NOTE IMDb
6,8/10
5,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA charming but totally ruthless criminal is sent to a remote Arizona prison. He enlists the help of his cellmates in an escape attempt with the promise of sharing his hidden loot.A charming but totally ruthless criminal is sent to a remote Arizona prison. He enlists the help of his cellmates in an escape attempt with the promise of sharing his hidden loot.A charming but totally ruthless criminal is sent to a remote Arizona prison. He enlists the help of his cellmates in an escape attempt with the promise of sharing his hidden loot.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Alan Hale Jr.
- Tobaccy
- (as Alan Hale)
Avis à la une
For his next to last film Joseph Mankiewicz did his only western and it ain't the west of John Ford or Howard Hawks. There Was A Crooked Man starts with the proposition that every man if given sufficient reason will turn dishonest.
Kirk Douglas has never been afraid to appear as evil, but next to his performance in The List of Adrian Messenger, the screen's never seen him as diabolically evil as Paris Pittman, Jr. in There Was A Crooked Man. And it's clear from the start just how bad he is when he shoots the only other gang member after robbing miserly Arthur O'Connell of his half a million dollar fortune that he keeps in the house because of distrust of banks.
So nothing that he does after this should surprise us. But Kirk Douglas is a player of incredible charm, never more so when used for evil intentions. Eventually he's caught and sent to Territorial prison from where he collects a gang of sorts and plots an escape.
A year after the Stonewall Riots homosexuality finally comes to the west and its depicted in two ways. First John Randolph and Hume Cronyn are a pair of aging gay con men who've pulled one con too many and are in the prison with Douglas in the same cell. Randolph's the flighty one, but Cronyn as it turns out has more talent and more common sense than just about everyone else in the film. That fact saves their lives.
And that's quite a look of lust that repressed prison guard Bert Freed has for young Michael Blodgett who admittedly is quite something to lust after. Blodgett is scheduled to hang at an undetermined date, but Freed's willing to give him some special consideration for special favors. Which Blodgett is unwilling to give him.
Blodgett's story is the most tragic one of the lot. He's a 17 year old kid who's caught by a most flirtatious girl's father who cries rape. As the father aims his shotgun, Blodgett throws a billiard ball and the blow is a fatal one. I've always thought if the kid had a good lawyer he could have gotten off, it was self defense. He's really the only innocent in this film.
The great moral figure in this is Henry Fonda, who's a lawman shot in the performance of his duty and now given the job of prison warden. He's another repressed individual, doesn't smoke or drink, and looks with particular disdain on sexual promiscuity.
Without giving away exactly what Fonda does in the end, it seems he has no other choice. Douglas in pulling off the jail break has made a total fool of him. They'll be all kinds of inquiries so for Fonda the self righteous his duty is clear unless he wants to kill himself. Which in some cultures would have been the answer.
But There Was A Crooked Man should be seen for what happens to Kirk Douglas. It is one of the most priceless comeuppances ever delivered on screen.
Besides Douglas, Fonda, and others I've mentioned look also for good performances from Warren Oates and Burgess Meredith as another two convicts that Douglas takes into his confidence.
Just as man can rise to noble heights on some occasions, with a little temptation he can fall. That's the unvarnished message of There Was A Crooked Man.
Kirk Douglas has never been afraid to appear as evil, but next to his performance in The List of Adrian Messenger, the screen's never seen him as diabolically evil as Paris Pittman, Jr. in There Was A Crooked Man. And it's clear from the start just how bad he is when he shoots the only other gang member after robbing miserly Arthur O'Connell of his half a million dollar fortune that he keeps in the house because of distrust of banks.
So nothing that he does after this should surprise us. But Kirk Douglas is a player of incredible charm, never more so when used for evil intentions. Eventually he's caught and sent to Territorial prison from where he collects a gang of sorts and plots an escape.
A year after the Stonewall Riots homosexuality finally comes to the west and its depicted in two ways. First John Randolph and Hume Cronyn are a pair of aging gay con men who've pulled one con too many and are in the prison with Douglas in the same cell. Randolph's the flighty one, but Cronyn as it turns out has more talent and more common sense than just about everyone else in the film. That fact saves their lives.
And that's quite a look of lust that repressed prison guard Bert Freed has for young Michael Blodgett who admittedly is quite something to lust after. Blodgett is scheduled to hang at an undetermined date, but Freed's willing to give him some special consideration for special favors. Which Blodgett is unwilling to give him.
