Grimerlana Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

edwagreen One thing about actor Aldo Ray. To me, his craggy voice disqualified him forever from being the leading man type in films. This 1957 film is absolutely no exception to that rule.He goes hunting with a doctor and they are set upon by bank thieves, who kill the doctor and run off in error with his bag instead of their bag containing the money they had stolen from a bank heist.To make matters worse for Ray, they had tried to concoct where Ray shot the doctor and then killed himself.A very young and beautiful Anne Bancroft is caught up in all this and the two guys seek out Ray, since they feel he has stolen the money.This film takes place mostly in Moose, Wyoming and the outdoors is a perfect setting for this rather taut crime thriller.

Lechuguilla An innocent man named James Vanning (Aldo Ray) finds himself in a predicament involving bank robbers. How Vanning maneuvers through his predicament is the crux of the film. There are no deep themes here, just a 1950s-style crime story, with a plot that is easy to follow.The story is quite contrived. Improbable circumstances and coincidental timing keep the plot moving. The script is rather talky. And the Anne Bancroft character, Marie, isn't really needed. In addition, there are a number of scenes wherein a criminal points a gun at someone but instead of shooting, the criminal talks and talks and talks. Which conveys the impression that the scriptwriter is padding the script.An unnecessary outdoor fashion show adds further padding. And even with all that padding, the film's runtime is still just a little over an hour. The plot, such as it is, contains minimal suspense and no mystery.Gorgeous nighttime, high contrast, B&W lighting by DP Burnett Guffey gives a wonderful noir feel in the opening credits sequence, and is easily the best element of the film. Yet later, nighttime driving scenes look like they were filmed with a day-for-night camera filter. The film's overall acting is average. I've always liked Aldo Ray. Here, with a weak script, he's merely acceptable. Ditto Anne Bancroft.There just isn't much to the film's story. Take away all that script padding, a character that is not needed, and what's left? Not much.

Sean Morrow Nightfall is one of those beautiful, crisp black and white films that make you wonder why they bothered with colour. Jacques Tourneur is at his poetic best with this simple tale of a wrongfully accused man pursued by the police and the crooks — a classic noir plot if ever there was one. The pace and place are ideal. You're caught up and carried along by the action of the present predicament while the understanding of how the protagonist got there is slowly revealed in a series of flashbacks. The cast is perfect: Aldo Ray is solid as the likable hero in the wrong place at the wrong time, Anne Bancroft has just the right combination of worldly wisdom and hope as the girl caught up Ray's troubles, Brian Keith and Rudy Bond are a couple of hard guys who don't much like each other but have 300,000 reasons to form a slightly uneasy alliance and the wonderful character actor James Gregory gives a nuanced performance as the insurance agent on Ray's trail.While Nightfall won't change your life if is a solid piece of entertainment which Hollywood seem to toss off with so little effort back in 40's and 50's. It might have been just part of a standard double bill in 1957 but if it came out now it would be hailed as something special. Nightfall has more heart and soul than current fare like Drive. It doesn't have an untoward pretentious of being anything but what it is and that's plenty good enough for me.

drystyx What makes a good film? Credible characters in incredible circumstances.That's what we get from Tourneur in this year. This is undeniably Tourneur's best year.Two of the most suspenseful films ever, this one and CURSE OF THE DEMON.This one has a lot of flashbacks. It is the sort of film that begins very ordinary, with a "status quo" effect, but the "status quo" is an illusion. There is nothing "status quo" about this, as we learn later.What works so well is the very thing that makes this a film that would be screwed up today. Indeed, it has been screwed up today. NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is the same story, only not told as well.Why is that? Both are stories of an "Everyman" who chances upon mob money. Both have an aloof family man investigating the incident, caught up in a case seemingly over his head. Both have a psychotic killer.This one differs in the three dimensional characters. Today, the killers would have to be depicted as "gods" who couldn't be killed except by super humans. By today's standards, this film is the epitome of iconoclastic "blasphemy". It would horrify the beavis and buttheads of today by showing the outlaws to be mere mortals.And that's what makes this special. The two killers are real characters, not some made up one dimensional cutout. Real gangsters are mortals. They have their insecurities. That doesn't go over well today, probably because rich mobsters need to keep the "myth" alive that they are invulnerable.We wind up with five characters in search of....just in search. The five come to a climax, and it's quite credible. It wouldn't go over today, because too many people today have never been outside away from their safe cubicles. In 1957, there were more mature people, people who may not have been better, but certainly had a grasp of reality. Today, movie makers don't have to appeal to this crowd. They only have to appease the brats who have no idea what real danger is like.And that's why this film is a great film. The characters all make mistakes. It's easy to second guess with a rewind button, but real life has no rewind buttons. Real life is insecure.