| Page 1 of 25: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Index | 241 reviews in total |
Seldom have I seen so many comments with so little understanding. The movie
is not about Heston's "Mexican-ness" or lack of it. The movie is not about
the 5 or 8 or 10 minute opening shot. The movie is not even, god help us,
about Welles' descent from the heights into "slumming it" in a "Grade B"
flick.
The movie is about two things : film-making, and character. Every shot worth
remembering (and there are few that aren't) is an exercise in the
possibilities of film, particularly black and white film. Woody Allen makes
movies in black and white that are all conversation. Welles made movies in
black and white because that's where the colors of the characters, the
location and ultimately the meaning of the movie are possible. Black and
white film is about the infinite possibilities of shadow. Touch of Evil is
about the infinite possibilities of human nature.
Heston, for those of you who just can't see past a "bad" accent is about
rigidity and short-sightedness. What kind of idiot would leave his wife in
all those threatening situations? The kind of idiot who can't imagine that
anyone would harm HIS wife, simply because she IS his wife! Akim Tamiroff's
Grandi is about flexibility to the point of breakage. Always playing ALL
ends against the middle he is the essence of "harmless" corruption, that
ultimately harms everyone.
And Welles' Hank Quinlan ... I just don't have the time or space to explain
that Quinlan is about the true cost of police work when the humanity has
gone out of it. Ultimately Quinlan would kill his best and only friend, the
only one, as Dietrich has it, who really loves him. At one time, perhaps,
Quinlan WAS the image that Pete Menzies saw. But the man behind that image
was eaten up long ago with alcohol and frustrated grief. It's all about
winning and losing now, and things he would never do. Until he does
them.
There are so many other moments and characters that I'm afraid you'll just
have to watch the film with your eyes and your mind open instead of shut to
"get it". Pay attention to what's on the screen instead of the smart,
cynical, hip comments you can make about an actual work of
heart.
Well, what the hell. Joan Didion said it best. Film criticism is petit point
on kleenex.
Raoul Duke
There are only two ways to write a review that would truly do this film
justice. Either one would have to write an exceedingly long review, or a
short, concise one. I choose to do the latter.
When I first saw "Touch of Evil," I was glued to the chair. When I found
out it was not Welles' definitive vision, I wondered how on earth it could
have been made better. And when I saw the re-released version, I wondered
why the studio altered it. The stunning black-and-white images, the
intricate plot, and the powerful, engaging performances took a hold of my
imagination. At times, I imagined myself on the street with the characters,
because the atmosphere was so thick I felt surrounded in
it.
The actors all did an outstanding job, especially Leigh and Heston (who,
although not thoroughly convincing as a Mexican, soared above his usual
powerful, furious presence). This is Welles' picture, however, and whenever
the camera catches his obese figure, you are fully aware of the man as a
director and an actor. His powerful vision drives the film, from the
single-cut opening sequence to the cat-and-mouse finale.
I suggest watching the 1998 restored version over the original theatrical
release, but regardless of which version, "Touch of Evil" will have you
stuck in your seat, questioning your views of morality until long after the
last credit has rolled up the screen.
Considered by many to be the last "classic" noir film ever made, and perhaps the last masterwork from child prodigy Orson Welles, who looks about sixty in this film, despite his 42 years. In TOUCH OF EVIL the "noirish" dark streets and shadows are darker than ever, practically swallowing up the soft tones like a murky swamp. The action takes place in a nondescript U.S./Mexico border town where the worst that both sides has to offer is most in evidence. The famous opening scene (a 3 1/2-minute continuous shot) where we witness a time bomb being placed in the trunk of a Cadillac is masterful. The camera pulls in and out of the city scene as it follows the motion of the vehicle winding its way through streets littered with pedestrians, thus effectively creating a level of anxiety that could not be duplicated with multiple edits. After the inevitable explosion, the drama dives into a seedy world of corrupt police justice and malevolent decrepitude, which is filmed with such a stylish flair, it is almost weirdly humorous and playful! Mike Vargas, the good guy, is played by Charlton Heston and seems more than a wee bit miscast as a Mexican narcotics officer with his face darkened by makeup. When U.S. Police Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) first meets him he remarks, "He doesn't look Mexican." Quinlan is the ultimate repugnant cop gone bad and Welles has the camera looking up into his nostrils most of the time making his character look even more monstrous. But Quinlan is also pitifully sad. A man who once had the instincts of a cat and the intelligence of a fox has been reduced to an insignificant mass of tissue, who's "instinct" is having a knack for finding evidence that he himself has planted. And while he may be revered by the local officials in law enforcement, he's acutely aware that he is a fraud and petrified that Vargas, has seen him naked.
