1944 Archives - Screen Wolf

Curse Of The Cat People (1944)

Posted on October 27, 2024October 25, 2024 by fenrisfil

Cynical cash in sequels were not an invention of more recent years. They were part of Hollywood since the golden age. Curse Of The Cat People is the sequel to “Cat People” from 1942. Both films were written by DeWitt Bodeen. To Bodeen and producer Val Lewton, this was a lot more than just a cash in. They took a radical direction with the story, much to the chagrin of the studio. This was Robert Wise’s directorial debut, however the original director on the film was Gunther von Fritsch. Gunther was fired for falling too far behind in shooting but approximately half of the movie is his work. Simone Simon, Kent Smith and Jane Randolph return to their roles from the previous film and they are joined by the movies young star Ann Carter.

After the events of “Cat People” Oliver Reed (Smith) has married his former co-worker Alice (Randolph) and moved to Tarrytown, New York. They have a 6 year old daughter called Amy, who is awkward and struggles to make friends. Oliver is concerned that she lets her imagination run away with her instead of socializing. Part of his concern is because he saw what happened to his former wife Irena when she lost her grip on reality. In a strange twist Amy befriends an invisible figure that appears to be the ghost of Irena. She also makes friend with a senile old lady, a former movie star that now thinks her own daughter is an impostor. Oliver tries to bring her daughter to reality but may end up only driving her away from him.

Are Cat People Without Cats, Still People?

Curse of the Cat People is a unique movie (Not bad for something 80 years old). The expectations for this sequel would be for it to be a monster like it’s predecessor. But while the original involved curses and cat people, this has neither. Instead it’s sort of a ghost story. Maybe not even that, since the ambiguity of the story leaves it just as likely the ghost was only ever a figment of a young lonely girls imagination. It is a story that has a bit of sentimental sweetness to it, but is actually quite sad. Not just in the lead girl but also the senile old woman that befriends her while rejecting her own daughter. It is a story about the border between fantasy and reality and how that impacts people. It’s really not a horror film. Yet, it is a direct sequel with three returning characters.

These days people talk like audience expectation as if this is not something that has ever been subverted before and yet here we are. A sequel to a monster movie turned into an emotional character drama with a hint at ghostly activity. It’s no surprise reactions to the film were decidedly mixed with fans of the first film often very disappointed while those that had no particular affection for the first simply enjoyed the film for what it was. Indeed that it wasn’t a horror was probably a bonus for those people. The movie even seems to retcon the events of the previous film, placing it all firmly inside Irena’s head, despite that movie showing the audience her in panther form. The only cat in this sequel at all is the street cat in the opening scene that was awkwardly edited in to the movie at the last minute.

Child Psychology

It seems the only way to really judge this movie is as a stand alone. That said, it was marketed and is still listed as a horror, so I’m not going to give it a complete pass for not having anyone mauled by a big cat. As a character drama Amy is a very compelling character. Eight year old Ann Carter did a great job with her performance. Her career was derailed by polio before she broke through as an adult, but she definitely had talent. You certainly feel her innocence and loneliness. Even as she is accidentally driving a wedge between another daughter and her mother, she is never anything but well meaning. Speaking of which, that story between Barbara and Julia Farren is quite heart breaking in it’s own right. It’s a strange secondary story to Amy’s that shares more with it thematically than anything else.

The themes are the interesting thing here. Because we are talking about psychology, senility, madness and the imagination of children. Ollie Reed has his own journey, perhaps one of forgiveness for his former wife Irena’s madness or to see that kindness and love is a better antidote to a delusion than anger. We reference the madness of Irena as an adult, the senile madness of Julia Farren believe her own daughter is an imposter and the childhood madness of Amy’s imaginary friend. These are all depicted with a supernatural overtone to it, yet none of it really does seem to be. It’s actually quite a clever bit of story telling.

But Is It Even A Horror?

Here we get to the problem. As a horror, this is not good. The only person that dies is an old woman of a heart attack. The only threat to anyone is from their own madness. The ghost is most likely just an imaginary friend and the vast majority of the movie isn’t even trying to present the viewer with any other conclusion. Ambiguity is always a benefit in movies that walk the line like this, but they barely attempted any. Madness can be a strong horror theme, but not in the way it is used here. The only character even portrayed as at all menacing is Barbara. Yet the story doesn’t do anything to make us think she is anything other than a poor abused daughter burden by her mothers senility. She is more sad than scary.

So with that all in mind, I have the dilemma of how to rate the movie. It was certainly a misleading film on the surface, but there is a solid, intelligently made movie underneath. As a horror though, which is ultimately what it was marketed as, it doesn’t work. This is more of a family movie than a horror. My instinct here is to give this a 6/10 and a mild recommendation with the caveat that you need to go in expecting a psychological character drama and not anything even mildly horror related.

