Reviews Aug 08 2008 @ 08:00 am
REVIEW: The Big Sleep
Directed By: Howard Hawks
Written By: Raymond Chandler (novel) and William Faulkner & Leigh Brackett & Jules Furthman
Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall
Running Time: 114 / 116 minutes
Not Rated
Daniel Getahun runs the aptly named Getafilm and manages, singlehandedly, to run one of the most complete and thorough blogs that I read. A lover of documentaries, independent, and foreign flicks (come to think of it, he just loves everything cinematic), if it’s out in theaters you can almost guarantee that Daniel has written (and written well) about it.
This began as a simple case of blackmail. Then all of a sudden things started to happen for no reason. No reason at all.
- Philip Marlowe in The Big Sleep
You can say that again, Bogie, because one of the most enjoyable characteristics of film noir is that the story is so often secondary to the style. Let’s be honest: there’s little difference between the plots and archetypal characters in many of these films. We watch them mostly to appreciate such elements as the tone, cinematography, acting, lighting, and score (just to name a few), and we generally don’t end up discussing how well they were adapted from the original source material or which pieces of the story are accessible and relatable to our lives. It’s not that we don’t want to discuss these aspects, it’s just that there’s much more to appreciate than the plot details.
Few films demonstrate this fashion-before-function concept better than Howard Hawks’ The Big Sleep. Adapted from Raymond Chandler’s novel of the same name, The Big Sleep is held up by many critics (and, since 1997, the National Film Registry) as a prime example of early film noir, and it remains one of the signature films featuring the private detective Phillip Marlowe. Perhaps most famously, however, The Big Sleep is notable because the romance on the set was all too real.
Filming began in 1944, shortly after production wrapped on Hawks’ To Have and to Have Not. Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall, the leading duo in both films, were passionately in love with each other despite an age difference of almost three decades. Problem was, Bogie was a married man throughout the production of both films. In 1945, however, when his tumultuous marriage with American actress Mayo Methot reached its breaking point, he left her for Bacall and began one of the most well-known celebrity marriages in Hollywood history. In the meantime, The Big Sleep was still on the shelf since studio executives at Warner Brothers were waiting to release it after emptying their slate of World War II movies.
A fortuitous decision, as it gave Hawks the opportunity to actually reshoot scenes in The Big Sleep and capitalize on the newfound freedom shared by its leading lovers. Imagine Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie reshooting Mr. & Mrs. Smith for release this year. You think people would show up? Right. Remember that Hollywood studios occasionally have interest in box-office returns, so putting two married stars in the same movie was quite the savvy investment, and one that ended up paying dividends despite one unforeseen complication: none other than Howard Hawks himself had also fallen – hard – for Lauren Bacall. In Jeffrey Meyers’ “Bogart: A Life in Hollywood” (1997), Hawks is reported as jealously declaring, “Bogie fell in love with the character she played, so she had to keep playing it the rest of her life.” Ouch.
But this isn’t supposed to be gossip column, it’s supposed to be a review of a classic Hollywood film. So let’s get to the story.
Actually on second thought, forget that.
There are two reasons to gloss over the plot of The Big Sleep: attention should instead be paid to the scintillating banter between Bogart and Bacall, and attempting to summarize and/or analyze the plot is way above my pay grade. Since Raymond Chandler himself admitted to not knowing who the killers were, I hope the same isn’t expected from me.
Nevertheless, the story at least deserves a set-up: Philip Marlowe (Bogart) reports to the stately Sternwood residence; he’s been beckoned by General Sternwood to make a mysterious blackmailer “go away.” As he makes his way through the opulent mansion, Marlowe meets Sternwood’s younger daughter, Carmen (Martha Vickers), a flirtatious rebel whose misbehavior is in fact the presumed reason behind this blackmailing. “She tried to sit on my lap when I was standing up,” quips Marlowe when he arrives in the courtyard to meet General Sternwood. The two men briefly chat before Marlowe, task in hand, heads out on the assignment. Before he leaves, however, the butler informs him that Sternwood’s other daughter, Vivian (Bacall), has requested his company in the other room.
And this is where things get steamy. Not sexually, mind you – this was 1946, after all. People didn’t have sex. They had winking conversations that blatantly hinted at sex. What starts in the parlor on that first encounter eventually leads to this scene later in the movie:
VIVIAN: Speaking of horses, I like to play them myself. But I like to see them work out a little first, see if they’re front runners or come from behind, find out what their whole card is, what makes them run.
MARLOWE: Find out mine?
VIVIAN: I think so.
MARLOWE: Go ahead.
VIVIAN: I’d say you don’t like to be rated. You like to get out in front, open up a little lead, take a little breather in the backstretch, and then come home free.
MARLOWE: You don’t like to be rated yourself.
VIVIAN: I haven’t met anyone yet that can do it. Any suggestions?
MARLOWE: Well, I can’t tell till I’ve seen you over a distance of ground. You’ve got a touch of class, but I don’t know how, how far you can go.
VIVIAN: A lot depends on who’s in the saddle.
Yow, good thing this was one of the scenes filmed after they were married.
While the Bogie-Bacall love connection is no doubt the most legendary aspect of The Big Sleep (along with the impossibly convoluted plot), we can’t ignore its other components, many of which would be considered the gold standard for noir for years to come. Let’s just focus on a couple while I still have your attention from that racehorse scene.
Howard Hawks filmed The Big Sleep entirely on sets in a soundstage. This is fairly obvious while you’re watching (the lack of natural light prevents you from ever knowing what time of day it is), yet it’s impossible to not be absorbed by the gritty little world he’s created. Like most noir, the interplay between shadows and light is not only used to enhance the intrigue and keep the truth ambiguously cloaked in darkness, but to represent good and evil, danger and safety, truth and falsehood. This evocative lighting, combined with brilliant cinematography and a lively score, results in a film that’s interesting to watch even when you have no idea what’s going on.
When we’re not taking in the scenery, we’re getting to know Philip Marlowe, a character that I would love to see reborn in some fashion today (I haven’t seen the 1978 version of The Big Sleep). Bogart is in almost every scene of The Big Sleep, and he doesn’t waste a moment on camera breathing life into Marlowe, whether it be his constant habit of pulling on his right ear whenever he’s thinking, his goofy disguise as a rare book collector, or his favored stakeout method of slouching in a car seat. Of course, Marlowe also gets to deliver the best lines:
(Marlowe arrives at his office to find Vivian waiting outside for him)
VIVIAN: So you do get up? I was beginning to think you worked in bed like Marcel Proust.
MARLOWE: Who’s he?
VIVIAN: You wouldn’t know him, a French writer.
(Marlowe pauses a moment before opening the door to his office)
MARLOWE: Come into my boudoir.
And later, a classic…
VIVIAN: I don’t like your manners.
MARLOWE: And I’m not crazy about yours. I didn’t ask to see you. I don’t mind if you don’t like my manners, I don’t like them myself. They are pretty bad. I grieve over them on long winter evenings.
As you can see, it’s hard to not keep coming back to the real heart of The Big Sleep: the characters and the dry humor of the brilliant screenplay, which was adapted by Hawks’ favored regulars William Faulkner, Leigh Brackett, and Jules Furthman. Don’t misread The Big Sleep as an outright comedy, though – there are numerous killings and an inexplicably high level of suspense throughout much of the film. I do have to admit the action leaves a little to be desired, if only because Hawks blocks his characters so awkwardly. The scene in Joe Brody’s apartment is especially cumbersome, notably Brody’s robotic pacing and the clumsy gunplay between everybody. Later on, the climactic shootout with the hired killer Canino is almost laughable.
To say I’ve only skimmed the surface of The Big Sleep would be a huge understatement. Students of noir and those who have seen it ten times or more might have the last word on its merits and its influence on later films. For the rest of us, it’s an entertaining romp and an excellent introduction to film noir, if only because, as I mentioned before, we’re free to let go of the story and just enjoy the style.
I’d say the same about this review, as it’s surely as scattered as the plot of The Big Sleep itself. If you’re interested to study the film further (and I suggest that you do), both the pre-release/pre-marriage version and the regular version of The Big Sleep are available on DVD. The first is considered to be closer to Hawks’ original noir vision, while the second is more of a showcase for Bogart and Bacall. Combined, then, I suppose The Big Sleep was a one-of-a-kind hybrid: a groundbreaking work of art disguised as a star-studded blockbuster.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 8:27 am 1. Luke Harrington said …
Brilliant work here, man. I’ll admit it’s a bit scattered, but that captures the feel of the film very nicely.
I really love this film…I should probably check it out again, soon.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 8:31 am 2. Sam Juliano said …
The paragraph beginning with “Howard Hawks filmed THE BIG SLEEP entirely on a soundstage” really conveys the filmic qualities that allow the film to overcome its narrative difficulties. But it has been stated through the years that not even Hawks himself really knew what to make of it. This may account in Dan’s perception why the film lost that half star in the rating.
Why Mr. Getahaun’s essay here is so effective (despite his endless modesty over at Getafilm where it is deservedly cross-posted)is that it gives you a historical and cultural perspective, rather than any kind of an exhaustive analytical treatment, which frankly there are enough of in the anals of film criticism. What Dan is really saying here in this piece as I read it is: enjoy! have fun! That spirit has been well conveyed here in this refreshing, entertaining piece.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 10:13 am 3. Miranda Wilding said …
YAY, DANNY!!!!!
You are the man, sweetie. Moat definitely.
I loved this. Crackling good read that cuts to the heart of the matter in righteously eloquent fashion.
When you win that Pulitzer, I’ll be there.
With bells on…
on Aug 08 2008 @ 10:14 am 4. Miranda Wilding said …
Uh…that should be *ahem* MOST definitely.
It’s only about 8:15 AM here.
Time for my nap…
on Aug 08 2008 @ 10:21 am 5. Evan Derrick said …
I liked your use of ‘moat’ instead, Miranda. I thought it was some colloquial turn of phrase that I was unfamiliar with.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 11:10 am 6. Miranda Wilding said …
I have an extensive (not to mention exemplary) vocabulary, Evan.
But it’s not THAT big.
These things happen when I’m tired. Unfortunate but true.
I much prefer that people think I’m perfection personified. I’ve all ready got everyone OFF the net fooled.
But now there’s a crack in my facade. Alas.
It would have to happen at your site, which is fab BTW.
Oh, well. I’ll live…
on Aug 08 2008 @ 12:01 pm 7. Daniel said …
Thanks, Luke. As I told Evan (or someone), it’s more a summary of observations than it is a legit “review”, but I felt a little more playful about this one for some reason. I’m glad that came out of it, Sam, because you’re right – there are likely volumes of critical analysis on this filma already out there. Not that they don’t belong here in the confines of MZ, but I’m afraid I won’t be the one to present one at this time. Besides, I figured the incredibly sharp folks over could carry on the conversation in the comments.
Regarding the star rating, well if this isn’t a noir classic than I don’t know what is, but I tried to grade it a little more within a vacuum than within the context of noir, if that makes sense. It’s hard for me to forgive the messiness of the plot, even if it’s by design.
Haha, when I win a Pulitzer you’ll be the first person I thank, Miranda. And I should say, your vocabulary really is much better than most. I’m surprised “moat” doesn’t somehow make sense in that sentence…:-)
on Aug 08 2008 @ 1:04 pm 8. Cinexcellence said …
I still need to se ethis one.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 1:19 pm 9. Alexander Coleman said …
As I said over at Getafilm, Daniel, it’s a great read. A strong balance of different things as others have noted.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 2:07 pm 10. christian said …
Love the review and the film. Damn that Bacall was a looker. Where is her type today? Jessica Alba?
on Aug 08 2008 @ 2:11 pm 11. Evan Derrick said …
Umm…that’s a joke, right Christian?
I would pick Rachel McAdams.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 2:16 pm 12. Daniel said …
Thanks, Alexander and Christian. Alexander, as you’ve seen every film being reviewed this month, I’d be interested to hear more of your thoughts on where/how TBS fits into the bigger picture. Anybody else jump in as well if you have a thought.
Alba? McAdams? Nah, neither has the eyes or the voice. Scarlett Johannson?
on Aug 08 2008 @ 2:24 pm 13. Evan Derrick said …
Scarlett Johannson consistently underwhelms me. I don’t get the appeal.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 2:32 pm 14. Daniel said …
No argument from me. It wasn’t so much a matter of appeal (or acting ability) as it was a similarity to Bacall’s screen “presence”.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 3:04 pm 15. Alexander Coleman said …
Woody Allen believed Charlize Theron was possibly the Lauren Baccall of today, as he told her when he cast her in The Curse of the Jade Scorpion. Watch the film and you might see how she could be the Baccall of now, but Baccall never showed up in something like Aeon Flux or Hancock. Wait, there were no movies quite like that then. Cinema was superior at that time. Game, set, match.
Daniel, without typing out an essay on the subject, I would say that The Big Sleep arguably–quite arguably, actually–helped to create the sometimes greater emphasis on style rather than substance, for lack of much better terminology. That isn’t to say there is no depth to The Big Sleep in the least. However, much of the film was reshaped between most of its principal photography, consumption of dailies by Hawks and the studio and what Hawks eventually turned out. Hawks was told that certain scenes he had shot, like one with Baccall’s character wearing a veil, for one, simply didn’t work–and that he hadn’t quite recaptured the dynamic “insolence” of the Bogart-Baccall repartees of 1944’s To Have and Have Not. So, some scenes were reshot, and Hawks placed greater emphasis on recapturing the “insolence,” especially of Baccall.
The Big Sleep was indeed a film marketed in a way that capitalized on the stars and the pulpy storyline and violence. The tagline was “The Violence-Screen’s All Time Rocker-Shocker!” and “The Picture They Were Born For!” (speaking of Bogart and Baccall).
One of my favorites is for the next year’s Out of the Past, “It’s like lightning kissing thunder when Mitchum makes love to a girl with a gun.”
on Aug 08 2008 @ 3:17 pm 16. Alexander Coleman said …
In relation to my noting of the reshot scenes, I meant to say, “Like you’ve written in your review.”
Also, Dorothy Malone as the bookstore proprietress is worth seeing all by itself. Thank you, Howard Hawks.
on Aug 08 2008 @ 3:57 pm 17. Daniel said …
Charlize Theron is a great call by Woody. Yeah she’s not doing herself many favors playing this bit action parts. A deserving Best Actress winner who’s underachieving, in my opinion…
Thanks for those thoughts, Alexander. You are the teacher and I’m the student…
on Aug 08 2008 @ 8:10 pm 18. films noir said …
Sorry to crash the knitting circle, but Daniel’s review is surface stuff only. The Big Sleep deserves more. The movie is a dark and seething critique of opulence, decadence, and corruption.
The actions of Marlowe in the final reel are disturbing. He is almost a proto-Dirty Harry. Clearly shaken by the death by poisoning while he stood by of the small-time hood who leads Marlowe to the final showdown, Marlowe responds with vengeful brutality in the shootout with the goon, Canino, and then in the final scene when he engineers the unnecessary killing of the crooked casino-operator, Eddie Mars. This final killing was not in Chandler’s book, and it is this dark twist that makes the movie a noir.
on Aug 09 2008 @ 11:46 am 19. Daniel said …
“To say I’ve only skimmed the surface of The Big Sleep would be a huge understatement. Students of noir and those who have seen it ten times or more might have the last word on its merits and its influence on later films.”
on Aug 09 2008 @ 2:33 pm 20. Whitney said …
Lauren Bacall is the hottest. Here, now, and forever.
on Aug 09 2008 @ 3:05 pm 21. G said …
I agree. Even in The Shootist. Damn.
on Aug 10 2008 @ 9:30 am 22. Evan Derrick said …
Drama! I’d like to hear someone respond to films noir’s claims about the “darkness” of The Big Sleep. It’s been ages since I’ve seen it, so I can’t really speak to tension between Daniel’s thesis that the film’s heart is its “characters and dry humor,” and film noirs assertion that it is much, much nastier than all that.
Come on boys, the gauntlet has been thrown down!
on Aug 10 2008 @ 10:44 am 23. G said …
Well Evan, I watched the film last week with my wife, so I’ll step in. I more or less agree with both of them. Marlowe was/is sort of a comical character, more so than Spade, and that’s why plenty of people still claim that Dick Powell was the best Marlowe. The first 2/3 of this film is driven by the Bogart and Bacall banter, the highly sexualized humor, the charm of not understanding the story but enjoying it anyway.
All of that changes, as films noir suggests, when Harry Jones is poisoned within earshot of Marlowe. Harry is a pint-size fellow who’s not really in “the game.” To paraphrase McNulty from The Wire, although Jones has gotten mixed up in things, he’s really just a “citizen” – a regular person who got in this mess. When he’s killed, after being interrogated and giving up the information his interrogator works, Marlowe’s perspective changes, as does the tone of the film. This leads to the final death of the poisoner’s boss which, as films notes, is a brutal and vicious act.
So I would agree with films that, ultimately, this film goes to a very dark place, darker than Chandler intended. But most of its success, both at the time and to this day, is based on the dry humor and sexual tension that Daniel highlighted.
on Aug 11 2008 @ 12:18 pm 24. Evan Derrick said …
Well said, G.