Mitten in der Nacht

I actually watched this in the middle of the night on one of those evenings where you fall asleep too early, then wake up and can't get back to sleep. As a veteran film buff and a huge fan of Director Delbert Mann and writer Paddy Chayefsky, I am surprised that I never heard of this very New York 1950's slice-of-real-life family drama with a May-December romance between Kim Novak (Betty) and Frederic March (Jerry Kingsley) as its Centerpiece.

As with Marty, the movie centers around the way that fiends of family members with concerns and pre-set notions of "what should be" of their own and reject the budding and heartfelt romance between two very lonely and insecure people who have just recently experienced trauma (divorce of husband and death of wife). The supporting turns by those trying to scuttle the relationship including Joan Copeland, Lee Grant, and Glenda Farrell among many others are terrific. On the supportive side, my favorite performance in the film was by Albert Dekker has March's long-time business partner. He advises March to reach out and hold on to the special relationship he has with both arms. He also has the film's best line saying, "When I die, they should write on my tombstone, What a Waste of Time!" Martin Balsam is also supportive as daughter Copeland's husband who supports Jerry's relationship and gets it with both barrels from his wife. The most surprising performance to me was from Lee Philips who I thought was awful in the two TV show guest appearances I saw him do before deciding that directing TV shows was a more suitable endeavor for him. Here, I found him perfect for his role and incredibly convincing as Betty's ex-husband who wants her back and at a minimum wants another sexual conquest of her. He's a smooth cad without being unctuous or obvious in any way and provides a stunning counterpoint to every other character in the film. He knows what he wants and is determined to get it regardless of whether it is what his ex-wife wants.

I always considered Novak underrated in Picnic and she's even better here. She conveys an insecurity mixed with determination about Betty that is as delicate a balancing act as I've ever seen. She wants to trust her love for Jerry but is so fragile she can't trust herself to be worthy of his love. At the same time, she loves the way he makes her feel special and finds that so different from everyone else in her life, she's willing to navigate the venom and BS thrown at her by all her friends and relatives. It's an incredibly complex and simple performance at the same time. I was almost awestruck.

All fairly compelling so far, right? So why didn't I give this a 9 or a 10 (Marty is a 10 in my book and a 10+ if IMDb would allow such a rating)? March's chemistry with Novak does not match hers with him in far too many of their scenes. March, of course, is a magnificent and accomplished actor who has given some of the most memorable performances on film (my favorite 0 Best Years of Our Lives). But he also can over-emote and connect more with the camera than with his love interest at times. Unfortunately, that happens here quite a bit. And his jealousy borne-out-of-insecurity seems to express itself too self-righteously given hid character and feelings - at least to me. When he allows himself to make eye contact with Betty, it is like day from night. In those scenes, the romance seems and feels genuine even when they are having rough spots (such as in the car toward the early middle of the film). On the other hand, March's chemistry with his threatened sister and with daughter Joan Copeland is perfect. He just seems to prefer the camera to Novak when his character is starting to convince himself that the doubters are right. These disconnections do not by an means ruin the film for me. I enjoyed it and wish to watch it again. It just stops it from being a classic for me.

I still recommend watching it - especially if you love Marty.

Many years ago I caught this movie on the "Bill Kennedy at the movies" show. It was the film that turned me on to Frederick March and Kim Novak. Both were powerful in there roles. The subject matter, older man younger woman hasn't really been explored in film to the extent I think it warrants. "Lolita is another such film, but I'm hard pressed to come up with others. I would love to see this film again after all those years to see if it still holds up to my standard of excellence, but alas, it seems to have dropped off the face of the earth. I've watched for it on TCM and AMC, but I've never seen it listed. I don't know who owns the rights to it, but hope someday to see this film again.

Unlike a lot of soapy relationship dramas from the late '50s filmed in sturdy, widescreen Technicolor, this gruff little movie actually has a pulse that still resonates! The dialog, the real NYC settings, the no frills though excellent black & white photography, the energetically committed performances of Novak and March (and everyone else) are a revelation. Some of the characters could have stepped out of a movie from today with hardly a change of appearance or attitude, such as Lee Grant. The technical and creative side of the film is refreshing for the era--just watch the scene in what looks like natural, overcast winter light as Novak and March laugh and joke as they approach a cabin. Feels so alive and spontaneous, minus any glossy photography or stilted direction. This film really breathes! And if there's music (I actually didn't notice),it's very subtle and doesn't hammer away and distract. Novak is at her very best--previously she seemed rather held in and expressionless to me, but this completely explodes that perception. And though March had a tendency to overact in his career, his tormented emoting here seems understandable. We really feel his pain and anxiety. This movie deserves wider attention.

that I taped years ago and watch every so often. It's a good thing I did as it is not yet available on either VHS or DVD. The first time I ever saw this movie on television was way back when I was a teenager and I was babysitting. It's one of those movies where each time I watch it I see things I missed before; either in someone's performance or in the way a scene is filmed or something else. Fredric March is just flawless as a self-made businessman and widower in his fifties and Kim Novak is edgy as the beautiful but damaged and insecure young woman working at his company. Everyone calls her somnambulistic, but in this movie I could feel her nerves jump right through her skin at times. I thought she was very good in the role. I have to mention that one of my favorite characters in it is the son-in-law, Jack, played by Martin Balsam--a fantastic actor, of course, but he is so great in this, that, although he's not in many scenes--he just knocks me over every time I watch it. The characters all sound so true to life, of course, because they were written by Paddy Chayefsky. I found the subject matter fascinating and believable and although the standout performance was definitely that of Fredric March, playing all facets of a mature man, all actors involved were right on the mark. When WILL they make this movie available on VHS or DVD? My home-made tape looks crummy, I admit it! (And the movie is hardly ever shown on television any more) Anyway, this is one of my favorite 100 films.

while the theme has been done, certainly for its time this was a bit experimental. Fredric March portrays a 59 year old garment district manufacturer who, recently widowed, is tired of life. He has many friends, a successful business and all the accouterments, but something is missing.

Enter his employee, Betty Preisser (Kim Novak). Recently divorced from a sporadically employed musician, she is uncertain and depressed about her situation. March (Mr. Kingsley) tells her that she must make a decision in life, that it is a sign of maturity. It is not certain at this point whether he is self-serving, or actually trying to help the girl.

The relationship develops as they start to date. There are some amusing scenes with family members, as Novak's friend Marilyn (well-portrayed by Lee Grant) tells her that she should return to her first husband who is still "madly in love with her".

This is a good film for its era, in that there are no pat answers. March's dilemma is that he truly is in love with a young woman 30 years his junior. An interesting story, and well worth more than one viewing. 8/10.