IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,5/10
3783
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuMiddle-aged bride Ann Hamilton soon begins to suspect that her charming husband is really a psychotic who plans to murder her.Middle-aged bride Ann Hamilton soon begins to suspect that her charming husband is really a psychotic who plans to murder her.Middle-aged bride Ann Hamilton soon begins to suspect that her charming husband is really a psychotic who plans to murder her.
Billy McClain
- Uncle Ben
- (as Billy McLain)
Jean Adren
- Mrs. Davenport
- (Nicht genannt)
Don Anderson
- Warmsley's Assistant
- (Nicht genannt)
Monya Andre
- Saleswoman
- (Nicht genannt)
Sylvia Andrew
- Nora
- (Nicht genannt)
William Bailey
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Something of a success, something of a misfire. Katharine Hepburn, Robert Taylor, and Robert Mitchum are all cast against type in this noirish movie made in the style of THE STRANGER, GASLIGHT, and even REBECCA in which a shy woman marries a man with a dark story surrounding him. It looks lush in its black and white visuals and takes its time to get to the tight noose of its plot. However, the middle-of-the road aspect of UNDERCURRENT comes mostly because to believe Katharine Hepburn, of all women, would be this passive person with little to no self-assurance and essentially be a damsel in distress -- a role Joan Fontaine or Joan Crawford could phone in while garnering Oscars -- would be to extend the suspension of disbelief to unbelievable levels. I can see why she'd agreed to take on the role of Ann Hamilton: like any actor, it would give her a chance to extend her range and prove she could pull it off. Both Roberts fared better to varying degrees: Taylor, a thirties heartthrob, had that rich voice and those dark looks that could convincingly translate into playing the complete opposite of the leading man. Mitchum, on the other hand, never known to play an overall nice guy, does just that here. Does it work? Not as well as Taylor, especially when over the years he made a name playing some of the most memorable villains in film history in NIGHT OF THE HUNTER and CAPE FEAR. Here, Mitchum gets little to do, and must concede the scene stealing to Taylor who all but ties Hepburn to the train tracks while twitching that mustache of his and sneering. A nice surprise was to see Jayne Meadows making her film debut by playing a woman who also resembles Hepburn and has some interesting information to give Hepburn about Taylor and Mitchum.
The first time I saw undercurrent, I was as disturbed as everyone else by the soporific pacing.
Having just seen it for the second time, I have to say that there is much detail to enjoy. As in most Minnelli pictures, I enjoyed the awkward party scenes, in which elegant extras enjoy themselves while the principals cringe.
Katharine Hepburn is in her "insecure" mode, like in Summertime, and she is very good. The role would have been more natural for, say, Jeanne Crain.
Most enjoyable is Jayne Meadows, as a cold fish you can't quite figure out. She is incredibly beautiful in the ladies'lounge scene. Both her scenes with Hepbburn crackle with 1940s psychological intensity.
Having just seen it for the second time, I have to say that there is much detail to enjoy. As in most Minnelli pictures, I enjoyed the awkward party scenes, in which elegant extras enjoy themselves while the principals cringe.
Katharine Hepburn is in her "insecure" mode, like in Summertime, and she is very good. The role would have been more natural for, say, Jeanne Crain.
Most enjoyable is Jayne Meadows, as a cold fish you can't quite figure out. She is incredibly beautiful in the ladies'lounge scene. Both her scenes with Hepbburn crackle with 1940s psychological intensity.
I can't be unbiased. This is the film that brought me into classic film - the first full film I ever saw on TCM. It means more to me than the favored classics. It gave me the greatest gift.
All of the criticisms of this movie might well be flushed down the loo. This is one powerhouse of an interesting movie.
Call it Film-Noir. Call it Mystery/Suspense. Call it Psychological Thriller. Call it what you may...I call it: absorbing drama.
It moves very deliberately...and the facts are revealed one by one, in true mystery fashion, until the fantastic, thrilling ending.
Those who say that Hepburn and Mitchum were miscast are just so wrong. Hepburn wasn't playing Hepburn here...she wasn't Tracy Lord here. She wasn't a know-it-all New England uppity snob here. Not a worldly character at all. She played a different character than I've ever seen her do. Hepburn doesn't rely on her stable of clichés to capture our imagination here. She does it with imagination and as few of the Hepburn cornerstone mannerisms as possible. Good result!
Robert Taylor is fascinating to watch. He has so many secrets in this role. And they reside behind his facade for us to watch and enjoy. He slowly swirls into controlled mania and desperate determination. Very fine, indeed. He should have been nominated for this one.
And then there's Mitchum! What can one say about Mitchum without gushing foolishly. Gee whiz...the first time you see him...he shows us a side of him we have hardly ever seen! He seems at peace, mild in character, mellow in mood...pensive...other worldly. Likable even! Never gruff or abrasive like we've seen him so many times before.
What is unique about this story is that we really do not know what is going to happen next. We spend most of the movie residing in Hepburn's character's mind. Her wondering, her confusion, her search for the truth -- at all costs.
I was expecting not to like this movie. I was expecting it to be another formulaic Hepburn vehicle about high society. But this is where this movie takes a left turn into an underrated mystery.
I enjoyed the use of the theme to the Third Movement of Johannes Brahms' Third Symphony throughout the movie. It lent a delicious air of mystery, love and luscious pastoral passion to the whole affair.
