User reviews

The Man With a Golden Arm was one of a trio of great films around that same time that dealt with drug addiction. The other two were Monkey On My Back and A Hatful of Rain. But I think of the three this one is the best.

Maybe if Otto Preminger had shot the thing in the real Chicago instead of those obvious studio sets the film might have been better yet. Who knows, maybe Preminger couldn't get enough money to pay for the location. It's the only flaw I find in the film.

Frank Sinatra is a heroin addicted card dealer who was busted for covering for his boss Robert Strauss when the game was raided. He took the cure while in jail and wants a new life as a jazz drummer. But a whole lot of people are conspiring against him.

First Bob Strauss who wants him back dealing, especially because a couple of heavyweight gamblers are in town. He uses a few underhanded methods to get Sinatra's services back. Secondly Darren McGavin is the local dope dealer who wants Sinatra good and hooked as a customer again. And finally Eleanor Parker his clinging wife who's working a con game to beat all, just to keep him around.

Frank Sinatra got a nomination for Best Actor for this film, but lost to Ernest Borgnine in Marty. Sinatra might have won for this one if he hadn't won for From Here to Eternity in the Supporting Actor category a few years back and that Marty was such an acclaimed film in that year. His scenes going through withdrawal locked up in Kim Novak's apartment will leave you shaken.

Eleanor Parker does not get enough credit for her role. She's really something as the crazy scheming wife who wants Sinatra tied to her no matter what the cost. If she had not been nominated that same year for Interrupted Melody, she might have been nominated for this. 1955 marked the high point of her career.

Darren McGavin got his first real notice as the very serpentine drug peddler. His performance is guaranteed to make your flesh crawl.

Elmer Bernstein contributed a great jazz score to accentuate the general dinginess of the bleak Chicago neighborhood the characters live in. Not a place you'd want to bring up your family.

I've always enjoyed Frank Sinatra's music, and just recently I wrote a term paper about his life story. I've been fascinated by the life and legend of Ol' Blue Eyes. However, I've never seen any of his movies. So I wanted to see if his acting was as great as his singing. Well...it was! I was blown away by his performance in this movie! He really does a tremendous job as recovering heroin addict Frankie Machine, who's trying to put his life back together and audition as a drummer for a local band.

Otto Preminger's direction is great as well. I haven't seen any of his other movies. I read his biography on the IMDB. He seems like one of those directors who was sorely misunderstood, and people had conflicted thoughts about him. Seems like the kind of person who appeals most to cult enthusiasts. I haven't seen enough of his films to know for sure if he's really brilliant, but now I'm curious. I want to see more of his films, because judging by his attempt with "The Man with the Golden Arm" this guy has talent. I also loved the music for this movie. The score definitely contains the kind of music that I'll remember if I ever happen to hear it again. That's when you know you have a great score.

The supporting performances are fine as well, including Darren McGavin as the local drug pusher, Eleanor Parker as Frankie's wheelchair-bound wife and Kim Novak as his lover.

It's interesting to see how filmmakers handled the subject of drug abuse, as opposed to modern attempts in films like "Trainspotting" and "Requiem for a Dream." Back in 1955, just mentioning the word "drugs" caused controversy, and if you watch the film they kept the subject on a very discreet level. There's only one scene where Frankie is actually getting heroin injected into his arm, and they showed a close-up of the reaction of his face rather than showing the needle graphically poking into his veins. But it delivered its message without making it feel watered-down. In a powerful drama like this, with powerful performances and direction like this, you don't need graphic portrayals of drug abuse to keep the audience intrigued.

"The Man with the Golden Arm" is a dramatic gem that all film buffs should check out. It really is an amazing piece of work!

My score: 8 (out of 10)

This great movie brought out into the open the horrors of heroin addiction. It captured the struggle of a man, Frankie Machine, with a "monkey on his back". Frank Sinatra did his homework, well. The acting is superb, the score is first rate and the actors all gave above average performances. Frank gave one of his best performances. This movie has much to offer.

