-reliance? As Charlie Brown would say...UGH!!!

"I don't want to make trouble, all I want is a drink."

reply

[–] novastar_6 13 years ago

No no no, stuffic, the correct word is AAAAAAUGH!

reply

[–] millephoenix 13 years ago

I agree Sam's "be self-sufficient" attitude makes one want to hand him over to Roat.

reply

[–] practicepiano 12 years ago

And, another way of showing that she realized how able she was could have been done (not that's it's even necessary!), by having him call out to her, having her say "Wait -- I'll come to you," and proudly doing so.

reply

[–] maccaby 12 years ago

Thank you. I don't know why it wasn't written that way, or something like that. In the play, the physical set-up is different, so they are closer together when the refrigerator door swings back, and the audience sees Susy. Then Sam starts to get her, and it's Gloria who says "No," and then something like "she can do it herself." Probably Gloria means that Susy can stand up by herself, and doesn't need to be picked up like a child-- she's crouched behind the door. If the actors do it right, it will look that way, and then Susy will start to walk to Sam on her own before he has another chance to go get her.

It's a nice visual to have Susy walking to Sam as the last piece of blocking before the curtain falls. In addition to reinforcing the themes of the play, it lets the audience know that Susy is physically OK. So it made sense to want to keep this in the movie. The set is different, because we see a lot more of the apartment, and Susy and Sam are farther apart at the end. And while hugging Gloria is nice, the sort of detour to her means that Sam has to stay put awkwardly. It's just wrong.

I would have liked it if Sam had tripped and fallen on something in the dark, because after all, Susy and Mike never put away all the things they had gotten out when looking for the doll, and then Susy could stand up, find her way to him and help him up. Maybe some day I'll invest in the CGI software to do that little manipulation for my personal copy.

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
"And, another way of showing that she realized how able she was could have been done (not that's it's even necessary!), by having him call out to her, having her say "Wait -- I'll come to you," and proudly doing so."

That is an excellent idea! Shame on the writers for not thinking of that!

reply

[–] parisel 12 years ago

And even before, he wouldn't give her the slightest help. Even a sighted wife needs a little help. It's common courtesy to help someone pick things up.

But most of all I hated that she had to beg to come and wait in a coffee shop for her Lord and Master...Hated Sam.

I guess it's like looking at clouds. You see one thing and I see another. Peace.

reply

[–] PerfectPoison2 12 years ago

He always bothered me too--what an ass..I can understand him wanting her to be as self sufficant as possible but he borderlines it to being emotionally distant and abusive. Perhaps I can see that he wouldn't want to just rush at her and scare her--she already been through that but he should have said,"I'm here baby and went over to her calmly and took her in his arms.

reply

[–] lilypad183 12 years ago

that was done for the drama, it's a movie and we have to expect scenes like that.

reply

[–] madetwolastforever 12 years ago

Maybe he was teaching her to be "self sufficient" so he could eventually divorce her?
He was a cold @$$ husband. Yes, Suzy should have beat him senseless with that cane.

reply

[–] nutsberryfarm 12 years ago

crenna is tepid. the girl is cute. he's so bad. and then arkin is acting. like acting.

“Can't go wrong with taupe."- Wynn Duffy

reply

[–] bigbluecheese 9 years ago

He was such a jerk! She - the world champion blind lady - had just fought off a total psycho and been terrorised by sadists and he makes her come to him!

Arse!

Goodnight, good luck and may your God go with you

reply

[–] ecarle 9 years ago

Interesting: the actor who PLAYED Sam -- Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. (then riding high as the star of TV's "The FBI" after a few years as a private eye on "77 Sunset Strip")...

...HE hated playing that scene too. HE thought Sam was a jerk.

But they made him, I guess.

Wasn't his character an ex-Marine? Or Army? They could be like that.

I would figure Sam would be needing to be very, very nice to Suzy after that scene. Buy her things. Never order her around. Or she would divorce HIM.

After all, his accepting the doll from the gorgeous Lisa started all of his wife's terrors.

reply

[–] bigbluecheese 9 years ago

Oh yeah!

He got her in that situation in the first place, idiot!

Goodnight, good luck and may your God go with you

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
I knew I had a thread on here about Sam! LOL! Can't believe it's been 7 years. Time flies..... etc. etc. etc.

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
I really am amazed at all of the response this got over the years. I never even gave this a thought until I saw it in the trending bar here. Then, I had to take a look. It really is nice to know that others watched this and feel the same way.
Still love the movie. I haven't seen it in years. I think I have it on a VHS tape. I must look for it and watch it again!

reply

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
Yes. I'm so glad that Sam was gone most of the time. I actually have always liked Efrem Zimbalist Jr. in most things. Having read another person's post on this thread, I'm glad to hear that Zimbalist didn't think much of Sam either!
I agree. Adam Arkin was downright creepy in this. I liked Richard Crenna as well.

reply

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
It's sort of fun to run across these things. Well, until you find that certain post that makes you cringe. LOL! In most cases, I say to myself, Did I really write that?
Happy hunting!

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

Adam Arkin was downright creepy in this

---

It was Adam's dad Alan Arkin who played the role, but isn't time amazing? Alan Arkin still works today(in old man parts, but as a very VIRILE old man -- he landed Ann-Margret in a movie last year); and his 'little boy" Adam Arkin is a middle-aged actor with a steady career as a TV director.

reply

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

I make lots of mistakes, too. Or "typos." They are no big deal.

A point I wanted to make is that while Alan Arkin was, overall, the more successful of the two(over the title billing in major films like The Russians Are Coming, The Russians are Coming, Catch-22, and Freebie and the Bean); son Adam Arkin has worked steadily for decades as a TV actor and supporting actor in movies(Checking Out, with Meg Ryan and Walter Matthau) and as a TV director.

Two successful Arkins.

It was amazing how Alan Arkin pulled off the terrifying Roat after debuting as a "comedy Russian" in The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming." I saw Wait Until Dark on release(actually, in early 1968 after its Xmas 1967 debut) and I found Arkin absolutely terrifying. But over the years, I've looked at the performance and realized that Arkin infused a fair amount of "comic delivery" into his work as Roat, like when he says "Did you know they wanted to kill me? I did. I knew it before THEY knew it. They had comic book minds. And now its topsy-toivy. Me topsy, dem toivy."

And when Suzy realizes Roat's going to take her to the bedroom to kill her:

Suzy: You promised you wouldn't kill me!
Roat: Did I?...I must have had my fingers crossed behind my back.

Chills. Funny. Terrifying.

reply

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

He was great in The Russians. Also, The Russians is kind of a dark comedy. He is, after all, an enemy commander in wartime. His continuous exasperation with his incompetent crew was great.

---

Yes, I suppose it is important to note that The Russians are Coming had its dramatic edge. The Cold War was still in a dangerous mode, and this movie, while funny, always respected the danger of an escalating conflict between the US and Russia.

The posters and the presence of Jonathan Winters in the movie suggested this would be another "Mad Mad World" type mindless entertainment, but this was more of a cautionary tale.

And thus, Alan Arkin picked up his Oscar nomination not only for his comedy accent work...but for his "capture" of the dangers his sub captain knew he was facing.

THAT said, I recall it became a big catch phrase for my high school friends(and eventually me) to do a comic Russian line delivered by Arkin's crew members as they tried to clear the streets of the American fishing village where they were trapped:

"E-mare-gency!" "E-mare-gency!" "Please to get off streets!" "E-mare-gency!"

Oh, the schoolyard laughs we got with that.

You had to be there.

reply

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

I have a Russian friend, who loved the movie and took it back to watch with his family in Moscow. They all loved it. I find it funny to think of these Russians in Moscow watching that movie about an accidental Russian invasion

---

That's great, to think about folks "on the other side" watching the events from their POV.

In their own way, the movies helped thaw the Cold War.

I'm reminded that filmmaker Stanley Kramer got a Moscow showing of his 1959 film "On the Beach"(about the last survivors of atomic war facing their own deaths by radiation.) For all the saber-rattling and shoe-pounding of the Cold War, there was always the haunting spectre of world anhilation to keep everybody under control.