Rather than films like Citizen Kane (1941) and The Lady from Shanghai
(1947), neither of which am I a big fan of, Touch of Evil evidences
director/writer/star Orson Welles' capacity for cinematic genius. The
story is engaging, suspenseful, tight and well paced; the
cinematography is consistently beautiful, inventive and symbolic; the
setting and overall tone of the film, including the performances, are
captivating, yet slightly surreal and otherworldly; and there are many
interesting subtexts. This all combines to create a complex artwork
that will reward however far a viewer wishes to dig into the film.
Based on a novel by Whit Masterson, Badge of Evil, Touch of Evil is a
battle between two policemen--Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) and Ramon
Miguel Vargas (Charlton Heston). Parallel to this is a kind of border
battle between the United States, represented by Quinlan, and Mexico,
represented by Vargas; the film is set in two border towns, frequently
crossing over.
As Touch of Evil opens, we see a bomb being placed in the trunk of a
car in Mexico. A construction company owner, Mr. Linnekar, gets in with
his girlfriend. Vargas and his new wife, Susan (Janet Leigh), manage to
walk along next to the car--they're all crossing the border into the
United States. Shortly after crossing, the bomb goes off. This brings
the gruff Quinlan into the picture. His investigation of the bombing
brings him into Mexico for suspects. Meanwhile, Vargas and his wife are
being threatened by Joe Grandi (Akim Tamiroff), a Mexican mob boss, and
his underlings. Both Quinlan and Vargas are well respected in their
countries, and both are used to getting what they want. But the bombing
investigation ends up putting them at loggerheads, and Quinlan
gradually turns out to have more than a "touch of evil".
As with many of his films, Orson Welles ended up having to battle the
studio to realize his artistic vision. Usually, as here, the battle was
unsuccessful for him. Despite his 58-page memo detailing various
problems with Universal's non-director supervised reshoots (by Harry
Keller) and re-edits, because they felt that Welles' final cut "could
use some improvement", the film was released in a form that was not
satisfactory to Welles. The fiasco has resulted in various versions of
Touch of Evil appearing throughout the years. The 58-page memo was
thought to have been lost, but a copy was discovered relatively
recently in Charlton Heston's possession. The film was recut in 1998
based on Welles' memo. So make sure that you watch the 111-minute
version first released by Universal on DVD in 2000.
The opening scene of Touch of Evil is famous, and rightfully so.
Beginning with the timer being set on the bomb, then the bomb being
placed in Linnekar's trunk before he gets into the car, we follow both
the car and the relative ebb and flow of Vargases as they roughly walk
alongside the car, all in one very long tracking shot that covers a lot
of ground and features a lot of unusual angles. Welles stages the scene
so that there are all kinds of complex background and foreground
elements interacting with the car and our protagonist pedestrians. The
suspense built up in this scene is incredible--you just know that bomb
is going to go off, but you don't know just when, or who it is going to
hurt. Compositionally, the scene is simply beautiful. The film is worth
watching for this opening alone, but the whole of Touch of Evil
features similar, meticulously planned artistry, filled with suspense.
Welles as an actor tends to have a very peculiar way of speaking that
is full of affectations. Sometimes this can be a detriment to the film,
as it was in The Lady from Shanghai. Here, though, the oddity works,
and this despite the fact that, like Woody Allen, he seems to direct
his whole cast to deliver their dialogue as if they were him. As a
result, Touch of Evil has very peculiar, contrapuntal scenes where
people frequently talk on top of one another, with odd phrasing. It
works because of the particular kinds of personality conflicts that
Welles set up in the script. These are people who frequently _would_
talk on top of each other and occasionally not pay attention to each
other.
But that's not the only odd thing about the film. Welles managed to
find locations that, shot in this highly stylized and
cinematographically complex film-noir manner, seem almost otherworldly.
