exactly, what's the title about?


Maybe a scene explaining the title was cut out by some overzealous editor?
Can anyone explain?

reply

The title is in reference to how you can't escape justice. You can miss the postman's knock once but he'll catch up with you eventually, same with justice. See the 1946 version for more information

Too late skippy, you're a communist now...

reply

"Too late skippy, you're a communist now... "

What is that line from?

reply

I suggest you watch the older version of the movie-the one with John Garfield and Lana Turner in order to get a direct idea of the titles importance-it fits with the ending of the movie and the movie in general. PLus, the movie is pretty good.

reply

[deleted]

""James M. Cain's first novel, The Postman Always Rings Twice, is the noir novel that paved the way for all the noir fiction that followed. ...
Cain originally titled the work Bar-B-Que, but the publisher Alfred Knopf who was considering publishing the novel objected to the title and suggested For Love or Money instead. Cain hated Knopf's title because he found it generic, the sort of title that seems designed to market any sensationalistic book or movie. In return, Cain offered to call the book Black Puma or The Devil's Checkbook, but Knopf rejected these as well.
Finally, during a conversation with the playwright and screenwriter Vincent Lawrence--Cain's best friend in Hollywood, and the person to whom he ultimately dedicated this novel--came up with the title The Postman Always Rings Twice. The two writers had been commiserating over the agonies of waiting for the postman each day to find out the latest news on their submitted manuscripts. Lawrence said that he would sometimes go out into his backyard to avoid hearing the postman come but complained that the postman always rang twice to make sure he was heard.
This anecdote put Cain in mind of an old English and Irish tradition according to which the postman always rang (or knocked) twice to announce himself. Cain pitched the title to his friend and Lawrence agreed that this metaphor was well suited as a description for the fate of Frank Chambers. Knopf, of course, accepted the title, which with its rather obscure meaning, may in fact have contributed to the controversy that fueled the novel's huge success.""

http://www.geocities.com/headlobe/postman.htmld the novel's huge success.

reply

""""The title is seen as something of a non sequitur; nowhere in the novel does a postman character appear, nor is one even alluded to. When asked for an explanation, Cain stated that the manuscript had been rejected by 13 publishers prior to being accepted for publication on his 14th attempt, so that when the publisher asked him what he wanted the work to be entitled he drew on this experience and suggested "The Postman Always Rings Twice"."""

http://www.encyclopedia-glossary.com/en/The-Postman-Always-Rings-Twice.html

reply

you're all wrong. It's called the Postman always Rings twice because of a crime that was committed in the late 1920s. Ruth Snyder (I think that was her name)convinced her lover Judd Geis to murder her husband. She also took out an insurance policy on him for a lot of money. She instucted the postman that whenever a letter came from the insurance policy to ring the doorbell twice so she would know to get the mail first so her husband would not find out about the insurance policy. After the trail, where Snyder was sent to the electric chair, the phrase "the postman always rings twice" became synomas with adultery and murder and lust, which is exactly what the novella is about.

reply

I have heard variations on all these themes, but the Ruth Snyder derivation is plausible. BTW, Snyder's lover was Judd Gray, and she did go to the chair for him. Her execution was surreptitiously captured on film by an enterprising newspaper photographer and made front pages around the world in 1927.

The postman also used to bring the mail twice a day. Until the late 1950s, many urban residential areas in the US received morning and afternoon mail deliveries.

reply

Wherever the idea of the title came from (two mentioned by prev posters), the question is *why* this title was actually chosen --- and it is a damned good title.

Clues (easy to work it out from them):
1. opportunity (as the saying goes) knocks only once - but here two opportunities for murder... but..
2. A slightly Faustan theme - Satan doesnt only tempt once, definitely twice (at least) - so the religious say. But..
3. The novel is strikingly *secular*, and so .. instead of satan, the postman -- a most mundane thing, the postman knocking twice.

and finally, as a previous poster noted, but I'll make some more points:

4. retribution - or rather just plain bad luck, but not purely a matter of luck - conscience (not for the Greek; but that heaven is momentary -- the mutual suspicions, the realisation that even after they made it up, it wasnt the same thing... in fact, there are echoes of a later novel - I speak of Orwell's 1984, of course -- in both, the protagonists are free, after having betrayed each other to the authorities...)

