14 Jahre Sing-Sing

I just saw this film two nights ago at the San Francisco Film Noir Festival. This was a beautiful movie filled with subtle shades of noir. The underrated Lizbeth Scott has the best performance in this rarely seen drama. There's great snappy dialog. Kirk Douglas is the perfect villain of this clever movie. It is so easy to see his son Michael's face on him. Burt was fun to watch as usual in giving his best to this intriguing screenplay. What was interesting to see unfold (in this almost 60 year old film) was how challenging the crime corporations are in pinpointing the vastness of what exactly they own. How they get around the skimming of the profits. As well as stating that they only "get" a minimal amount of the percentages ~ by the books. There was a lot of thought that went into this film and the three stars gave it their best. Pure quality.

The screenplay and the directing may seem a bit hackneyed to some,but Lancaster's problems,trapped in the mystery of economics and club management are rather intriguing.

The essential lies elsewhere:watching the Lancaster/Douglas team is enough to satisfy the cine buff;they are so good than even when they work with inferior material,they are still better than most of the rest. Douglas is icily suave,treating his old pal to a meal of canard à l'orange with vintage Champagne.But if looks could kill,his certainly would.Lancaster is a mistreated,thrown into jail (14 years!),cheated good guy ,but who will play fair game till the end.Between these two men ,there's of course a woman:unlike today's female parts,this one is not sacrificed .Lizabeth Scott's performance is first-class and on a par with the two male parts.Too bad her career should have ended so prematurely.She easily equals Laureen Bacall,she's even more human.

It's strange how Douglas 's first parts were often villains (this movie,the loves of Martha Ivers) which culminated with Billy Wilder's highly superior "the big carnival".This movie proves that three good leads can give a banal plot substance.

Burt Lancaster has been in prison since the days of Al Capone, and when released he sets out to claim his share of ill-gotten gains from his former partner, Kirk Douglas. Kirk is pleasant at first, lulling Burt with wine, gourmet food, and the company of his mistress Lizbeth Scott, but he has no intention of sharing anything. What starts out as a buddy relationship becomes a battle of wits and wills as the two fight for control of Kirk's nightclub, lots of money, and Lizbeth.

This is no "Double Indemnity", but the two main characters are written and acted well enough to hold our interest. Douglas steals the film as the cleverer thug, the one who was smart enough to get away and go legit. His performance is lively and has touches of humor, particularly in the scene where he proves that the pen is mightier than the sword, or at least that legalese is mightier than the gun. Lancaster has a more violent, less sympathetic character, but has fun playing a brute who's forced to actually think for the first time in his life.

Not a great film, but an enjoyable one. Interesting for the way it shows the changes in the criminal world over the course of a decade, from the brutality of the thirties to the emerging sophistication of the fifties.

No need to recap the plot. There's one key scene unlike anything in the rest of 40's noir. Frankie (Lancaster) invades Dink's (Douglas) office to muscle in on what he's owed of Dink's big operation. But Frankie's a gangster of the uncomplicated 1930's, while Dink's a white-collar criminal of the coming 1950's. So. By the time Dink's accountant Dave (Corey) is through answering each of Frankie's threats with another layer of corporate ownership that can't possibly be divided, Frankie's reduced to a bundle of quivering frustration. In short, Dave has beaten all Frankie's assembled thugs with what amounts to a maze of legalese. As a result, piles of paper prove ultimately more powerful than gangs of gunmen in what amounts to a great unexpected scene.

All in all. The movie's decent 40's noir, long on atmosphere but too long on talk, at least to my liking. I suspect the screenplay was tailored to showcase producer Wallis's top 3 new stars, especially Scott who gets a lot of romantic dialog along with sultry screen time. The overall result is a movie composed of too many under-blended showcase scenes- - some quite good-- that nevertheless don't really gel into a compelling whole. It's the kind of movie where the stars are more memorable than the story.

Scott and Douglas, for example, really shine. Scott does some of the best acting of her career as the conflicted glamour girl. But I especially like Douglas's slimy version of a smooth-talking mastermind who's so self-assured, you can't wait to see him get what he's got coming. Douglas's early career specialized in such compromised types, a revelation to those only familiar with his later, more heroic, career. For his part, Lancaster does well enough with his distinctive looks, but Frankie is a less showy role than the other two.

Anyway, one thing for sure—producer Wallis certainly had an eagle eye for new talent, as this movie more than demonstrates.

Frankie Madison (Burt Lancaster) gets out of prison after 14 years. He wants his half share from his former crime partner Noll "Dink" Turner (Kirk Douglas) who now owns a roaring nightclub. Dink sends his singer girlfriend Kay Lawrence (Lizabeth Scott) to talk to him.

Whenever Lancaster and Douglas get together, the movie explodes in threatening energy. Both actors exude a violent menace. The movie has a nice noir style starting with the shadow of Frankie. The sense of brooding criminality is pervasive. I'm uncertain about Frankie being taken down by a corporate flow chart but it is something different. This is simply a good start of a great acting duo.