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
Hi, ecarle! Nice to see you around.
Sorry about that. Of course, it's Alan! The mind is getting fuzzy.
I personally think that Alan has gotten much better looking with age.

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

hi missmargo!

I didn't mean to cause a stir with my Adam Arkin correction. But it seemed like the wrong name was repeating. That happens when we get "locked in."

You can correct me anytime!

Alan Arkin HAS gotten better looking with age. And I can count two films -- "Little Miss Sunshine"(his Oscar winner) and "Going in Style"(where he lands Ann Margret, also older and looking terrific) -- where Arkin plays a manly, fit, sexual character. Its good for older folks everywhere to have such a role model.

But man was he scary as Roat. Stephen King has deemed Arkin's Roat "the most terrifying villain in movies." I'm rather in agreement. Unlike the hulking monsters in Friday the 13th and Halloween, Roat is very chatty(he talks a LOT in the first act; this is based on a play.) Unlike Anthony Perkins' Norman Bates, Roat is clearly a killer from the first time we meet him.

Trivia note in passing: the actors who played two of the great psycho villains of all time -- Roat and Norman Bates -- can be found together in a movie: 1970's Catch-22. By 1970, Arkin was a bigger star than Perkins, and got billing above the title.

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
You didn't cause any stir. In fact, I'm always happy to know you are around! You know so much. You have a great deal of information when it comes to classic films and TV shows. You may jump in at any time!
It's funny that you should mention Stephen King's take on Roat. I had also read that and something about the character of Randall Flagg in The Stand. He had said that Roat was in part, inspiration for that character.

thanks for all of the trivia. As I said, jump in any time!

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

OK, I will, thanks for the invitation and the encouragement.

And...I didn't know that King based Flagg partially on Roat. You see, I learn things from all of you all the time, too.

reply

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 6 years ago

❤️️
That's what I like about these boards. We can learn a great deal from each other!

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

Yes, MissMargoChanning...we can and we certainly DO.

Cheers!

ecarle

reply

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

Time for a bump!

reply

[–] ElizabethJoestar (929) 3 years ago

That last bit with Sam is absolutely terrible, I agree.

From a writer's perspective, I have often wondered why the screenwriters (and tbh even Knott-- in the play, Sam doesn't call for her but he does deliberately stop and wait for her to find him) chose to have Sam not run up to Susy. The woman was almost turned into swiss cheese by a psychopath. He just got home to find the bodies of two strange men on the ground and the room stinking of gasoline. Also Susy is covered in blood and cowering behind a fridge.

Just to briefly play devil's advocate, I get in the earlier scenes why he's being harsh-- there's the sense that Susy's reluctance to help herself (such as with the fallen pepper shaker) and moments of self-pity disappoint him since he seems well-aware that she is capable of taking care of herself to a greater degree than she is willing to accept, and Sam is an ex-Marine, meaning he probably has a tough love philosophy to begin with. Having that conflict between them also makes it more believable that she is at least likely to consider he might be at least yearning for "greener pastures" during the con, especially since she's already self-conscious about her inability to see (I always think of Hepburn bitterly going "if those are letters from Mrs. Roat, don't read them to me!" when Mike finds her old love letters-- she's afraid of having her fears of Sam secretly wanting to abandon her validated).

However, that's early in the movie and had Sam not been a jerk in the final scene, I think people would at least tolerate him. By the end, Susy's already proven her self-reliance and smarts to the most important party: the audience. Circumnavigating Alan Arkin's corpse to hug Sam is not necessary to prove to us or heck even Sam that she can take care of herself. Actually, the 2013 Jeffrey Hatcher rewrite of the play has Susy insist on going over to Sam by herself-- at least that is far less harsh and allows Susy to make that call!

reply

[–] liscarkat (16476) 2 years ago

I thought the same thing. Sure, it's good to get her to learn to do things for herself, but under the circumstances--the apartment is doused with gasoline, there are dead guys lying around, she has blood all over her, and she's almost been murdered herself--why not give her a break? If I had been Sam, I would have run right over to her.

reply