Although dated in some ways, the man with the golden arm still packs a powerful punch. Yes, it is melodramatic and rather too stagey for modern tastes and there is a lot of scenery chewing from some of the actors, but this piece still has a level of intensity and integrity beyond what most films can achieve this days. Frank Sinatra, giving perhaps his finest performance, is magisterial throughout as Frankie Mahine, but it is in the druggy scenes where he is most convincing. Other characters are less well defined particularly Sinatra's 'comical' sidekick Sparrow, obviously thrown in to lighten the mood of what otherwise would be an overly bleak film. He is however merely an annoyance and detracts from the intensity more than anything. The script is probably rather too in love with its own metaphorical cleverness. The 'golden arm' angle refers not only to Machine's drumming ability and his love of injecting himself with heroin but his gifts as a card dealer. Incidentally it is hard to see what about Sinatra would make him so highly prized as a dealer; dealing cards is hardly a difficult activity. It suspect that he is a 'dealer' only because the writer wish to play on the card dealer/drug dealer ambiguity. Again, perhaps the theme of dependency is rather overplayed with the women in Machine's life all exhibiting some sort of co-dependent behaviour. Kim Novak has a parasitic boyfriend she cannot leave and Eleanor Parker (in a hysterical performance) is dependent on the sympathy she receives from an accident which apparently left her wheelchair bound. The ending is rather contrived too and obviously designed merely to bring the strands together but that should not deter the viewer from checking this remarkable film out.

It's a shame that this adaptation of Nelson Algren's classic Chicago novel, one of the first to deal with drug-addiction, is so obviously studio-bound. Even by 1955, the year it was made, a number of more adventurous directors were going to real locations. Perhaps it was Sinatra, notoriously antsy when it came to being too far away from Hollywood or Vegas, who insisted that Preminger shoot the story on those phony sound-stage interiors which passed once for real city streets. Sam Leavitt, the cinematographer, seems to have over-lit many of these studio sets as if he was afraid of being too dark and depressing. Another minus, but much lauded in its time, is Elmer Bernstein's heavy handed big-band score which often only punctuates what is obvious. Sinatra really tries, working hard, committed to making the role seem both real and sympathetic. The primary failure of this film can only be blamed on that most vastly over-rated of directors, Otto Preminger, whose gift for self-promotion and controversy can no longer disguise the fact that at heart he was a rather mediocre director. Too bad someone like old-timer Raoul Walsh couldn't have directed this.

The Man with the Golden Arm was one of the first films to have as its main topic (and, in some respects, the message) the tragedy of heroin addiction. It's nowhere near a great film, but its importance lies in Otto Preminger's dedication to making it feel real and on the edge of melodrama and naturalism. What I liked is that it's not so much an expose of junkies (if you want the best expose of that read Naked Lunch, if you can get through it anyway, besides the point), but the nature of the urban environment Frankie Machine lives. He expects after he gets out of prison for dealing to go on the straight and narrow, to become a drummer in a band and make it legit as a musician. But he has his "crippled" wife Zosch, who can't work and needs money and often complains, and then there's the old neighborhood- he can't escape seeing Louie (Darren McGavin), who is still doing back-room card games and, yes, pushing dope. Like Mean Streets, it's hard to escape the minutia unless you leave.

But then again, it's hard for Frankie Machine not to try and operate naturally in this urban quarter. It's just that he can't escape the temptation of junk (when he's booked on a phony theft charge with his friend, he sees a junkie freaking out, and it puts back the fear of going back on into his clean self). And personifying Frankie is Sinatra, and I can't see anyone else who could've played him, even original choice Brando. He fits into the neighborhood, and seems like the kind of guy who should be a step ahead of the game. But there's also a vulnerability to Sinatra that he pulls out wonderfully, and by the time we see him going 'cold turkey' in Molly's apartment, it's believable even if it's not the kind of thing those from 'my' generation would think of heroin (i.e. Trainspotting and certainly Requiem for a Dream). If for nothing else, you want to watch the movie to see what happens to Sinatra as this character.

The flaws, however, come in some of the other performances, though it's a little tricky. Eleanor Parker seems to be overacting for a good portion of the movie, fooling Frankie that she's really crippled when in reality she can walk and is fooling him for one reason or another. But then it becomes clearer as it goes along- she's supposed to be nuts, and nuts with jealousy, and on that level it starts to get better. Meanwhile, Kim Novak is good, though not Vertigo-worthy, as the possible girl in the side but more like the voice of reason in the story. Then there's a Detective Bendar, who might be one of the most one-note characters/performances, ever. And also Sparrow, Frankie's nerdy friend, and the characters of Louie and Schiefka, and they're all played as one might expect them to (actually, McGavin is better than OK). As far as casting other talent around Sinatra, Preminger doesn't do all that great. And, frankly, some scenes kind of fall flat.

But there's a lot of fascination in the Man with the Golden Arm, and not just as some dated piece of sociological interest. It works as compelling drama, and as a message piece conveyed without being preachy or campy. It's a genuine article, just not exceptional.

Rather than go on location and make a realistic film about drug addiction in the Windy City, contrarian director Otto Preminger decided to go the opposite way and make his movie appear as artificial as possible, thus flying in the face of the fashion set by men like Kazan, Huston and Zinnemann, who were making their pictures all over the world. Nelson Algren, on whose novel the movie is based, went on record as despising it. What, one wonders, was Preminger up to, and why did he do the movie this way?

The sets in the film are so minimal as to suggest a Mr. Magoo cartoon. Louie, the drug pusher, is attired as to resemble the sort of gangster the artists at Mad magazine used to draw. Arnold Stang, wonderful comedian that he was, seems out of place in a serious picture like this, and his very appearance, topped off by an exaggerated and over-sized baseball cap, elicits laughter. Robert Strauss, another actor best known for humorous roles, is likewise out of place, as his large, heavily jowled face and Runyonesque delivery of lines seems more appropriate to a Jerry Lewis movie. Against all this, stars Frank Sinatra, Kim Novak and Eleanor Parker have to work overtime to just keep the viewer from snickering. Sinatra is jittery and manic throughout, suggesting a man ill at ease with himself, hence wholly appropriate for the role of a drug addict. Miss Novak, plant-like and sublimely deadpan, is sympathetic and seems a product of the artfully dingy slums she graces in the film. Parker is pure Hollywood and very hard-working as the crippled and crafty Zosch. She is never convincing, but then neither is the film.

I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone interested in a realistic depiction of the lives of drug addicts in America. The Caligari sets alone make it unbelievable. Preminger may have been aiming for a dream effect, as the cardboard backgrounds give the proceedings the surreal feeling of a nightmare operetta, perhaps harking back to Preminger's early days in Vienna.

Director Otto Preminger makes a valiant attempt to interject some real feeling into this adaptation of Nelson Algren's novel, but the material is ultimately far too false and the film fails to come off. Frank Sinatra plays Frankie, an ace card-dealer and poker-player coming out of a six-month stay in an institution to kick his drug habit; in the interim, he's become a good drummer and hopes to land a job with a band, but troubles with his invalid wife and the low-life neighborhood characters set him out on the precipice once again. Preminger can't seem to eke out a realistic scenario within these studio back streets, and Elmer Bernstein's blaring music undermines the nuances with Prestige! and Importance! Sinatra manages some hard-knock looks of concern and hopelessness, but his well-intentioned Frankie is a distressing creation (and, with all that talk about the "bobbysoxers" turning out for him, he's an uncomfortable sketch of the real Frankie when he was down-and-out several years prior). Glamorous Kim Novak, cast as the local working girl, is perhaps too Park Avenue for these squalid settings, however this is one of Novak's best, most subtle performances and she carries a great many scenes in the second-half. Eleanor Parker's role as Frankie's wheelchair-bound spouse is something else altogether; played on the verge of hysteria, it's a stunning portrait of a parasitic woman on the edge, needling, needy and yet aggressive. Parker appears to relish this outré role (and chews up a few scenes in the bargain)--and her big exit scene is a beauty--but in the context of this film, the performance is too hyperbolic. It's indicative of much of the writing, which walks a fine line between human drama and soap opera. This effort, pumped up for big effects, crosses that line too many times, finishing up wilted and unsatisfying. ** from ****

Sinatra is thoroughly convincing as the addict in this grim horror story of what life is like for someone who has lost his soul to drugs. This is film noir made even more noir by the drab sets and lighting. We go through the terrifying experience of a man who is trying to escape from the monster he has placed on his own back.

Elmer Bernstein's score is a mixture of jazz and symphony that makes the addict's frightful journey even more believable to the audience.

This film opened the topic of drug addiction the way LOST WEEKEND broached the subject of alcoholism. At least people could talk about these addictions a little more freely.

A strung-out junkie (Frank Sinatra) deals with daily demoralizing drug addiction while crippled wife (Eleanor Parker) and card sharks continue to pull him down.

While this is not the first film to deal with drugs, it is probably the first to deal with them in a very serious manner. "Reefer Madness" and "Cocaine Fiends", for example, can be written off as humorous nostalgia. This film, on the other hand, is decades ahead of "Trainspotting" and "Requiem For a Dream". (Did you even know heroin addiction was prominent in the 1950s?)

Variety called the film "a gripping, fascinating film, expertly produced and directed and performed with marked conviction by Frank Sinatra as the drug slave." I agree for the most part, though I really did not enjoy Sinatra's acting as much as many others did, I think. Otto Preminger is a first-rate director, and I hope this film gets the respect it deserves over the long run (I found the 50th anniversary release to be not nearly cleaned up enough).

While the focus is heroin and addiction, one could also make a case about this film being about love. Frankie's wife brings him down, encourages him to go back to his old habits, turns him away from his dreams. Molly (Kim Novak) does just the opposite. Divorce and adultery are hardly ever positive topics, but in this film you almost hope that Frankie goes that route.

Like Harry in Requiem, Frankie in this film causes nothing but pain and sorrow for those around him. Frankie is selfish and foolish easily influenced and manipulated by the sinister people around him. His weakness causes himself and those that care about him heartache. If you like movies about losers and the underbelly of our society you will enjoy this film.

I am willling to BET very few of You have seen this amazing mid-50´s CLASSIC! I am particularly anxious to share my impressions and thoughts about it with You readers....

Those of You who remember seeing Frank Sinatra in this film at a movie theater during the first year of its release surely must be in Your 80´s or 90´s... How did I manage to see it thusly when I am now ONLY 75?¿? I will share that with You in a moment....

....But FIRST: Let us FOCUS on the Title's CONTENT and CONTEXT:

If you're under 80, there's probably no way you can remember how controversial and cutting edge MAN WITH The GOLDEN ARM was when it was released in 1955! Fortunately for me, my parents were very liberal in permitting me to see films and even took me to see it just after turning Eight.

WOW! What a tremendous impact it had on me. It was the first "Grown-up" film that clearly made me realize there was more to cinema than just Sci-Fi/Horror, Westerns and Kids' movies!

Mainstream cinema had NEVER touched the subjects of drug addiction and heroin withdrawal, which were considered taboo topics, even at the dinner table, let alone as the focus of a movie to be shown in public! The MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) refused to give its seal of approval to GOLDEN ARM, forcing Producer/Director Otto Preminger and Distributor United Artists to release it without the MPAA's seal. This decision, of course, contributed greatly to both the films commercial and critical success! It also opened the door to new ways of making, distributing and classifying films.

Before my recent third viewing, I had only seen it once at age 8, mentioned above, and again, in my late teens (Perhaps the 10th Anniversary Re-Release?). Despite some of the production elements and dialog that do date the film considerably, the last half of GOLDEN ARM had me in a virtual headlock!

The acting, Bernstein music, photography and editing all contribute to the mood of the movie, precisely as Otto Preminger intended! The scene where Machine (Sinatra) undergoes withdrawal pains is still unbelievably hard-hitting today.

In general, Sinatra's performance is quite surprising. His Oscar nomination was very well deserved. When you consider this performance in conjunction with Sinatra's role in MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE and FROM HERE to ETERNITY, you begin to appreciate just how underrated OLD BLUE EYES was as an ACTOR! 9* STARS*

..... ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!

Any comments, questions or observations, in English o en ESPAÑOL,, are most welcome!

It's hard to believe this movie did not get censorship approval. No where in the film do the characters mention what drug was involved or that drugs were even being used. Really the story teaches a morality lesson and that should be applauded.

Frank Sinatra performed very well in Golden Arm. He make good use of subtlety and facial gestures. I did not not the melodramatic performance of Eleanor Parker, although I liked her last bit just before the film ended. The music is too intrusive throughout much of the film and that really messes up the flow of the story in places. But overall pretty decent.

Frank Sinatra is "The Man with the Golden Arm" in this 1955 Otto Preminger film that also stars Eleanor Parker, Darrin McGavin, Kim Novak, and Arnold Stang. Sinatra plays Frankie Machine, a heroin addict who is treated during a six month prison stay and comes home determined to start a new life as a musician.

