TCM Fri.: Slander (1957) & Bad for Each Other (1954)

[moira finnie]

Heads up, noiristas! Two films that could be new to some of us are on TCM on Friday, July 15th. I hope that you'll add your comments about these two movies here if you'd like.

1:45 PM EDT
Slander (1957)
A TV star almost loses his career and his marriage over a tabloid story.
Dir: Roy Rowland Cast: Van Johnson, Ann Blyth, Steve Cochran.
BW-81 mins, TV-G,

I've seen Slander (1957) and think it is one of Steve Cochran's best portrayals of a certain kind of sleaze, though this time he doesn't destroy with a fist or a bullet, but a magazine along the lines of the notorious Confidential of that decade. Cochran gives a nuanced portrayal of his character, adding some shading to his character's relentlessness, especially in his scenes with the great Marjorie Rambeau as his mother. As a matter of fact, this one is especially timely, given recent developments in the press hacking scandals in Britain and the US. Van Johnson, an actor I like, especially as he got older, gives one of his better post-stardom performances as one of Cochran's targets. Johnson's characterization has a certain poignancy given later revelations about the man's complicated private life. The fine character actor Harold J. Stone and the lovely Ann Blyth are also on hand in this one.

3:15 PM
Bad for Each Other (1954)
A doctor returned from the Korean War must choose between setting up a glamorous practice and helping the poor.
Dir: Irving Rapper Cast: Charlton Heston, Lizabeth Scott, Dianne Foster.
BW-82 mins, TV-PG,

I've never seen this one, but I really WANT to so much. The prospect of Lizabeth Scott + Young Chuck + photographed by Franz Planer and a script by Horace McCoy (author of They Shoot Horses, Don't They) and Irving Rapper as director seems promising, so it may be a small gem (or not). Since Irving Wallace's name is attached to the story, I'm not entirely sure what to expect. I have been on a recent "Chuck Heston Before Moses" kick, seeing for the first time ever Dark City (1950) which was great fun, Ruby Gentry (1951) aka Son of Duel in the Sun, The Savage (1952), Secret of the Incas (1953) which I loved and want to know more about Yma Sumac, and the sublime The Naked Jungle (1954) with a repressed Chuck stuck in the jungle surrounded by those damn ants, ravishing Eleanor Parker, and a skinny (well, sort of) William Conrad. (The ants wouldn't have as much to munch on back then)

[moira finnie]

Hey, what a gyp! Bad For Each Other(1954) was a soap opera, (and a fairly limp one, at that), not a film noir. Why was it sold as part of the boxed set, Bad Girls of FIlm Noir Vol. 1?

Probably for two reasons: the people marketing it wouldn't know film noir if it sat up and bit them and because Lizabeth Scott was in the cast.
The best things about Bad For Each Other may have been Mildred Dunnock (as Chuck's conscience and Mother), Ray Collins as Scott's plain-spoken father trying to warn Chuck that his daughter was nothing but trouble (I liked his line "the back yard is strewn with the bones" of the men she'd destroyed! Gee, thanks, Dad)...and Marjorie Rambeau, who appears to be the featured player today on TCM in honor of her 122nd birthday.

P.S. This movie was not Lizabeth Scott's finest. Chuck Heston still tried to smile this early in his career, though he looked quite pained when he did. He had a strange, wolfish smile that seemed to indicate pain more than delight.

[ChiO]

Probably for two reasons: the people marketing it wouldn't know film noir if it sat up and bit them and because Lizabeth Scott was in the cast.

As much as it pains me to write this, I would propose a third reason (or, a corollary to your reasons): "Film Noir" has become a marketing tool. Even if a marketer does know more about film noir than just shadows, fedoras, wet city streets, and a few actors' names, that knowledge is beside the point. "Film noir" sells. So if it has any of those things, or is close to having some of those things, label it "film noir".

Somewhere Lawrence Tierney is crying (he must be...because he sure ain't beatin' such yahoos up).

[moira finnie]

As much as it pains me to write this, I would propose a third reason (or, a corollary to your reasons): "Film Noir" has become a marketing tool. Even if a marketer does know more about film noir than just shadows, fedoras, wet city streets, and a few actors' names, that knowledge is beside the point. "Film noir" sells. So if it has any of those things, or is close to having some of those things, label it "film noir".

Somewhere Lawrence Tierney is crying (he must be...because he sure ain't beatin' such yahoos up).

I agree about film noir...and, since I didn't want to ruin the experience of discovering a new noir, I avoided reading much about this movie before viewing it. I think that Lizabeth Scott=Film Noir to many people. She probably gets tired of having all her work lumped together like that, but it sure sells. Mr. Tierney, if he were still with us, might just be making a few shekels by surfing the noir wave, in between beating on the yahoos.

On the other hand, Slander was even better than I remembered. Steve Cochran was a truly great slime bag and I loved the justice of the denouement, (way to go, Marjorie, baby!) Van Johnson is one of the few actors who can express self-pity without making me hate him (Robert Young is another).

If anyone missed this, you can currently see the film on youtube:
[youtube][/youtube]