El beso amargo

I just had to comment on this movie to give another view to the only other review that's here for this movie at the time. This movie was made in 1964 and thus should be judged according to its time. I thought the movie was excellent in the fact that it took alot of chances for 1964. It dealt with prostitution and child molestation in a very real way. The cinematography was very good for a picture of its time. The lighting on some of the scenes was absolutely erie and sometimes very emotional. I think in todays world of movie making the art of lighting has been lost or at least severely under developed. This movie is well worth seeing if you can find it.

This is the second Fuller film that I've seen (the other one was "Shock Corridor"). I can't say that I was bored, but I really don't see why these films are held in such high esteem by some people (including famous film-makers like Scorsese). "The Naked Kiss" is certainly a good-looking film. The black and white cinematography is excellent, as you would expect from those involved. But stylistically, the film is kind of a mess -- a weird mixture of soap opera, film noir, 1960's-style psychological drama, and kinky shocker. For fans of the latter, that infamous opening scene certainly promises a lot more than the rest of the film delivers. As it seems to belong to no particular genre, perhaps Fuller's work could be considered a genre in itself. As has been pointed out elsewhere, if watched in the right company it can be a real camp hoot. But honestly, I think this film is far too flawed to be called a masterpiece, as some people have. The acting is fairly nasty, the script not much better. And that horrendous scene where our heroine sings that sickeningly sweet, cloying, endless song with the kids at the hospital! Good Lord, it's one of the most embarrassingly awful things I've ever seen on film! It seemed to induce actual physical pain, I kid you not! The subject of child abuse, which occurs in the film, was fairly progressive for its time, I'll grant, but hardly unique. If you can, see an even earlier film (1961) called "The Mark," with Stuart Whitman, Maria Schell and Rod Steiger. While staying in the confines of early '60s constrictions, it addressed the subject in a much more powerful and direct manner, to greater effect. I guess I'd have to consider Fuller one of those "cult film" figures. Either you get it, or you don't.

The Naked Kiss (1964)

Constance Towers is fresh off of Sam Fuller's Shock Corridor the previous year, and she is perfectly adroit at the saint/sinner, prostitute/angel dichotomy at the core of it. This is a crazy movie to take seriously, yet there are so many serious parts to it, not the least of which is child molesting. For a 1964 movie that's daring stuff. Throw in a corrupt lovable cop, sweet children with physical disabilities, tinkly fairy tale music that comes out of nowhere when she is looking at a bedroom to stay in, and some good old female fist fights. Out comes a Fuller masterwork, of sort.

It's flawed enough to make some people run, but edgy enough to glue others to their seats. If the movie industry was looking for ways to break out of the doldrums of the late 1950s and early 1960s (there are some terrible high budget films from these years), it overlooked the breakthroughs coming from the fringes. The directness and everyday nasty material here would be the bedrock of movies in just two or three years, as violence, frank sexual content, and flawed people became the norm.

You may as well admit, too, that the best parts of this movie are terrific, including some hard edged, sharp, black and white photography. The Criterion DVD is as close to great as you can get, even though there is some confusion about the way even this famed company handled the release. The movie was actually shot in 4:3 format, in so called "flat" 35mm shooting (no anamorphic lens used). It was then cropped along the top and bottom to create a wide screen format for theatrical release. The "fullscreen" version is formatted full (and I don't know if any of the fullscreen ones show the whole original "open matte" formatting, or are further cropped from the widescreen cropping). Either way, it was intended to be seen with wide screen composition, so get the Criterion. It's beautiful.

If Sam Fuller is the father of Independent film then this is the point where the history of the Indie film begins. However, unlike most of Fuller's work this is not overtly shocking or wordy. In fact its best sequences are those which have no words. The acting, by mostly B actors is terrific, and the dialogue is well done. It tackled an issue that no film had before, and perhaps has not done so well since. A teriffic work.

How fascinating an artist is Samuel Fuller? So fascinating that the responses on IMDb for this film range from "brilliant, devastating masterpiece" to "pulpy, campy fun" to "Ed Wood-like crap." Of course, being Fuller, this film is ALL those things. There are sequences that are amazing as anything. There are moments of just brilliant insight and meaning -- creepy and poignant in their nightmarish beauty. And then there are just plan crappy B movie moments that are unintentionally funny. Bad acting and annoying preachy moralizing. It's a hodgepodge. But it is also a totally unique experience to watch. Noir. Melodrama. Crap. Art. This is pure Fuller! Gotta love it!!!!! A must see for people who love their aesthetics with a kick.