Trying to follow the advice of his doctor, he refuses his old job, that of a card dealer. However, it doesn't take long for the old pulls on him to take root. His wife Zosch, is in a wheelchair due to an accident caused by Frankie, and she's extremely clingy and needy.

His girlfriend Molly (Novak) is with someone else and isn't sure she wants to be involved with him again. Louie (McGavin) is constantly on him to buy a fix, and Schwiefka (Robert Strauss), his old boss, is desperate for him to work as a dealer. Frankie fairly quickly starts using again.

The setting of this film couldn't possibly be more depressing - a seedy, dirty, old neighborhood peopled with weirdos, drug dealers, and criminal types. In the midst of this, Frankie's wife plays on his guilt for the accident, and then he has to face up to the fact that he went back to his addiction.

Frank Sinatra is great as the downtrodden, pathetic Frankie who wants to get a job playing the drums and takes a detour.

The supporting cast is marvelous with the exception of the miscast Eleanor Parker. Parker is simply not low-class enough for the role of Zosch -- her acting is very good as always, but she's too well-spoken. This would have been an excellent role for Coleen Gray who could have captured the necessary quality beautifully.

Without giving away the ending, I had a problem with it - how the truth of the situation was learned is not explained.

Films about drug use in later years were much more graphic and hard-hitting. Drugs in the '50s were not as mainstream as they became, and actually, they're hardly mentioned in the movie. I'm sure this was a difficult subject to handle in 1955, and given that, Preminger did an excellent job.

The Man with the Golden Arm (the movie) is a decent career vehicle for Frank Sinatra, but fails abysmally as a good adaptation of a fantastic book. You always hear about how books are "changed" when they are made into films- things are cut out, dumbed down, etc. Well, you can't even say they "changed" anything with the movie- they just told a completely different story. The characters and setting are the same sure- but not the ambiguous characterization, the depth of the men and women of Polish Chicago in the book. As for the setting, it's become merely a play stage, complete with the unnecessary "supporting role" players walking all too busilly down the claustrophobic, interior exterior streets. The movie is a dumbed-down, completely different take on Frankie Machine and drug addiction. When this happens, Zosh, Frankie, Sparrow, all lose their psychological edge. Frankie's drumming, a modest dream in the book, becomes his full passion in the movie (probably because Sinatra is a musician). And drug addiction is treated as shlock, exploitavely. The acting is decent, especially the snakelike Louie, who is more menacing in the movie than the book. But it's just a shame this kind of movie can be heralded as a classic alongside the book it is "based upon," the real story of Frankie Machine. The movie just goes to show Hollywood can' get anything right without dumbing it down and adding a happy ending. In this case, they just changed it completely, cheapening an important and realistic story into Hollywood fluff. I'm sure as hell biased because I read the book first, so I can't really treat the movie honestly by knowing how good the book is. I actually thought about turning the movie off (and I never do that), just so I wouldn't get its silly plot confused with the beauty of the book. But this is an overrated film, and while it's not so bad, the book should come first, as it was the first. And it should have remained the only story of Division Street and Frankie Machine.

A solid drama to begin with, "The Man With the Golden Arm" is particularly worthwhile for Frank Sinatra's performance as Frankie Machine. The movie was well-conceived, and it would probably have been worth seeing with any decent lead, but Sinatra makes it even better. The story is interesting and at times compelling, as Frankie struggles against himself and his circumstances.

The story is told from the viewpoint of its era, yet the basic elements are timeless enough that the story still holds up very well. The details of Frankie's situation are less important than the general themes of him battling his own desires while also contending against "friends" who simply want to use him for their own purposes.

Sinatra was good at this kind of role, as a character with his own inner demons who must also face hostile surroundings. He channels his nervous energy into expressions and gestures that convey well what is going on inside him. The actor Sinatra deserves to be remembered for roles like this one and his roles in "The Manchurian Candidate" and "From Here to Eternity", rather than for the insubstantial 'Rat Pack' features.

The supporting cast have simpler roles, but they do their jobs satisfactorily. The story moves at a good pace, and it is complemented by an Elmer Bernstein score which, though sometimes jarring, is appropriate. The combination works well as a whole.