And to say that Vincente Minnelli was WRONG for this movie? Gee whiz! He was perfect! Why compare him to Hitchcock? Minnelli has manufactured a mystery world all his own. Sure there are devices. All movies have devices. But they are handled so deftly...we don't rely on them to make us aware of the story -- they don't get in our way. They heighten our interest and this very absorbing plot.
Well done. I wish it had been a longer movie...it was THAT kind of movie.
I recommend this one...
Call it Film-Noir. Call it Mystery/Suspense. Call it Psychological Thriller. Call it what you may...I call it: absorbing drama.
It moves very deliberately...and the facts are revealed one by one, in true mystery fashion, until the fantastic, thrilling ending.
Those who say that Hepburn and Mitchum were miscast are just so wrong. Hepburn wasn't playing Hepburn here...she wasn't Tracy Lord here. She wasn't a know-it-all New England uppity snob here. Not a worldly character at all. She played a different character than I've ever seen her do. Hepburn doesn't rely on her stable of clichés to capture our imagination here. She does it with imagination and as few of the Hepburn cornerstone mannerisms as possible. Good result!
Robert Taylor is fascinating to watch. He has so many secrets in this role. And they reside behind his facade for us to watch and enjoy. He slowly swirls into controlled mania and desperate determination. Very fine, indeed. He should have been nominated for this one.
And then there's Mitchum! What can one say about Mitchum without gushing foolishly. Gee whiz...the first time you see him...he shows us a side of him we have hardly ever seen! He seems at peace, mild in character, mellow in mood...pensive...other worldly. Likable even! Never gruff or abrasive like we've seen him so many times before.
What is unique about this story is that we really do not know what is going to happen next. We spend most of the movie residing in Hepburn's character's mind. Her wondering, her confusion, her search for the truth -- at all costs.
I was expecting not to like this movie. I was expecting it to be another formulaic Hepburn vehicle about high society. But this is where this movie takes a left turn into an underrated mystery.
I enjoyed the use of the theme to the Third Movement of Johannes Brahms' Third Symphony throughout the movie. It lent a delicious air of mystery, love and luscious pastoral passion to the whole affair.
And to say that Vincente Minnelli was WRONG for this movie? Gee whiz! He was perfect! Why compare him to Hitchcock? Minnelli has manufactured a mystery world all his own. Sure there are devices. All movies have devices. But they are handled so deftly...we don't rely on them to make us aware of the story -- they don't get in our way. They heighten our interest and this very absorbing plot.
Well done. I wish it had been a longer movie...it was THAT kind of movie.
I recommend this one...
Undercurrent (1946)
Melodrama with Katherine Hepburn instead of Bette Davis or Joan Crawford?
Yes. And it works, though differently. Hepburn rules the movie, for sure, and she covers some range from sweet daughter of a scientist to a rich man's wife losing her innocence to someone who rises up on her own two feet. She's still the classy (or stiff) Hepburn (depending who you ask). I like her, and I liked her in this film a lot.
The plot uses a whole range of clichés but uses them well. The slight twists to what you expect are never shocking, but they keep you guessing. The second big star, seemingly, is Robert Mitchum, but if you are a fan of his, don't see the movie for his role. It's exceedingly minor. A very strange contract arrangement on that one. When he is there, it's undramatic, though he's in command, of course. The other male lead, Robert Taylor, is his usual reasonable, appropriate self--carefully chosen words to avoid saying a little starchy and ordinaire. One bit part is predictably colorful, Marjorie Main with her earthy comebacks.
Director Vincente Minnelli is in good form here, actually, and if the movie seems routine, it's the story that holds it back. He has some great photography behind it all (Karl Freund), and the score is unusually effective and beautiful (Herbert Stothart). I wouldn't call it a film noir, though it has shadings of the style and it's from that post war dark period. Instead, it's a noir melodrama. Worth seeing, absolutely, if you like those kinds of films.
Melodrama with Katherine Hepburn instead of Bette Davis or Joan Crawford?
Yes. And it works, though differently. Hepburn rules the movie, for sure, and she covers some range from sweet daughter of a scientist to a rich man's wife losing her innocence to someone who rises up on her own two feet. She's still the classy (or stiff) Hepburn (depending who you ask). I like her, and I liked her in this film a lot.
The plot uses a whole range of clichés but uses them well. The slight twists to what you expect are never shocking, but they keep you guessing. The second big star, seemingly, is Robert Mitchum, but if you are a fan of his, don't see the movie for his role. It's exceedingly minor. A very strange contract arrangement on that one. When he is there, it's undramatic, though he's in command, of course. The other male lead, Robert Taylor, is his usual reasonable, appropriate self--carefully chosen words to avoid saying a little starchy and ordinaire. One bit part is predictably colorful, Marjorie Main with her earthy comebacks.
Director Vincente Minnelli is in good form here, actually, and if the movie seems routine, it's the story that holds it back. He has some great photography behind it all (Karl Freund), and the score is unusually effective and beautiful (Herbert Stothart). I wouldn't call it a film noir, though it has shadings of the style and it's from that post war dark period. Instead, it's a noir melodrama. Worth seeing, absolutely, if you like those kinds of films.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesIn Vincente Minnelli's autobiography, he says that Robert Mitchum was very uncomfortable in the role of the sensitive Michael.
- PatzerThe aircraft shown flying mid-air with Ann and Alan going to Washington, D.C. and the one landing are different planes. The one flying is NC16001, the one landing is NC33651. Note the different tail on the one landing that says "Buy War Bonds".
- VerbindungenFeatured in Forecast (1945)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- Corrientes ocultas
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.644.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 56 Min.(116 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.37 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen