Añade un argumento en tu idiomaArt curator George Steele experiences a train wreck...which may not have actually happened. Is he cracking up, or the victim of a wicked plot?Art curator George Steele experiences a train wreck...which may not have actually happened. Is he cracking up, or the victim of a wicked plot?Art curator George Steele experiences a train wreck...which may not have actually happened. Is he cracking up, or the victim of a wicked plot?
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Man
- (sin acreditar)
- Man
- (sin acreditar)
- Nagging Wife on Train
- (sin acreditar)
- Arcade Patron
- (sin acreditar)
- Station Agent
- (sin acreditar)
- Lecture Guest
- (sin acreditar)
- Dorothy
- (sin acreditar)
- Man with Drunk
- (sin acreditar)
- Cop
- (sin acreditar)
Reseñas destacadas
Charlie Chan movies occasionally involved art thefts or forgeries. Of course, there is the black bird in "The Maltese Falcon." But generally, this is an unusual setting for a film noir, which this definitely is.
It's tense but maybe not so tense as it might be. I like Hitchcock but do not worship at his feet. Whoever, had he directed this, it could have been a tight, thrilling picture. He'd have story-boarded it all before filming and we'd have been on the edge of our seats as ti played out.
He didn't, of course, and it's still a really good movie. It's noir with a highbrow twist, just as "Red Light" -- which I haven't seen in 15 years and wish would turn up -- is noir with a religious setting.
After breaking down the door at the museum where he works and smashing a statue, George Steele (O'Brien) is knocked out. When he comes to, he believes he was in a train wreck.
A man on mysterious business at the museum (Marshall) convinces the police (Ford) to release Steele and watch him. Steele investigates matters and begins to undercover some dirty work at the museum.
This is an okay noir that has good performances, atmosphere, and a decent plot. O'Brien is a character man who is not usually the lead in a film; it's possible that "Crack-Up" would have been stronger with a true leading man, perhaps Van Heflin, who certainly would have been believable as an art expert and had some panache as well.
O'Brien, a solid actor, nevertheless pulls off the role and gets strong support from Marshall and Claire Trevor as his girlfriend, who add the sophistication that befits the high-brow museum plot.
"Crack-Up" could have used a little more spark, but it's entertaining.
Pat O'Brien (ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES) is a WWII vet and art curator who gives lectures on paintings at an art museum. While trying to account for his actions one strange night, he finds himself pretty deep in some kind of criminal racket. On the lam from the law, he decides to get to the bottom of things on his own. (O'Brien is a street-smart art curator, knowing how to evade the police, sneak into and out of buildings, and arrange meetings in shady places.) He's mixed up in something serious. He knows too much. His life is in danger. Can he trust *him*? Can he trust *her*? Should he be trusting anybody at this point?
There are a handful of secondary characters, but the film doesn't take the time to explain who they are or what their deal is. We only know that they are associated in some way with O'Brien and/or the museum. And we know that one of those people in the room must be the "bad guy". And so the guessing game begins.
Why is Herbert Marshall so interested in O'Brien's activity? What was that person doing on the night of the murder? Is that a crooked cop? Why didn't the cigarette boy recognize him? Who's that lurking in the shadows? Could O'Brien be betrayed by *them*?
The final solution to the art theft mystery seems like too much work, too much risk, and too much bloodshed to be worth it all. (And what good is a painting that's too hot to be displayed for anybody?) But what do I know about great art?
Pat O'Brien is past his 1930s prime and looking a bit William Bendix-y around the edges. He is joined by the lovely Claire Trevor, a film noir staple, as an old friend and his only true ally. The cast also includes Herbert Marshall, Wallace Ford, and Ray Collins. The film has some typical noir touches, and the art theme is unique. Seeing the x-rayed paintings is fascinating, so the movie has that going for it. But the film overall doesn't stand out. It's okay, but not great.
A test for movie mysteries for me is, is there real suspense, or do clues just inexplicably pop up so that the movie can come to a conclusion. Using reverse on the DVR, I was able to go back several times and see when certain clues came up if it was logical or simply convenient. This film passed that test.
It has a surprisingly strong cast. Claire Trevor is interesting, as is Ray Collins. Herbert Marshall is always good, but one thing to take note of here is his real limp, which in most films is not noticeable (Marshall lost a leg in WWI).
Another thing that made the film interesting was how it portrayed life back in 1946. For example, the very good scene filmed at an arcade was very era-oriented, and certainly more interesting than had the scene just been shot in a restaurant or something of the sort...which most directors would have done. The night dock scene was also nicely done. And, these "location shots", though undoubtedly done at the studio, did look real.
So why do I rate this only a 7? Well, while Pat O'Brien is good, he seems a bit old for the part. For example, in one scene he shimmies down a very long chain that would be rather unlikely for someone nearly 50 years old (and clearly out of shape). And, he's not totally convincing as an art expert. But still, it's a decent performance.
The role of WWII in shaping the film noir style should not be underestimated. In 'Crack-Up,' combat veteran George Steele (O'Brien) remarks that his greater fear in the trenches was that his mind might unexpectedly snap "like a tight violin string." These combat-related fears are here transcribed into a society ostensibly recovering from the war, suggesting that the shadow of the twentieth century's most costly campaign was still bearing over America, a sinister spectre of uncertainty and disarray. The film's undisputed centrepiece, though it is never adequately explained, is Steele's recollection of a train crash, a sequence that almost suggests an episode of "The Twilight Zone." As Steele watches the blazing beams of an oncoming train, time appears to stand still. He sits transfixed, calm and emotionless, a deer in the headlights. In classic film noir fashion, both he and the audience know what is about to happen, but all are powerless to stop it. The train barrels towards its predestined fate, a blistering collision of light and flames. Or does it?
Perhaps drawing some inspiration from Lang's 'Scarlet Street (1945),' this film noir concerns itself with the art of art fraud and forgery. The filmmakers' approach to the topic is strictly populist. At the beginning of the film, art critic Steele gives a lecture that openly denigrates the booming popularity of surrealism and "modern art," dismissing the style as being of use only to snobbish social-climbers {an unfair view, since Hitchcock had employed the services of Salvador Dali just one year earlier for 'Spellbound (1945)'}. It is these very same snobs who have planned an elaborate scheme to replace masterpiece canvasses (titled "Gainsborough" and "The Adoration of the Kings," respectively) with worthless replicas, before destroying the copies not for monetary gain, but because they're snobs, and would like to have the classic works of art all to themselves. If all of 'Crack-Up' was as lurid as the opening sequence and train-wreck flashback, then Irving Reis would have had a masterpiece on his hands. As it is, we are left with an entertaining if occasionally stodgy thriller.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesThe footage of the oncoming train was used again in other RKO films including Acusado a traición (1949), Grito de terror (1951) and Testigo accidental (1952).
- PifiasAlbrecht Dürer's "Adoration of the Magi" (called "Adoration of the Kings" in the film), and the forgery that is passing for it, are shown as paintings on canvas, which people roll up in several scenes. However, the real painting is on a wood panel.
- Citas
Terry: [opening her car's passenger door] Come on. Get in.
George Steele: No thanks, I'll take a streetcar; I can trust streetcars.
[a policeman's whistle is heard and we see two cops running toward Steele. Steele jumps into the car, and they take off]
George Steele: What's your racket girlie? Whad'ya do for a living?
Terry: I'm outta my head. I drive around in cars picking up psychopathic killers.
[softening]
Terry: Someone has to look after you. I was at a party at Reynolds'. Things began to come apart at the seams. I drove Traybin...
George Steele: [interrupting] I know that.
Terry: OK, you know that. You know everything. You're the great Steele. You walk through brick walls. You...
[she pulls over]
Terry: You can wait here. They're going to put in a streetcar soon. Unless... unless you have some dim idea of what you're doing and want me to help you.
George Steele: I always ask one question of people who want to join my club. Who's Traybin?
- ConexionesEdited into Grito de terror (1951)
Selecciones populares
- Who plays the supporter of modern art that kicks up such a fuss at the museum lecture? I thought it was John Qualen ( by golly!) but he's not in the cast list and no one else is credited for the role.
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- El crimén del museo
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- San Pedro, Los Ángeles, California, Estados Unidos(scenes on the ship - Los Angeles harbor)
- Empresa productora
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
- Duración1 hora 33 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.37 : 1