Monday, June 19, 2023

OVP: Ace in the Hole (1951)

Film: Ace in the Hole (1951)
Stars: Kirk Douglas, Jan Sterling, Robert Arthur, Richard Benedict
Director: Billy Wilder
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Original Screenplay)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

Throughout the month of June we will be doing a Film Noir Movie Marathon, featuring fifteen film noir classics that I'll be seeing for the first time.  Reviews of other film noir classics are at the bottom of this article.

We've talked about this before, but with noir, it's not always clear when I'm headed into the movie whether or not the film in question is, in fact, film noir.  Ace in the Hole is one of the bigger titles that has this problem.  Directed by Billy Wilder in 1951, the film was poorly-received when it first came out and flopped at the box office, despite Wilder coming off of the critical acclaim of an undisputed film noir like Sunset Boulevard the previous year.  The movie has since been rescued by critics, but it's debatable whether or not it's actually a film noir.  In 2022, Eddie Muller (the president of the Film Noir Foundation) said it wasn't, that it was more a depiction of sleazy journalism, and to a degree I agree with him.  This film doesn't entirely fit within the traditional confines of noir, even if it has elements of it.  But because it's oftentimes called noir, I thought it was a good choice for our series this month.  And whatever it is, it's indisputably a great movie.  

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is about Chuck Tatum (Douglas), a ruthless, ill-tempered journalist who is forced to work for a small town newspaper after becoming basically unemployable at larger papers.  Tatum comes across a man named Leo Minosa (Benedict) trapped in a cave, an amiable guy whom the sheriff assumes he can get out in about 12 hours.  But Tatum, understanding that people will clamor for such a human interest story, convinces the sheriff and Leo's unhappy wife Lorraine (Sterling), who was about to leave him, to take the long way to rescue Leo, therefore extending the rescue to a week rather than the initial 12 hours, and getting him a big story.  It works-he gets national news attention, which results in huge sales for the local paper, and gives Chuck the chance to get back on top.  But in the process, Leo's prognosis gets worse, with him eventually getting pneumonia.  Chuck tries to save him the original way, but it's no longer an option because they've damaged the path by going the long way.  Leo dies, but before that he tells Chuck he has left an anniversary present for Lorraine in their home.  Chuck forces Lorraine to wear it (a fur stole), nearly strangling her with it, and in the process she stabs him in self-defense with a pair of scissors.  Chuck eventually confesses to his crimes, though it's clear that they will never reach the readers who were enthralled with Leo's story, and then dies from the wound that he got from Lorraine.

This is one of of three movies (along with Sunset Boulevard and A Face in the Crowd) that Wilder made in the 1950's that was about the media, specifically critical of the way that journalism & entertainment were merging in an unhealthy way.  As I mentioned above, only Sunset Boulevard was financially successful of the three, and it's easy to see why that resonated more with audiences, given that it was about a "crazy" movie star, and people love to see a celebrity fall.  The latter two are more indictments on their audiences, and Ace in the Hole in particular.  This is a nasty story-it's about how people will turn a man who is in danger, someone we should want to save, into a story.  The ending of the movie is literally a carnival (the alternate title of this is The Big Carnival), with people celebrating in some aspects Leo getting out of the cave, but more so their own stake in his misery.  There are fights between people over who has been at the cave the longest, and watching people put in their own claim on a piece of one man's fame-through-misery.  The focus is obviously on how characters like Chuck & Lorraine are profiting off of Leo, putting his life at stake for a few dollars, but honestly what struck me about my screening was the people they were catering to.  In an era where we literally watch the Capitol be stormed, and the focus is less on the horror & more on the reaction from politicians of how it happened...it's easy to see the terrible way we all contribute to the degradation of our humanity just for a few dollars and a few moments of macabre entertainment.

It's helped by a pair of wonderful performances from Douglas & Sterling.  Kirk Douglas is a complicated actor for me, as there are times I genuinely do not get his appeal, but other times I'm totally invested in him.  I can't quite say I'm a fan, but when he's good, I totally can subscribe to it, and this is a case of him being very good, playing his Chuck as someone who has never questioned his own morality, mostly because he finds such a thing a nuisance on his way to the top.  Sterling is also good.  I loved the way that she throws herself at Douglas, a love story that even he knows makes little sense, mostly because it's the only thing she knows she can use against a man.  She's been stuck so long that she struggles with changing her own plan even if it means a faster means to an end.  I kind of wish the film had the guts to give us one last moment with her, though the Hays Code might've gotten in the way there.  Lorraine essentially gets out of this with cash & a widow's lease on life...I wish we'd either have seen her completely get away, or forced into her own nightmare, being "Leo's Widow" as the only way to make money going forward (which is probably what would've been her fate).  That lack of focus and maybe a minute or two of repetitive storytelling are my only complaints, though.  This might not be noir, but it's proof that Wilder (more than any other filmmaker of his era) could see the dawning of a new era in America...and it wasn't shining.

No comments: