After his gossip-columnist master cuts off his means of living, a press agent is forced into the dirty deed of splitting up his master's sister and her fiancee.
The intro to this is full of promise, with neon-lit Manhattan beaming in black & white while a jazzy Elmer Bernstein score sweeps us around a hectic night in Times Square. The sense of location and period is really strong - sleazy and vibrant.
Sadly, the characterisation is a let-down. The press agent's situation doesn't make sense: he operates out of an office with a bedroom in back, yet he has a secretary, yet he's down to his last cent, yet he has the trust of a powerful man, yet he can't cover the simplest jobs, yet he's got everything it takes to succeed in a dirty business. Confusing. And he starts off sleazy, carries on being sleazy, and gets a bit of cheap redemption in the end. He is the main character, so everything flows from that, and it's all a bit off.
The other problem is the highly mannered dialogue - hard bitten, sometimes obscure, never believable. The actors do deliver it well - but I ain't buying it, see? The columnist is an interesting character, but the lovers are pretty plain, and in the end we just get a jerky old melodrama with nothing true about it.
The one part I did enjoy was the subplot with the stage comedian, where the hero's nerve and trickery shone through. So, although impressed with the atmospherics, I was left cold by the rest of the story.
My guess is this movie's reputation really rests on the surprise of Lancaster's performance. Overall: big production built on a flawed screenplay.
Ps. I've read the screenwriter was drafted in very late, and ended up ripping fresh pages out of his typewriter on shooting days. Lancaster was not happy.
The intro to this is full of promise, with neon-lit Manhattan beaming in black & white while a jazzy Elmer Bernstein score sweeps us around a hectic night in Times Square. The sense of location and period is really strong - sleazy and vibrant.
Sadly, the characterisation is a let-down. The press agent's situation doesn't make sense: he operates out of an office with a bedroom in back, yet he has a secretary, yet he's down to his last cent, yet he has the trust of a powerful man, yet he can't cover the simplest jobs, yet he's got everything it takes to succeed in a dirty business. Confusing. And he starts off sleazy, carries on being sleazy, and gets a bit of cheap redemption in the end. He is the main character, so everything flows from that, and it's all a bit off.
The other problem is the highly mannered dialogue - hard bitten, sometimes obscure, never believable. The actors do deliver it well - but I ain't buying it, see? The columnist is an interesting character, but the lovers are pretty plain, and in the end we just get a jerky old melodrama with nothing true about it.
The one part I did enjoy was the subplot with the stage comedian, where the hero's nerve and trickery shone through. So, although impressed with the atmospherics, I was left cold by the rest of the story.
My guess is this movie's reputation really rests on the surprise of Lancaster's performance. Overall: big production built on a flawed screenplay.
Ps. I've read the screenwriter was drafted in very late, and ended up ripping fresh pages out of his typewriter on shooting days. Lancaster was not happy.