Though it features a man transfixed by a woman who draws him into crime, Scarlet Street is a great example of how conventions associated with noir are not fixed. It is a story about ordinary people trapped by circumstance and impulse.
It is also an example of the influence of 30s French cinema on noir.The presence of Fritz Lang as the director is also notable, marking Scarlet Street as a meeting point of two of the genre’s biggest influences converging - the downbeat French dramas of the thirties and Lang, one of the key figures to come out of German cinema of the Weimar era.
While I have seen plenty of noir which focuses on familiar archetypes like the detective and the femme fatale, I always gravitate toward the movies about ordinary people who get in over their heads.
While it does feature a great deal of manipulation, Scarlet Street is not principally concerned with a criminal scheme. It is about a small group of characters who are trying to escape their circumstance.
Cross is a schlub trapped in a loveless marriage, trapped by conventions and masculinities (with his dead predecessor’s portrait as a constant signifier of what he lacks). When he meets Kitty, he sees youth, beauty and (mistaken) support of his artistic pursuits.
While she shares some qualities with the fatale archetype, Joan Bennett’s Kitty is not a cliche. She is a young woman who uses her sex appeal because she has no other way forward. She is also ensnared in a doomed romance of her own, with Johnny, a man who is using her for his own benefit. One of the biggest tragedies of the film is that because of him, she ends up dead.
Scarlet Street’s grey morality is probably due to its source: The movie was based on the 1931 film Le Chienne - I only realised this part of the way in, and it is hard not to see the shape of the narrative, especially as it heads towards the climax. Based on the strength of the remake, I am very curious to watch the original.
Knowing that it is a remake now, I wonder if the adaptation is responsible for some of the elements I did not quite buy. There were elements of the narrative that I found lumpy and contrived - thematically I like the reveal of the dead husband’s true fate, but the execution comes off as a contrivance.
The ending also feels a bit fudged, with Cross failing to complete his own life.
However, this is one change that I kind of enjoy(?). There is something rather haunting about how it closes, with Cross forced to wander the earth while Kitty's voice haunts him. There is a brutal gut punch of a scene showing how his paintings have given Kitty immortality, which does carry a certain power. It is a suitably noirish end, even if the character feels too sympathetic to deserve such a fate.
In the lead, Robinson is a mile away from his tough-talking insurance man in Double Indemnity. He imbues Cross with a sadness and melancholy - he is an old man who is beginning to feel like he missed out on his youth. He is sleepwalking through life, with only his paintings to keep him awake.
Bennett is also pretty good as Kitty. There is a bite and solidness to her performance that makes for an interesting contrast with Robinson, particularly when she is under the thumb of Duryeas' Johnny. Duryea is a believable sleaze although he does not make sense as a heartbreaker.
Scarlet Street is a really terrific movie - the story is rather like a vice, but without the presence of the law as the arbritator of the protagonists' punishment. Technically, our heroes get away with it. They are just in no position to enjoy it.
No comments:
Post a Comment