Blodgett's story is the most tragic one of the lot. He's a 17 year old kid who's caught by a most flirtatious girl's father who cries rape. As the father aims his shotgun, Blodgett throws a billiard ball and the blow is a fatal one. I've always thought if the kid had a good lawyer he could have gotten off, it was self defense. He's really the only innocent in this film.
The great moral figure in this is Henry Fonda, who's a lawman shot in the performance of his duty and now given the job of prison warden. He's another repressed individual, doesn't smoke or drink, and looks with particular disdain on sexual promiscuity.
Without giving away exactly what Fonda does in the end, it seems he has no other choice. Douglas in pulling off the jail break has made a total fool of him. They'll be all kinds of inquiries so for Fonda the self righteous his duty is clear unless he wants to kill himself. Which in some cultures would have been the answer.
But There Was A Crooked Man should be seen for what happens to Kirk Douglas. It is one of the most priceless comeuppances ever delivered on screen.
Besides Douglas, Fonda, and others I've mentioned look also for good performances from Warren Oates and Burgess Meredith as another two convicts that Douglas takes into his confidence.
Just as man can rise to noble heights on some occasions, with a little temptation he can fall. That's the unvarnished message of There Was A Crooked Man.
Kirk douglas, henry fonda. After a robbery, pitman is sent off to prison. And he can't stop thinking about escape. The usual prison gags and shenanigans. The wardens come and go, and each time, pitman thinks he has the upper hand. Keep an eye out for alan hale junior (skipperrr !) and burgess meredith (the penguin!) can pitman keep his plan together, make the break, and find the money he hid? It's pretty good. Directed by joseph mankiewicz. Only directed one more after this. He won four oscars!
This is One of Director Mankiewicz's most Divisive Films.
The 4-Time Oscar Winner seemed to Discover the Absence of the "Motion Picture Code" and Embraced the Freedom with this Multi-Toned, Star-Studded Western.
His First Western Ever is a Romping, Head-Snapping, Cynical to the End Look at the "Lighter" Side of Rape, Murder, Robbery, the Penal System, and More.
The Movie is so Odd it is Jaw-Dropping at Times.
The Cast from Top to Bottom all Join in on the "Fun".
The Film Appealed, and still does, to the Post-Modern Audience and Film-School Generation where "Revisionist" is Not a Bad Thing.
Because Nothing On-Screen is Traditional, Especially the Tone, that the Studio-System, where the Director, Henry Fonda, and Kirk Douglas Earned Their Bona-Fides.
This Probably Paved the Way for Great Films Like Mel Brooks""Blazing Saddles" (1974).
The Strange Goings-On in this Love it or Hate it Film, was Probably Shocking to Western Fans and Stalwart Studio-Film Fans.
But that Unfortunate Ride of Full-Control was Over. This was the Dawning of the Age of the Independent Film and Independent Authorship.
For those Willing to "Walk on the Wild Side" of Westerns...
Worth a Watch
Not for Everyone.
The 4-Time Oscar Winner seemed to Discover the Absence of the "Motion Picture Code" and Embraced the Freedom with this Multi-Toned, Star-Studded Western.
His First Western Ever is a Romping, Head-Snapping, Cynical to the End Look at the "Lighter" Side of Rape, Murder, Robbery, the Penal System, and More.
The Movie is so Odd it is Jaw-Dropping at Times.
The Cast from Top to Bottom all Join in on the "Fun".
The Film Appealed, and still does, to the Post-Modern Audience and Film-School Generation where "Revisionist" is Not a Bad Thing.
Because Nothing On-Screen is Traditional, Especially the Tone, that the Studio-System, where the Director, Henry Fonda, and Kirk Douglas Earned Their Bona-Fides.
This Probably Paved the Way for Great Films Like Mel Brooks""Blazing Saddles" (1974).
The Strange Goings-On in this Love it or Hate it Film, was Probably Shocking to Western Fans and Stalwart Studio-Film Fans.
But that Unfortunate Ride of Full-Control was Over. This was the Dawning of the Age of the Independent Film and Independent Authorship.
For those Willing to "Walk on the Wild Side" of Westerns...
Worth a Watch
Not for Everyone.
