IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,5/10
6718
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuThe female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.The female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.The female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 2 wins total
Eddie Acuff
- Ed - Coroner
- (Nicht genannt)
Charles Bradstreet
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
David Cavendish
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Wheaton Chambers
- Property Clerk
- (Nicht genannt)
Roger Cole
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Frank Dae
- Party Guest
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Striking camera work letting the viewer see through the eyes of hard-boiled detective Philip Marlowe(Robert Montgomery). This is an intriguing Raymond Chandler tale that has the "private dick" solving a murder while seeking a missing socialite. Montgomery directs himself and is primarily only seen in a scene looking in a mirror. Novelty of the camera work is clever and makes YOU part of the movie. Its pretty cool finding the clues. Very apt cast featuring Audrey Totter, Lloyd Nolan, Leon Ames and Jane Meadows. Fun to watch.
If you want a great, serious Philip Marlowe mystery, go check out "The Big Sleep." If you're in a lighter mood, however, this one is well worth watching. The POV is cute and leads to some decent effects, but it's also tremendously goofy sometimes. The dialogue really sells it though. The lessons I learned from this movie were 1) Only men can handle guns. 2) Having four thumbs is bad. 3) Never, ever tell anyone the time. 4) If you try hard enough, you can drink whiskey through your eyes. I'm sure there are hundreds more gnomic sayings, easily applicable to daily life, scattered through it!
Seriously, though, it was a lot of fun to watch, mostly because of the problems with it, and I'd highly recommend it.
Seriously, though, it was a lot of fun to watch, mostly because of the problems with it, and I'd highly recommend it.
I saw this film on TMC on Christmas Eve 2000. I thought it was pretty interesting. The first first-person film I've ever seen. It really caught the first-person POV with which Chandler wrote the novel. I loved Marlowe, wise-cracking, one-liners ("Do you fall in love with all of your clients? Only the ones in skirts.") I thought the director handled the camera very well, with the mirrors to show the first-person perspective. I like it a lot. Great noir! Kept me riveted.
Robert Montgomery was a pretty savvy guy. As I recall, President Eisenhower tapped him to be the first presidential adviser on TV appearances at a time when the tube was still a new- fangled technology. No doubt, his being a well known Republican also helped.
Too bad this experiment in the subjective camera fails as clearly as it does. I'm sure it took guts for Montgomery to pitch the idea to the notoriously conservative MGM. But he did get the opportunity. My feeling is that he took on too much for this, his first feature as a director.
First, he's not only directing but starring as well. That might be okay if he weren't also refashioning his image from lounge-lizard playboy to tough-talking private eye. After all, Dick Powell had managed a similar transition the year before in the highly effective Murder, My Sweet (1944). The trouble here is that we seldom see Marlowe (Montgomery), thanks to the subjective camera. Instead we hear him all the time in a pinched unnatural voice more annoying than compelling. Nor, for that matter, does the tough-guy tone match Marlowe's or narrator Montgomery's dapper appearance. Despite some clever cracks from scripter Fisher, the transition just doesn't work.
Just as troublesome is the complex Chandler novel that Fisher adapts without simplifying. The resulting narrative is almost impossible to unravel, which compounds a slow-moving camera whose subjective pov has to avoid the kind of quick-moving pans that might disorient or upset the viewer. Together, they produce a labored result, both visually and narratively. A simpler story-line would have demanded less from sometimes over-burdened viewers.
This is not to say the experiment doesn't occasionally produce interesting effects, especially the hazy, claustrophobic climb out of the wrecked car. Then there's the blonde receptionist's come-hither look while exiting the room that almost had me leaving my chair to follow. Note, however, how the the subjective eye of the camera alters traditional assumptions about movie acting . When Marlowe grills Adrienne Fromsett (Totter), the camera doesn't cut back and forth in routine conversational style. Rather the camera stays on Totter the entire time Marlowe eyeballs her. Thus, Totter has to perform uninterrupted for an extended period in which any false note or exaggeration gets magnified; at the same time, flaws cannot be finessed in the editing process. Rather, the whole scene has to be re-shot. Though the players do well enough, I suspect the novel technique was not popular.
If the movie fails, it's at least an honorable failure. Then again, the talented Montgomery bounced back in his next dual effort Ride the Pink Horse (1948), a gripping noir expertly acted and directed. Apparently, appropriate lessons were learned from this disappointing initial effort.
Too bad this experiment in the subjective camera fails as clearly as it does. I'm sure it took guts for Montgomery to pitch the idea to the notoriously conservative MGM. But he did get the opportunity. My feeling is that he took on too much for this, his first feature as a director.
First, he's not only directing but starring as well. That might be okay if he weren't also refashioning his image from lounge-lizard playboy to tough-talking private eye. After all, Dick Powell had managed a similar transition the year before in the highly effective Murder, My Sweet (1944). The trouble here is that we seldom see Marlowe (Montgomery), thanks to the subjective camera. Instead we hear him all the time in a pinched unnatural voice more annoying than compelling. Nor, for that matter, does the tough-guy tone match Marlowe's or narrator Montgomery's dapper appearance. Despite some clever cracks from scripter Fisher, the transition just doesn't work.
Just as troublesome is the complex Chandler novel that Fisher adapts without simplifying. The resulting narrative is almost impossible to unravel, which compounds a slow-moving camera whose subjective pov has to avoid the kind of quick-moving pans that might disorient or upset the viewer. Together, they produce a labored result, both visually and narratively. A simpler story-line would have demanded less from sometimes over-burdened viewers.
This is not to say the experiment doesn't occasionally produce interesting effects, especially the hazy, claustrophobic climb out of the wrecked car. Then there's the blonde receptionist's come-hither look while exiting the room that almost had me leaving my chair to follow. Note, however, how the the subjective eye of the camera alters traditional assumptions about movie acting . When Marlowe grills Adrienne Fromsett (Totter), the camera doesn't cut back and forth in routine conversational style. Rather the camera stays on Totter the entire time Marlowe eyeballs her. Thus, Totter has to perform uninterrupted for an extended period in which any false note or exaggeration gets magnified; at the same time, flaws cannot be finessed in the editing process. Rather, the whole scene has to be re-shot. Though the players do well enough, I suspect the novel technique was not popular.
If the movie fails, it's at least an honorable failure. Then again, the talented Montgomery bounced back in his next dual effort Ride the Pink Horse (1948), a gripping noir expertly acted and directed. Apparently, appropriate lessons were learned from this disappointing initial effort.
As confusing a plot as any Chandler novel might be, The Lady in the Lake screenplay is full of some interesting twists, film noir staples, and a unique point of view. The viewer sees only what the protagonist Phillip Marlowe sees - and just the way he sees it! Yes, at first I thought this novelty was interesting, but eventually it lost its allure and started hurting the actual story - of course this may have been purposely done. The story starts with Marlowe sitting in an armchair telling us about this crazy case of his that creeps up in suspense. A book editor hires Marlowe to find her boss's wife. After that, who knows? Joking aside, I have a vague idea about what the eventual outcome of the film was - but have no complete account to be sure. Bob Montgomery plays the detective and I think his performance hurts the film the most. He isn't bad, but he isn't real good either. After seeing Bogie in Murder My Sweet, my expectations were too high I suppose. Montgomery does a workmanlike job if nothing else, but he plays one crabby private dick! He is all sour and no sweet. Bogart at least always had a high level of humour indirectly laced throughout his performance. He was a layered character - something film noir heroes strive to be. Montgomery's Marlowe is just cantankerous and crabby. We see only one side. The rest of the cast is okay - Lloyd Nolan gives a pretty good performance. The main "doll," Audrey Totter is a pretty accessory who overacts quite a bit. Nothing real special here, but certainly I recommend it for its film novelty if nothing else.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesLloyd Nolan was almost blinded when the glass splinters from a bullet that smashed a window hit him in the face. He was rushed to the hospital and a doctor carefully removed a shard of glass from the edge of his cornea.
- PatzerWhen Adrienne is taking care of Marlowe after the car crash, she hands him a mirror so he can see his injuries. As he's putting the mirror down, the face of a stage hand is reflected in the mirror.
- Zitate
Adrienne Fromsett: [to Marlowe] Perhaps you'd better go home and play with your fingerprint collection.
- Crazy CreditsSPOILER! In the opening credits Chrystal Kingsby is written as being played by Ellay Mort, the phonetic spelling for 'elle est morte', French for 'she is dead.'
- Alternative VersionenThere is an Italian edition of this film on DVD, distributed by DNA srl, "UNA DONNA NEL LAGO (1947) + L'UOMO NELL'OMBRA (1952)" (2 Films on a single DVD), re-edited with the contribution of film historian Riccardo Cusin. This version is also available for streaming on some platforms.
- VerbindungenFeatured in The Best of Film Noir (1999)
- SoundtracksJingle Bells
(uncredited)
Written by James Pierpont
Played during the opening credits
Also sung at the office Christmas party
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Lady in the Lake?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- La dama del lago
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.026.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 45 Minuten
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.37 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Die Dame im See (1946) officially released in India in English?
Antwort