5. I recommend the book (long essay) 'lust' by simon blackburn (oxford univ press, 2004) ... to express it all more clearly.. and for how you find the theme in such diverse sourses as shakespeare, proust, and of course sartre [and also Marquis de Sade, but we'll let it pass..]


Deep, terse title. It's what made me read the novel in the first place [haven't seen the film -- none of the three adaptations... - would like to see the 1946 one someday...]

reply

I always thought it was a bit of unsaid dialogue between Frank and the guy with the flatbed at the beginning:

Frank: Can I get a cigarette?
Guy: Opportunity knocks once.
Frank: Well, the postman always rings twice.
Guy: [deadpan]

_____
"The wisest man is therefore he who loafs most gracefully." ~ Lin Yutang

reply

[deleted]

The ending was cut from 1st movie, wherein Frank was arrested for suspscion of killing Cora by purposely causing car accident, wrongly found guilty and executed. He got away with first murder but not second in the law's eyes- 2 rings. I am basing this answer on Lana Turner version only, not how author got title or other very interesting info submitted. I didn't know any of that. Hope this helps a little.

reply

has anyone seen the original Italian movie version "Ossessione" [1943] by R. Rossellini?
the one with Lana Turner was DULL, she had sexappeal of a nun

reply

"Ossessione" (1943) was made by Visconti, and takes a different approach to the story than the two American versions. It probably includes more elements from Cain's novella than the other two movies combined.

Clara Calamai plays the "Cora" character as very earthy and world-weary. This is the only version, IMO, where it is easy to see why she becomes so quickly attracted to the drifter. Her marriage is so lacking in passion and she's so empty, she's ripe to be shaken up a bit by something new. Massimo Girotti, who plays the "Frank" character provides that excitement, and exudes a raw, visceral power that is fascinating to watch.

Just a more grown-up approach to the story than either Hollywood version, IMO. Plus, the B&W cimematography and Italian locations are just beautiful.

reply

ecjones1951,

thanks alot for reply, think the same. Massimo was #1, would even prefer him
to Jack:);1st time saw signor Girotti in a German-Czechoslovak historical series [1987], he was f... mean, old villain

reply

I've seen every version even the now thought lost "Cunviverie" from Jacque Smolette.

Nothing exists more beautifully than nothing.

reply

Isn't "The Postman Always Rings Twice" an expression referencing adultery in the sense that a married woman who is having sex with different callers might have "code" rings or knocks so that she knows who is there? It seems like I've heard that expression in reference to the milkman and the postman.

Is that not one of the meanings here?

reply

In a film class that examined noir movies, I'm pretty sure I remember being told that nobody ever really found out what the title meant. It was just one of those wird things that probably only made sense to a few people that aren't alive anymore. If we didn't have the internet talkshows, would anyone know what the title to "Cloverfield" meant?

I'm not surprised there's so much violence in this country. I'm surprised there's so little.

reply

Frank Chambers started out with nothing and at the end still had most of it.

reply

It takes all sorts. I thought Turner was gorgeous whilst the only honest answer to Carla Calamai's question "Do I look like a cook?" was "Yes - and a not especially good one either". She fitted well with Visconti's Neo-Realist approach but sex appeal? Not a hope.

PS Rossellini?

reply

Frank and a hurried traveling salesman (Christopher Lloyd) arrive at Nick's Station for fuel. Frank offers a bromo (apparently an antacid of the time) at the attached restaurant, but Lloyd says only for a minute.

Frank orders the bromo and a hearty breakfast for himself and heads for the john. He only uses the restroom to peer out to see if Lloyd had left. When his ride quickly leaves Frank returns to his breakfast even as Llyod no longer sits there. It's a minute before Frank asked Nick where Llyod has disappeared.

My wife says this all was a scam by Frank to ditch Llyod and con Nick into getting him a job. Does that make sense? He knows nothing of Nick or Cora, and ditched his free ride to LA.

Just a story but wonder if the book had finer details why Frank did this.

reply

Yeah, I'd like to know too.

reply

He DID see Lloyd leave. I noticed this too.

http://www.cgonzales.net & http://www.drxcreatures.com

reply