Le cauchemar

Kevin McCarthy stars as a musician who wakes up one morning to find tangible evidence of something he thought he'd done in a dream. Things really gets going when good old Edward G. Robinson appears as the musician's brother-in-law who also just happens to be a police detective. There's just something about Eddie G. that compels us to watch him, whatever he's in.

McCarthy's character, Stan, thinks he may have committed a murder, and is tortured by the fact that he has no recollection of doing so, except in his "nightmare".He can't reconcile what he knows as reality with what he remembers from his dream and the evidence he found afterwards. (Intriguingly, a button and an odd-looking key.)

Oh, there's also a few female characters, none of them of the fatale variety. One of them is just a pick-up in a seedy all-night bar (interesting and kind of fun scene, though), the other two are his sister and his "girlfriend". I put girlfriend in quotation marks because Stan doesn't seem to have much regard for the poor girl, who's a jazz singer and devoted to him. Poor Gina, Stan has not the least interest in confiding his troubles to her, or in fact talking to her at all, as far as I could tell. He's always telling her he'll get back to her later, when he's straightened some things out.

Some noirs have a smart and sympathetic girlfriend or secretary (who of course later becomes the girlfriend) who helps the main character sort out his troubles, but Nightmare isn't one of those. It's all about Edward G. and his crime-solving abilities. But who's complaining when Edward G. solves or even commits a crime in any movie?

The story is set and filmed on location in New Orleans, which is a major strength of the film. There's one scene where Stan goes on a desperate search through the nightclubs and all-night bars of the city, trying to find a musician who's heard the mysterious melody he heard in his nightmare. I love all the neon lights flashing on and off, proclaiming the alluring names of the nightclubs - scenes like this are what noir is made of.

Another memorable scene is when Stan, the long-suffering Gina, and Edward G.Robinson and his wife (Stan's sister) go on a picnic and get caught in a rainstorm. They take refuge in a deserted house, where they light a fire and make themselves tea ! It just struck me as funny that they were making themselves so much at home in a complete stranger's house. Now, there is a reason for this, but that would be spoiler territory.

This One has an Interesting Pedigree.

It is a Remake of a Film-Noir, Fear in the Night (1946) from the same Director, the Prolific (mostly screenplays) Maxwell Shane. Everybody Endlessly compares the two Movies,

This is a Distinctive Noir, at the End of the Cycle and it is Remarkable because it includes almost every Film-Noir Trope starting with the Title. Obsessive Fans of the Genre could make a List.

The least Impressive thing about "Nightmare" is the Print. TCM, a stickler for finding the Best Available, showed a very Unimpressive Version that was Weak all around. The Contrast is "Grayish" and the Look is very Flat. That Visual Disappointment Aside, the Film reminds of the Great Style that was all but Forgotten by 1956.

Seemingly Filmed on a Very Low Budget, it still manages to Conjure Up the Atmosphere of True Film-Noir. The On-Location Footage on the Streets and Bayou are "Nightmarish". The Film feels Odd and Off-Beat adding to the Enjoyment.

The Cast lead by Edward G. Robinson and Kevin Mccarthy give the Movie Gravitas and the Story, by Cornell Woolrich, is Rich with Mysterious Happenings and Dreamlike Displays.

If every Reviewer on Earth hasn't Spoiled the Ending You will Undoubtedly have a Fun Time with this Mystery Movie.

Highly Recommended for Low-Budget Entertainment.

This 1956 Film-Noir shows just what Staying Power the Genre could Generate. The Conservative Fifties, with Very Few Exceptions, had Hollywood Capitulating to Government Gawking and Back-Room Intimidation and the Cynical and Edgy Film-Noir Genre was Relegated to Cheap Second Features and within a Year or two was Abandoned Altogether.

Making a Comeback about Later, as Neo-Noir, the Movies Started Experimenting with a Renewed Energy as things were Opening Up Culturally and the Art Form found that the Freedom to Express was again winning the Public's Imagination and Imagination is obviously one of the Ingredients in the Creative Process.

In the late 1940s, director Maxwell Shane made a very low budget psychological thriller called Fear in the Dark -- about a man waking from a nightmare that he's murdered a stranger, only to find it to be true. In 1956, Shane decided to remake it as Nightmare, with a name cast (Kevin McCarthy -- Mary's brother, for the record -- as the luckless dreamer, Edward G. Robinson as his brother-in-law the homicide cop). It's a very close remake, not as pointlessly literal as Gus Van Sant's cloning of Psycho, but with little changed except a better and more integrated jazz score. In sum, Nightmare boasts better acting and better production values, all of which serve to point up the basic cheesiness of the plot. The earlier version, looking a lot like a nightmare itself, lends its own low-rent integrity to Cornell Woolrich's bizarre vision.

Maxwell Shea remade his own film; the cheap Noir thriller "Fear in the Night" as 1956's "Nightmare" with a bigger budget and an A-list cast, yet the film follows the formers structure so closely you wonder what was the point. The two films are basically the same movie yet where they differ "Fear in the Night" comes out the superior, its hokey plot felt more at home with its low-budget and it was nicely complimented by an effective dark atmosphere, also the films conclusion and hallucination/dream scenes were sharper and more creatively shot . The one thing "Nightmare" has over the original is in the cast, 'Noir' staple and the always great Edward G Robinson, takes the role of the protagonist cop brother in-law (which was fairly flat in the original) and injects it with the warmth and vitality that is expected from him. Kevin Mcarthy has played the 'average man pushed to hysteria' role before but for good reason; he does it well, his performance is preferable to Deforrest Kelly's big eye-balled take on the same character. Even though its neck and neck with the original "Nightmare" comes out short, which doesn't make it a bad film, I just wouldn't recommend it if you've seen the original, but if you haven't there are some cheap B-movie thrills to be fond in the A-list surroundings.

Maxwell Shane remakes his own 1947 film Fear in the Night but with a better known cast and more money. Adapted from Cornell Woolrich's novel, story has Stan Grayson (Kevin McCarthy) as a New Orleans clarinetist who dreams he has committed a murder in a heavily mirrored room. Upon waking he finds clues that suggest he actually may have killed a man and frantically turns to his police detective brother-in-law, Rene Bressard (Edward G. Robinson), for help. But it doesn't look good for Stan...

Fear in the Night is a good film, and so is this, but if you have seen the earlier version then this feels very much perfunctory. The opening titles are superb, as melted candle wax plays host to the roll call shown in moody dissolves. We jump into Grayson's dream, again this is very well constructed on noirish terms, and from there on in it's a competently crafted visual film noir picture with good tension and splendid jazzy interludes.

However, nothing else makes it stand out, it just sort of exists as an exercise in late noir cycle film making, a pic that doesn't want to even try to push boundaries. The cast are dependable in performances, but nothing to really grab the attention, though Shane does work near wonders to cloak the characters in various levels of paranoia or suspicious machinations. New Orleans locales are a bonus, with cinematographer Joseph Biroc excelling at sweaty close-ups and the utilisation of shadows as foreboding presence's.

It all resolves itself in a haze of improbability, but as most film noir fans will tell you, that's actually OK. Yet this is still a film that's far from essential viewing for the like minded noir crowd. More so if you happened to have seen the 1947 version first. 6/10