Ministry Of Fear (1944)

Posted on November 21, 2023November 21, 2023 by fenrisfil

For tonight’s Film Noir I’m checking out the Fritz Lang film “Ministry of Fear” from 1944. This is a spy thriller, one of the less well known sub genre’s of Film Noir. These films were mostly popular around the second world war, for obvious reasons. Fritz Lang having fought in the first world war and fled Germany during the second was naturally a good fit for the genre. This particular story was based on the novel by the same name by Graham Greene (Adapted by script legend Seton I. Miller). It’s worth noting there have been a number of changes from the source material likely mandated by the Hays code and it does impact that story and characters. But I’ll mention that in the review section. The movie stars Ray Milland (Who would later go on to star in Noirs “The Lost Weekend” (1945) and “Dial M For Murder” (1954).

Guess The Weight, Win The War!

Set in England during the blitz, our story starts with the release of Stephen Neale from Lembridge Asylum. He was placed in the asylum effectively for legal reasons after he had been involved in the mercy killing of his wife. Though his wife took the poison herself, he did purchase it and so the court decided to sentence him to the asylum instead of prison. While waiting for the train to London, he stumbles upon a town fête. While having his future read by a psychic he is told to give a particular weight for the “Guess the weight, win the cake” game. He takes the advice and then wins the cake, but shortly after it’s clear there was a case of mistaken identity.

After boarding his train, he is joined by a blind old man who during an air raid takes the opportunity to attack Stephen and take the cake. Neale pursues, but the old man is killed by a bomb. With no trace of the cake, Stephen takes the man’s gun and returns to London. He seeks the help of private eye, who takes them to the charity that was organising the fête. Here he meets Willi Hilfe (Carl Esmond) and his sister Carla (Marjorie Reynolds) who seem to want to get to the bottom of things themselves. They pursue the medium from the fête and after joining her in a seance Neale is framed for murder and must go into hiding. Though he seems to be getting close to a dangerous Nazi spy right that are a threat to the entire country.

Creative Differences.

So the first thing to talk about are the changes from the book. These mostly impact the leading man and ladies personality. In the book, there is significantly more guilt on Neale’s side for the death of his wife. She was still ill, but he actively poisoned her and it’s suggested he feels it was more to end his suffering than hers. Meanwhile Carla is suggested to be part of the spy ring herself. This frames their relationship in an entirely new perspective. Two people afraid of having their dark secrets revealed finding some uneasy comfort with each other. It’s worth noting too that screenwriter Seton I. Miller fell out regularly with Lang over the direction of the film, but Miller usually had the final say (As he was a producer too).

It’s hard to say if the changes were related to the Hays code or just Miller’s vision. But either way along with the character motivations, the Asylum itself is entirely removed from the spy plot. The resulting plot is a little far fetched, but no worse than the majority of spy films. I can’t help but think there were more foolproof ways to deliver microfilm than to rely on key words to a fortune teller to be told the weight of a cake that literally anybody could have guessed. Once the ball is rolling the first two acts settle down nicely. The final third though is a little rougher though with it feeling like a bit of a rush to tidy things up. This includes a happy ending that flies at you from out of nowhere.

Building Suspense.

In practice the movie basically feels like a Hitchcock spy movie than a regular film Noir. The plot having a number of twists and turns and there being a big focus on building suspense. If there is one man that can rival Hitchcock for his ability to build suspense however it is Lang and he demonstrates this tremendously here. There is never a rush to action, so each moment is given time to provide maximum tension. Scene by scene these are superbly well crafted moments and it makes the relatively short run time of the movie fly by. In actuality the moments of plot are very fast paced and straight forward set pieces, but the build to each moment is prolonged.

What I like about Lang’s approach is it is very casual and natural. Here he doesn’t rely at all on the score and often these moments are quiet, except for things like footsteps. The train scene in particular stands out as well built tension in a scene that is on paper very simple. Another scene has a tailor is on the phone while casually twirling around a very large and dangerous looking pair of scissors. The scene provides important plot information from the call itself, but also signals to the viewer something is about to go off. Neale is aware of this too and you can see his tension build, especially as he eyes the scissors.

Conclusion.

This is an interesting film. The performances from Ray Milland and his supporting cast are fine and the story is relatively fun, but it is Lang’s direction that makes this worthwhile. He really knows how to get the most out of fairly straightforward scenes, especially ones that are light on dialogue. Perhaps this is due to his silent film roots, but it’s something we rarely see these days so well worth spending time to appreciate it. That said, this isn’t one of Lang’s best movies. The final act is a little messy and the character changes from the novel definitely hurt it. Perhaps were he given more creative control it could have been a true classic, we will never know. What we have however, is still good and I’m rating it at a high 6.5/10.