Terrific mix of comedy/western/prison film about clever thief Kirk Douglas who lands himself in jail after robbing a rich man of $500,000 which he's hidden in a mountain. Honest, forthright sheriff Henry Fonda becomes warden of the jail with the intent on reforming the prisoners not punishing them. Kirk Douglas must plan his escape with the help of some colorful prisoners by bribing them. Very underrated and overlooked gem of the 70's wonderfully directed by Academy Award winning director Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Full of humor, excitement, and entertainment. Cynical and funny script has some great twists and the cast is perfect.
***1/2 out of ****
***1/2 out of ****
There is so much to like and appreciate about this film that while it's an enjoyable experience, it isn't the great film it should have been.
Firstly, the script is largely excellent. It has a good plot and characters backed up by interesting dialogue. It has a top-notch cast delivering almost universally quality performances. As well, it has some interesting themes and issues to explore, especially in the central battle between Fonda's warden and Douglas' prisoner. The scene where Douglas confronts Fonda in the just built eating hall and exposes his self-serving interests and hypocrisy, is a great example of top-class screen writing.
All the elements are there for a classic (or at least semi-classic) Western, but it doesn't quite reach that. Why? I think a big problem for this is Joseph L. Mankiewicz's direction. As other users have commented, the tone of the film is jerky and erratic and he has to take prime blame for that. But even in pure cinematic terms, it isn't well directed. Scenes that should have been highlights (such as the robbery that opens the film) lack punch because they're ineptly handled.
I think another major problem is the cinematography. The glossy, bright and flashy look of TWACM seems more in tune for a jovial, knockabout, straightforward Western. For a film full of cynicism, complexity (as well as its share of humour) and some rather depressing elements, it's a distracting and misjudged look. The much more realistic style that was to become much more common in films as the 1970s progressed (e.g. 'McCabe and Mrs. Miller') would have been much more apt.
Overall, an under-appreciated and underrated film worth seeking out. But also a bit of a missed opportunity.
Firstly, the script is largely excellent. It has a good plot and characters backed up by interesting dialogue. It has a top-notch cast delivering almost universally quality performances. As well, it has some interesting themes and issues to explore, especially in the central battle between Fonda's warden and Douglas' prisoner. The scene where Douglas confronts Fonda in the just built eating hall and exposes his self-serving interests and hypocrisy, is a great example of top-class screen writing.
All the elements are there for a classic (or at least semi-classic) Western, but it doesn't quite reach that. Why? I think a big problem for this is Joseph L. Mankiewicz's direction. As other users have commented, the tone of the film is jerky and erratic and he has to take prime blame for that. But even in pure cinematic terms, it isn't well directed. Scenes that should have been highlights (such as the robbery that opens the film) lack punch because they're ineptly handled.
I think another major problem is the cinematography. The glossy, bright and flashy look of TWACM seems more in tune for a jovial, knockabout, straightforward Western. For a film full of cynicism, complexity (as well as its share of humour) and some rather depressing elements, it's a distracting and misjudged look. The much more realistic style that was to become much more common in films as the 1970s progressed (e.g. 'McCabe and Mrs. Miller') would have been much more apt.
Overall, an under-appreciated and underrated film worth seeking out. But also a bit of a missed opportunity.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe prison set took seven weeks to build. When construction began, it was snowing. When it ended, the temperature was 100 degrees. Upon completion of filming, the entire set had to be removed and the area it occupied restored to its original pristine state so that no trace would be left.
- GaffesWhen Pitman is getting beaten up by three men in the prison yard during a heavy rainstorm, there is bright sunshine casting distinct shadows behind them.
- Citations
Woodward Lopeman: Don't tell me you can't make speeches. You could talk a coyote out of a chicken!
- Versions alternativesA scene was shot where Miss Jessie Brundidge runs away from the prison completely naked, after having had her clothes torn off piece by piece over the course of the prison riot. Although two images from the shooting of this scene exist, proving that it was indeed shot, it was never a part of the final, finished film for U.S. release, and nor was it ever reinstated for either the VHS or, later, DVD release of the film. Whether the scene was ever added to any of the international releases of the film, however, is unknown.
- ConnexionsEdited into On location with There Was a Crooked Man. (1970)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is There Was a Crooked Man...?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 15 160 $US
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Le reptile (1970) officially released in India in English?
Répondre