Fear in the Night

Still more film noir - and quite a grabber it is. First of all - Kelly and Kelley are excellent. The story - short as it is - will have you paying attention from top to bottom..

This is a tight, well-scripted movie. It is, of course, small-budgeted, but it is big on excitement. This flick is well worth your time and, as is usual with these dark flicks, you have to pay constant attention - no wandering minds allowed. "Fear In the Night" is worth your time.

The gals are good - what little they have to do.

It is fascinating to watch DeForest Kelley when he was just getting started. He does well with his 'rabbit-caught-in-the-headlights" expressions.

Anyway, check this out. One more thing - the attempted suicide scene is almost Hitchcock-like.

Okay, I admit it, a lot of the charm of this really low budget effort comes from Deforest "Bones" Kelley. Kelley's homely mugg was made for b-picture third bananas / villains and this rare, unlikely turn as the goodguy lead (his first credit) is as much the source of FEAR IN THE NIGHT's enjoyment as anything. Kelley gives a nice try in a role he wasn't really built to play, overcoming several overly melodramatic moments with generally naturalistic and believable reactions to the rather ridiculous and murky situation he finds himself in. Direction and other performances are unremarkable, though a little bit of stylistic cinematography in the flashbacks isn't bad.

NIGHTMARE was the slicker remake which came about nine years later with Edward G. Robinson, Kevin McCarthy, and slightly more money, but I would suggest that this earlier version has more suspense and rooting interest (Kelley is far more sympathetic than McCarthy.) More importantly, the flimsy plot holds together better in FEAR IN THE NIGHT, omitting the poorly motivated Edward G. Robinson character entirely. This is far from a great movie; it's not even really a good noir, but Kelley's rare lead performance is fascinating and he makes us care about what happens. Anyone who is into Star Trek classic will probably be as quickly hypnotized by his young non-baggy-eyed presence as Deforest is by the badguys.

Fear in the Night (1947)

This is one surprising film. It's not "great" for several reasons (it's not even very good), but it has great, bizarre, creative, daring aspects for a commercial film. In fact, its brilliance is only the more tragic relative to its drawbacks (a clumsy plot and some mediocre acting, unfortunately). But the special effects, dream sequences, and just plain surreal imagery are all worth the look.

There are a couple of deep flaws in the plot--like a group of four people drive up to a house they've never been to and because it's raining they go inside and make tea and take a nap. And the characters are kind of just going through the motions sometimes to get to the next step. Decidedly low budget. But you know how a low budget can inspire makeshift solutions--here we have room of mirrors, some hypnosis, a murder that the murderer can't remember, crazy dreams, and a brother-in-law who is a tough detective.

The two leads are Paul Kelley (rather good, the strength of the cast) and DeForest Kelley (solid, too, and later to be Dr. McCoy in Star Trek, yes!).

Deforest Kelley has a nightmare in which he kills a man. He can't go in to work, so he goes driving with his sister and girl friend and brother-in-law Paul Kelly... to the house in which he dreamt the murderer.

It's a film noir from a story by Cornell Woolrich, so you know up front that it's going to be overwrought. It's also Kelley's first feature, and screenwriter Maxwell Shane's debut as director. Given the poor condition of the copy I looked at -- plenty of hiss on the audio track, as well as looking as if it was made from a 16mm. TV print -- I was not able to evaluate cinematographer Jack Greenhalgh's visuals, so important for a movie with extensive dream sequences.

Even with those handicaps, I was able to see the basic competence of this Pine-Thomas production. There's little that's fancy about the production, but the ripeness of the source material, the solid actors (Ann Doran has a solid role, and old Demille hand Julia Faye an uncredited bit) make this an agreeably disagreeable noir.

As I prepare to launch another film noir marathon, I thought I'd get back into groove with something small, offbeat and quickly sketched, but authored by a guy who was one of the preeminent creators of noir: Cornell Woolrich.

His Deadline by Dawn would make my list of 10 favorites in the genre, it captures the chimeric noir world on the deepest level.

Noir is all about the hallucination, the anxious narration causally tied to the world of the film. This structure is probably more explicit here than in any other noir film, including Lang's: the film starts with the narrator having a nightmare where he kills a woman in a mysterious octagonal room with mirrors, but when he wakes up in his room he finds traces of the murder.

Over the course of the film, bit by bit memory seeps back into his narration. A storm leads him back to the fateful house. A cop brother- in-law and his girlfriend act as conscience, escorting him on the journey of atonement. It's all about guilt, memory and mishaps of fate. But the execution is slapdash, the actor doesn't have any tragicool charisma. It's off.

But how about this as explication of noir dynamics? What we see and the protagonist experiences in the opening scene as the noir nightmare was very much real, but at the same time illusory for him in the moment of experience—double perspective. And how about this as the deeper cosmic joke of the prankster gods of noir? There would be no problem for our guy if only he didn't wake up that morning with the memory. So it wasn't the killing, but memory that causes stuff—being conscious of the nightmare, it acquires reality. Superb Woolrich.

So this is a miss, but right off the bat we have some expert delineation of the noir universe.

Noir Meter: 3/4