For most of his career, Tony Curtis played rather light-weight roles. This is not a criticism--just an observation of the types of parts he played in movies. Here in "Sweet Smell of Success", however, he breaks with this and portrays a meaty and incredibly unlikable guy. The strength of this performance served to do something VERY difficult--to upstage Burt Lancaster--an actor who usually dominates the screen.
Curtis plays a press agent--a very slimy and weak one who will do ANYTHING to make a buck and get into the good graces of people who can help him. In particularly, he hopes to get a cold and nasty columnist (Lancaster) to work with him--at any cost. Lancaster's character seems as if it's based on Walter Winchell--a real life columnist who used to wield tons of power but who, according to most accounts, was a vicious and power-hungry jerk. Watching Lancaster's character so coldly and callously manipulate those around him was great--almost as captivating as the depths to which Curtis would go to debase himself. They made a very compelling and slimy team--hateful but something you just can't stop watching. As for the rest of the cast, they do a fine job but they are way off in the background--it is a Curtis-Lancaster film and they dominate the picture.
So why did I give the film a 10 Well, first, it's very original and gusty--very different from the nice image of stars and those who make them. You see an ugly side--like watching people bathing in a sewer. And it's unforgettable and relies solely on excellent writing, acting and direction. Sets and plot devices are irrelevant--just darn fine work by the priniciples involved.
So why didn't it win anything at Oscar time or get nominated?! Well, first, I think it was a film that slowly caught on and many people also just didn't know what to think of this anti-Hollywood and anti-Broadway film. Second, 1958 was an amazingly good year in films and all but one of the Best Picture nominees were amazing films. Whether or not they were better or worse than "Sweet Smell of Success" is debatable but they almost all were terrific films--"Bridge on the Rive Kwai", "12 Angry Men", "Sayonara" and "Witness for the Prosecution" were all up for the big award (how "Peyton Place", a very glossy soap opera, got nominated is beyond me). However, neither Curtis nor Lancaster even got nominated..and that is inexplicable.the
Curtis plays a press agent--a very slimy and weak one who will do ANYTHING to make a buck and get into the good graces of people who can help him. In particularly, he hopes to get a cold and nasty columnist (Lancaster) to work with him--at any cost. Lancaster's character seems as if it's based on Walter Winchell--a real life columnist who used to wield tons of power but who, according to most accounts, was a vicious and power-hungry jerk. Watching Lancaster's character so coldly and callously manipulate those around him was great--almost as captivating as the depths to which Curtis would go to debase himself. They made a very compelling and slimy team--hateful but something you just can't stop watching. As for the rest of the cast, they do a fine job but they are way off in the background--it is a Curtis-Lancaster film and they dominate the picture.
So why did I give the film a 10 Well, first, it's very original and gusty--very different from the nice image of stars and those who make them. You see an ugly side--like watching people bathing in a sewer. And it's unforgettable and relies solely on excellent writing, acting and direction. Sets and plot devices are irrelevant--just darn fine work by the priniciples involved.
So why didn't it win anything at Oscar time or get nominated?! Well, first, I think it was a film that slowly caught on and many people also just didn't know what to think of this anti-Hollywood and anti-Broadway film. Second, 1958 was an amazingly good year in films and all but one of the Best Picture nominees were amazing films. Whether or not they were better or worse than "Sweet Smell of Success" is debatable but they almost all were terrific films--"Bridge on the Rive Kwai", "12 Angry Men", "Sayonara" and "Witness for the Prosecution" were all up for the big award (how "Peyton Place", a very glossy soap opera, got nominated is beyond me). However, neither Curtis nor Lancaster even got nominated..and that is inexplicable.the