Except for a couple expansive desert shots, Touch of Evil feels eerily
claustrophobic, even though most locations aren't exactly enclosed. The
various modes and settings are all perfect for their dramatic material,
which is mostly dark and moody. One change that Universal made was the
excision of a lot of comic relief material featuring the Grandi family.
Universal was right to cut it, and wisely, Welles agreed.
The music in the film is also extremely effective but unusual. Most of
it is incidental. Latin and rock 'n' roll emanates from radios, for
example, and the climax intermittently has a repeating, contextually
haunting theme from a pianola.
But of course the story is just as important. Although Welles stated
hyperbolically at various points that he was trying to "infuriate" the
audience with a somewhat inscrutable plot, and it's true that the plot
isn't exactly given in a straightforward manner, once you figure out
the gist, it's relatively simple but extremely captivating. At the same
time, it is full of symbolism and subtexts, including commentary on
justice systems and perhaps some irony about the popular conceptions of
the U.S. versus Mexico (made more complex by the fact that Quinlan
spends just as much time south of the border and Vargas seems to spend
a lot of time north). But as for being annoyed, you're more likely to
become infuriated with Quinlan, who becomes more and more deliciously
despicable as the film unfolds.
Here is a film that wouldn't be made today because nobody
makes
'B' movies anymore; and this is the greatest 'B' movie in the history of
cinema. Here is the perfect example of why Orson Welles should be considered
a genius. He has made this film look so effortlessly easy that it could
almost be considered film making by numbers. From the famous opening
sequence to the closing titles, this is the film students' reference
book.
Welles portrayal of the bloated cop Hank Quinlan is only bettered by his
Harry Lime in 'The Third Man'. He gets right inside the seedy, corrupt
Quinlan; but still leaves room for just the lightest touch sympathy because
we know that, after all, he's a fallible human like all of us. We almost
feel sad at his fate especially when Marlene Dietrich gives her sad
soliliquay about him.
This is another film that can only exist in black and white, and begs the
question, why can't directors work effectively in this medium today? Some
have tried but none have have really suceeded. David Lynch's Eraserhead is
probably the best modern example of a black and white only film. Woody
Allen's Manhattan tries hard but ends up looking too much like a
documentary. I don't think that directors today use this medium enough, too
many rely on colour and the efffects that can only work in colour to get
them out of trouble.
So put A Touch Of Evil on your 'must see' list and enjoy a work of film
making artistry.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" is a complex, ironic examination of the
relationship between the law and justice... The film must stand beside
the very best in detectives genre...
Its enormous confused tracking shots, its low angles, its tormented
lighting, its obscure intelligent photography, its great use of the
wide-angle lens, its hard complexity and complete fictional night-city
word, all represent a brilliant essay of pure cinema establishing
Welles as an alarming genius, one of the greatest filmmakers with
movies years ahead of their time...
"Touch of Evil" is an outstanding achievement of a great cinematic
mind, displaying a powerful range of Gothic expressionism... Welles'
first appearance as a corrupt used-up Texas police captain (Hank
Quinlan) is no less surprising...
A police car comes to a stop to the scene of a murder and unexpectedly
there is Welles, sitting in the back seat: gross, unshaven, sweaty, and
with a cigar clenched between his teeth... He seems a repellent person,
with "intuition," manifesting that sensation of evil, as no crime movie
has managed to do since, a suggestion of corruption that is the key to
the fascinating and doubtful character he plays... Welles character
will cheat, lie and murder in order to prevent the truth from
emerging... One hates his toughness, yet one still understands him and
feels pity for him than for his victims...
Joseph Calleia, his slightly more presentable assistant, is like Dana
Andrews in Otto Preminger's "Where the Sidewalks Ends," a villain with
unchanged methods: he waits, watches, leaves the police work to others,
remains loyal to his profession and to his bossbut could not exist
without him, or in another environment...
From that moment, we are caught between admiration of his brilliant
directorial effects and fascination with his characterization of
Quilan, a chief able to make a quick arrest by the simple expedient of
framing the most likely suspects... He appears to have been using the
techniques for years, but before this he has usually fitted the frame
round the guilty party... It is a performance which frequently gives
great energy to the screen...
Stanley Kubrick once said that the first shot of a movie should be the
most captivating... Definitely, Welles' legendary opening shot
satisfies one of the key requirements of the movie mystery... Of
course, Russ Metty deserves a lot of credit...
The long traveling shot starts with a close-up of a time-bomb being
placed in the trunk of a car by a shadowy figure, then, the richest man
in town (Rudy Lanniker) and his mistress appearing from the background,
getting into the car and driving away across the border from Mexico to
the United States and through the border town... By this time the
roving camerathat seems never to come to a standstill, has offered to
us long view of the surroundings (crumbling arches, peeling walls, poor
hotels and night clubs and a lot of trash) which will enclose the
plot...
While the convertible stops at a crossroad, the camera descends swiftly
to introduce a Mexican gentleman, an idealistic justice department
lawyer Ramon Vargas (Charlton Heston) and his bride, the blonde
American Susan (Janet Leigh) walking toward the frontier...
The superlative camera tracks the couple for some time, catching again
the car as both Vargas and the automobile meet at the U.S. Customs
post... We see and hear a conversation between Vargas, his wife and the
border guard as the vehicle moves out of the frame... We proceed with
the couple about to cross the border until the bomb goes off and the
car explodes... The killing is the start of the conflict between
policemen from both sides of the border...
"Touch of Evil" is great and memorable for the distinguished
description of its scenes, its images, its acting and its sound
track... Its importance lies entirely in how the event is told 'not' in
the message or material...
In addition to its wonderful opening, the film contains other
outstanding sequences:
- The deplorable ambiance of a closed nightclub where Marlene Dietrich
wisely advises Welles to "lay off the candy bars." "Honey, you're a
mess", she says when she finally recognizes Quinlan, and (at the end of
the picture) when he asks "Come on, read my future for me," she
replies: "You haven't got any. Your future is all used up. Why you
don't go home."
- The single shot (in the murder suspect's apartment) where Welles
handles his cast with great skill... There is much overlapping
conversation as everyone talks at once, and half a dozen characters are
brilliantly delineated...
- When the camera meets a group of three characters crossing the street
across a hotel lobby and into a restricted elevator, and rides with
them slowly up to the second floor until Vargas, who has left them in
the lobby, reappears at the very moment the elevator door reopens...
- The horrifying siege of Leigh at the isolated Mirador Motel by a gang
of young punks...
Perhaps the finest things about "Touch of Evil" is the cold, strange
and unsympathetic atmosphere of its night city (narcotics, gang-rape,
racism, prostitution) an almost universal corruption...
It's unlikely that there will ever be a more unpleasant or offensive or
disgusting detective than Welles or a more fascinating one...
Watch for Mercedes McCambridge in it... but look quickly, or it will be
too late.
Touch of Evil has, perhaps, the BEST cinematography and lighting in ANY film ever made. Not just in the film noir genre, but in all categories. Orson Welles tended to use wide shots for all of his films, and Touch of Evil's use of wide shots took filmmaking to another level, especially with the amazing opening shot. The camera techniques and lighting are too spectacular to fathom, it is the grandmaster of all movies. Brilliant is an understatement. See this film, if not for the excellent acting and sheer brilliance in terms of the camera (this film had a GREAT D.P.!!), but for entertainment value. But if you are a film student or just want to see great camera work, Touch of Evil will astonish you.
Orson Welles made this film over 15 years after "Citizen Kane", but even though it doesn't reach the level of "Kane", he never lost his genius touch. With a basic story and regular budget he made the most famous B-film ever. His majesty in the camera control and the editing jump out of the screen. His director geniality is seen through the outstanding performances by great actors like himself, Janet Leigh and Marlene Dietricht, and actors not that great, like Charlton Heston. Several lines of this motion picture are amongst the greatest of all times, specially the Dietrich ones. The credits scene, that runs uncut for about 3 minutes, is one of the greatest moments in the film history, along with the pianola tune at Tanya's place. Some might say that "Touch of Evil" is banal and boring, but these are the people that don't like real motion pictures, and we all know that, so we don't care about them.
The genius of Orson Welles (and I am only convinced of his genius and that of Eisenstein and Griffith, though I have seen thousands of movies) was so amazing that one could easily see in the reviews on the IMDb that mostly everybody got the right idea about Touch of Evil. It is almost impossible not to SEE what Welles intended to be seen in this picture, the differences of opinion come afterwards and have nothing do do with the movie itself but with the way we interpret it. We have to keep in mind that Heston himself, who was the damn actor playing the leading role had no idea what he was actually doing in here, just as Anthony Perkins will be clueless to the meaning of his role in The Trial four years later. It is obvious for everybody that the movie has style, but few understand the meaning of that style. It is not only the noirish cinematography (partially invented by Welles-Tolland in Citizen Kane) and the overall movement of the camera and the brilliant lighting and everything that means cinema that gives this picture style, but the fact that it is aware of its being the last of the mohicans, the last of the noir genre. This awareness gives a new depth to the movie that other B-flicks never had. The customary recipe with a noir movie was a gullible guy, falls for pretty, dangerous woman with a dangerous husband or boyfriend, a crime is committed and the gullible guy gets the fall. This is a story about the appearance of things not being their essence, and every noir movie shared something from this. Touch of Evil is all about this: yes, for all you frustrated Heston-haters, he was suppose to be a parody of a Mexican, just as Welles was supposed to be both a parody of his Harry Lime character and a parody of himself. And Marlene is a German actress speaking English, playing a Mexican gypsy saying "Adios" at the end. Akim Tamiroff is a Georgian playing a Mexican etc. etc. There are also the apparently transsexual...fellows at the motel. Everything is fakery in this picture and I think that this should be looked upon in the same analytic vein as we look at movies such as Alphaville or A bout de soufle. Nobody thinks Godard intended a sci-fi or a noir with those movies, then why should we think that Welles intended a noir with this one? Is it simply because the story seems to unravel in the usual noir way? I agree that the story is not so convincing if you look at it only at the surface. Any story from any noir movie more or less is filled with holes and loose ends. The main intent of those movies was never to create a perfect, novel-like story, but a cinematic account of what a story could be. Touch of Evil is one of the most cinematic movie you will ever see. Every shot is composed with a perfect understanding of what the medium can do, and in this category I think it is only matched by Welles' own Othello in the use of architecture in order to achieve a sense of space within the frame. Look at the way the shadows are projected on the walls and at the relative proportions of the characters. It is clear to the fullest that the movie develops in space and time, a conscience alone for which this movie deserves praise .
After crossing the border of Mexico to the United States of America,
the bomb planted in the car of the wealthy businessman Rudy Linneker
blows up in Los Robles. The Mexican Chief of Narcotics Miguel Vargas
(Charlton Heston) is spending honeymoon with his American wife Susan
Vargas (Janet Leigh) in the border town and will testify in the case of
the drug dealer Grandi that is arrested in Mexico City. The idolized
ex-alcoholic American Police Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) is in
charge of the investigation since the murder happened in the American
side of the border, but Mike Vargas participates as observer since the
Mexican citizen Sanchez (Victor Millan) is the prime suspect.
Meanwhile, Uncle Joe Grandi (Akim Tamitoff) unsuccessfully presses
Susie, trying to convince her husband to drop the case. When Hank
plants two dynamites in the house of Sanchez in a shoe box that Vargas
had seen empty ten minutes before, he confronts Hanks. Joe Grandi
witnesses their argument and associates to Hank to discredit Vargas,
dishonoring Susie.
"Touch of Evil" is a masterpiece of malevolence and loss of humanity
and one of my favorite movies ever. The long sequence in the beginning
is in my opinion the best in cinema history, with a perfect timing. The
black and white cinematography is amazing, with the perfect use of
shadows and lighting. The story is fantastic and Orson Welles is
awesome in the role of a despicable policeman that believes in his
hunches, eternally grieves the loss of his wife and wishes to bring
justice no matter the means and without any ethic. Janet Leigh performs
a strong female character unusual in the 50's. Charlton Heston has also
an unforgettable performance in the role of an ethical police office
that is the opposite of Hank and prioritizes his work to his family,
leaving his wife alone to seek the truth about his opponent. My vote is
ten.
Title (Brazil): "A Marca da Maldade" ("The Mark of the Malevolence")
| Page 1 of 25: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |
| Plot summary | Plot synopsis | Ratings |
| Awards | Newsgroup reviews | External reviews |
| Parents Guide | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |