Drawing on his life of crimefighting to write a short story, Raymond Chandler's tough but noble P.I. Philip Marlowe (Robert Montgomery, pulling double duty as actor and director) submits his work to Kingsby Publications, home of such pulp fiction mags as LURID DETECTIVE and MURDER MASTERPIECES. Before he can say "byline," editor Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter) has Marlowe up to his neck in murder, missing dames, and crooked cops -- and you can see things Marlowe's way, literally! Before all those slasher movies came along during the last couple of decades, LADY IN THE LAKE used the subjective camera treatment -- hell, the camera was practically a character in the flick! Throughout most of LADY..., we see everything exactly as Marlowe sees it; the only times we see Marlowe/Montgomery's face is when he looks in a mirror, as well as in a brief prologue, an entrè-acte segment, and an epilogue. In the trailer (featured on the spiffy new DVD version of LADY..., along with an enjoyable and informative commentary track by film historians Alain Silver and James Ursini), MGM's publicity department did its best to push the film as the first interactive movie experience: "MGM presents a Revolutionary motion picture; the most amazing since Talkies began! YOU and ROBERT MONTGOMERY solve a murder mystery together! YOU accept an invitation to a blonde's apartment! YOU get socked in the jaw by a murder suspect!" YOU occasionally start snickering in spite of yourself when the subjective camera gimmick teeters dangerously close to parodying itself, like when Totter moves in for a smooch with Our Hero The Camera. Some of Totter's facial expressions in the first half of the film as she spars verbally with Montgomery are pretty funny, too, though I'm not sure all of them were meant to be (she uses the arched eyebrow technique done so much more effectively later by Eunice Gayson of DR. NO and FROM Russia WITH LOVE, Leonard Nimoy, CQ's Angela Lindvall, The Rock, et al... :-). Having said that, the subjective camera technique works more often than not; in particular, I thought the fight scenes and a harrowing sequence where an injured Marlowe crawls out of his wrecked car worked beautifully. It helps that Steve Fisher provided a good solid screenplay for Raymond Chandler's novel, though Chandler purists were annoyed that the novel's pivotal Little Fawn Lake sequence was relegated to a speech in the recap scene in the middle (apparently they tried to film that scene on location, but the subjective camera treatment proved harder to do in the great outdoors, so they gave up). The performances are quite good overall, including Lloyd Nolan as a dirty cop and an intense dramatic turn by young Jayne Meadows. Montgomery's sardonic snap mostly works well for cynical Marlowe, though he sometimes forgets to tone it down during tender dialogue, making him sound simply cranky. Totter eventually tones down her mugging and becomes genuinely affecting as her Adrienne lets down her guard and begins falling for Marlowe. You may love or hate this LADY..., but if you enjoy mysteries and you're intrigued by offbeat movie-making techniques, give her a try!
121 Reviews
Chandler supplies grapes pinot noir? for film experiment of doubtful vintage
bmacv28 August 2002
For a suspense writer whose observations of mid-20th-century Los Angeles proved so gimlet-eyed that he has been enshrined as the city's unofficial bard, Raymond Chandler had a bumpy fling with Hollywood. The first of his five major novels to be filmed during the classic period of film noir, Farewell, My Lovely was first turned into an installment in the Falcon series of programmers, then into Edward Dmytryk's 1944 Murder, My Sweet (a success, but too short; to do justice to Chandler's atmospherics and milieu demands longer time spans than the movies allot them).
From 1946, probably the most adroit blending of style and content taken from his works was Howard Hawks' The Big Sleep. But its popularity, then and now, owes as much to the chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall and to the frisky, irreverent tone Hawks brought to the movie as to Chandler, whose outlook was one of dispassionate observation tinged with disgust.
The following year, The Brasher Doubloon, from the book The High Window, can be deemed a failure. That leaves the odd case of The Lady in the Lake, also from 47, which Robert Montgomery, starring as Philip Marlowe, ill-advisedly decided to direct himself. The movie labors under two huge handicaps: one of technique, the other of tone.
Cited often (and often by those who may not have actually seen the movie) for its subjective use of the-camera-as-character, The Lady in The Lake flounders on an idea that may have sounded good when initially floated but had to have looked bad once the first rushes came in.
Except for an explanatory prologue (the necessity for which should have raised red flags) or in scenes where he's caught in a window or mirror, Montgomery's Marlowe remains unseen. We, through the camera lens, are the detective. Conceivably, this gimmick might have worked at a later date, when swift, lithe Steadicams were part of Hollywood's technical arsenal. But in1947, the camera lumbers along as though it were being shoved through wet sand. As a result the pace slows to deadening, as though a senescent Marlowe were tracking down clues from the rail of an aluminum walker.
In consequence, time that might profitably been expended on filling in missing pieces of the puzzle gets wasted on Marlowe's getting from point A to point B. Vital and evocative parts of Chandler's novel take place in the summer resort areas of Puma Point and Little Fawn Lake; that snail of a camera, however, was not up to a hike in the great outdoors, so the movie preserves none of them.
And in tossing away chunks of the novels to accommodate budgets and shooting schedules, movie versions (like this one) mistake Chandler's strengths, which did not lay in plot. (The scriptwriters on The Big Sleep, including William Faulkner, couldn't figure out who killed one of the characters, so they asked Chandler, who didn't know either.)
His strengths were in weaving intricate webs of duplicity and deceit shot through with corruption and dread. That was heavy fare for Hollywood even during the noir cycle. So stories tended to be simplified and atmosphere lightened: the freighted response gave way to the wisecrack, suggestive tension between two characters turned into a meet-cute, the brooding loner became a red-blooded American joe.
So, in The Lady in The Lake, the icy and questionable Adrienne Fromsett of the book (Audrey Totter) is now a sassy minx to Marlowe's snappy man-about-town, and so on. The plot deals with Marlowe's attempts to find a missing woman (an off-screen character whom the Christmas-card credits, in a droll fit of Francophone humor, call Ellay Mort).
Is a verdict possible? Some viewers find the movie's conceits and distortions amateurish and self-congratulating, while others overlook them to find a vintage mystery from postwar vaults. The Lady in The Lake remains a flawed experiment that over the years has developed its own distinctive if not quite distinguished period bouquet.
From 1946, probably the most adroit blending of style and content taken from his works was Howard Hawks' The Big Sleep. But its popularity, then and now, owes as much to the chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall and to the frisky, irreverent tone Hawks brought to the movie as to Chandler, whose outlook was one of dispassionate observation tinged with disgust.
The following year, The Brasher Doubloon, from the book The High Window, can be deemed a failure. That leaves the odd case of The Lady in the Lake, also from 47, which Robert Montgomery, starring as Philip Marlowe, ill-advisedly decided to direct himself. The movie labors under two huge handicaps: one of technique, the other of tone.
Cited often (and often by those who may not have actually seen the movie) for its subjective use of the-camera-as-character, The Lady in The Lake flounders on an idea that may have sounded good when initially floated but had to have looked bad once the first rushes came in.
Except for an explanatory prologue (the necessity for which should have raised red flags) or in scenes where he's caught in a window or mirror, Montgomery's Marlowe remains unseen. We, through the camera lens, are the detective. Conceivably, this gimmick might have worked at a later date, when swift, lithe Steadicams were part of Hollywood's technical arsenal. But in1947, the camera lumbers along as though it were being shoved through wet sand. As a result the pace slows to deadening, as though a senescent Marlowe were tracking down clues from the rail of an aluminum walker.
In consequence, time that might profitably been expended on filling in missing pieces of the puzzle gets wasted on Marlowe's getting from point A to point B. Vital and evocative parts of Chandler's novel take place in the summer resort areas of Puma Point and Little Fawn Lake; that snail of a camera, however, was not up to a hike in the great outdoors, so the movie preserves none of them.
And in tossing away chunks of the novels to accommodate budgets and shooting schedules, movie versions (like this one) mistake Chandler's strengths, which did not lay in plot. (The scriptwriters on The Big Sleep, including William Faulkner, couldn't figure out who killed one of the characters, so they asked Chandler, who didn't know either.)
His strengths were in weaving intricate webs of duplicity and deceit shot through with corruption and dread. That was heavy fare for Hollywood even during the noir cycle. So stories tended to be simplified and atmosphere lightened: the freighted response gave way to the wisecrack, suggestive tension between two characters turned into a meet-cute, the brooding loner became a red-blooded American joe.
So, in The Lady in The Lake, the icy and questionable Adrienne Fromsett of the book (Audrey Totter) is now a sassy minx to Marlowe's snappy man-about-town, and so on. The plot deals with Marlowe's attempts to find a missing woman (an off-screen character whom the Christmas-card credits, in a droll fit of Francophone humor, call Ellay Mort).
Is a verdict possible? Some viewers find the movie's conceits and distortions amateurish and self-congratulating, while others overlook them to find a vintage mystery from postwar vaults. The Lady in The Lake remains a flawed experiment that over the years has developed its own distinctive if not quite distinguished period bouquet.
Ten dollars a day and expenses.
michaelRokeefe9 January 2004
Striking camera work letting the viewer see through the eyes of hard-boiled detective Philip Marlowe(Robert Montgomery). This is an intriguing Raymond Chandler tale that has the "private dick" solving a murder while seeking a missing socialite. Montgomery directs himself and is primarily only seen in a scene looking in a mirror. Novelty of the camera work is clever and makes YOU part of the movie. Its pretty cool finding the clues. Very apt cast featuring Audrey Totter, Lloyd Nolan, Leon Ames and Jane Meadows. Fun to watch.
Film noir with a unique twist
steve-raybould2 April 2004
Out of the many Marlowe novel adaptations, this must be one of the closest to the spirit of the original. Unfortunately Chandler himself does not seem to have had the opportunity to contribute to the screenplay - although there are plenty of Chandleresque wisecracks. The film, unlike most of the other adaptions reflects the original author's full dislike of the cops (although the tough police chief having to answer a telephone call from his daughter during an interrogation is an unusual appeal for the viewer's understanding), and mistrust bordering on pathological hatred of women (I suspect that the ending is an uncharacteristic 'cop out' to assuage the producer's or popular taste). Director/star Robert Montgomery shows great self-restraint by appearing only briefly in the action. When he does show himself, mainly in mirror-reflections, the star appears (as in that other great latter day film noir, China Town) battered and bruised and not at all flattering. The plot is suitably twisted and confusing - just like the novels. And the concept of timing the whole dark affair against the backdrop of the Christmas holidays only emphasises the bleakness of the subject matter. Incidentally the idea of continuing the opening titles' jolly Christmas carol chorus in darker, more disturbing tones throughout the soundtrack is fascinating and I think unique. Audrey Totter (whatever happened to her?) makes a very sexy femme fatale. And as she plays most of her lines to camera we are seduced just as protagonist Marlowe. On top of that, her gowns are absolutely magnificent examples of forties chic. Lloyd Nolan deserves special mention as a superb heavy. What a wonderful example of Hollywood film noir.
Hardly a classic, but great fun nonetheless.
howlandowl29 March 2000
If you want a great, serious Philip Marlowe mystery, go check out "The Big Sleep." If you're in a lighter mood, however, this one is well worth watching. The POV is cute and leads to some decent effects, but it's also tremendously goofy sometimes. The dialogue really sells it though. The lessons I learned from this movie were 1) Only men can handle guns. 2) Having four thumbs is bad. 3) Never, ever tell anyone the time. 4) If you try hard enough, you can drink whiskey through your eyes. I'm sure there are hundreds more gnomic sayings, easily applicable to daily life, scattered through it!
Seriously, though, it was a lot of fun to watch, mostly because of the problems with it, and I'd highly recommend it.
Seriously, though, it was a lot of fun to watch, mostly because of the problems with it, and I'd highly recommend it.
"He had a wonderful motive; he was in love with her"
ackstasis16 December 2008
I'll get the obvious out of the way first. Robert Montgomery's 'Lady in the Lake (1947)' is most renowned for being one of the only mainstream films to unfold almost entirely from the first-person perspective of the main character, in this case Raymond Chandler's Philip Marlowe. The technique had been used before, albeit on a lesser scale, in the opening five minutes of Rouben Mamoulian's 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931).' In 1947, shortly after the release of Montgomery's film, Delmer Daves would take an enormous risk by filming the first hour of 'Dark Passage (1947)' without showing the face of Humphrey Bogart, though the star's status was such that he was eventually forced to emerge from the shadows (after which point, it must be said, the film becomes more conventional and marginally less interesting). Montgomery, in his last film at MGM, was also given the opportunity to direct, and he doesn't flinch from his chosen gimmick. Marlowe's face is seen only during several brief explanatory interludes, and whenever he happens to catch his reflection in the mirror.
Setting aside the gimmick which MGM optimistically hailed as the greatest cinematic innovation since synchronised sound 'Lady in the Lake' doesn't quite measure up to other popular Chandler adaptations of the time. Robert Montgomery may have been a great actor I honestly can't say, this being my first film with him but his Philip Marlowe doesn't possess the toughness of Bogart in 'The Big Sleep (1946),' nor the cocky swagger of Dick Powell in 'Murder, My Sweet (1944).' The awkwardness of the role is only accentuated by Marlowe's constantly being behind the camera, though even the occasional direct-to-camera interruptions seem to miss the mark. I don't expect that the supporting actors had much experience in speaking directly to a piece of equipment, and so their performances are capable without being particularly memorable. The chemistry between Montgomery and Audrey Totter, the potentially-villainous femme fatale, was mostly stale for this reason, as we're really only seeing one side of their conversation.
Perhaps the film's greatest weakness and, once again, this all comes back to Montgomery's chosen gimmick is that everything moves so slowly. One would expect those 1940s movie cameras to have been incredibly clunky, and so, in these pre-Steadicam days, Marlowe ambles from A to B with devastating sluggishness. The first-person technique, however, did work wonderfully in the sequence where Marlowe is being pursued in his car, and also when he must drag himself across the gravel to a public telephone. There are lots of prolonged silences where nothing happens, and, despite striving for realism, the film should have conceded more of a musical soundtrack to fill these voids. The one piece of music put into use, however, was an eerily effective choir song that reminded me of György Ligeti's "Requiem" from '2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).' Overall, 'Lady in the Lake' is a fascinating film noir experiment that doesn't quite manage to pull it off. Even so, it's worth a look for its unique take on Philip Marlowe and several scenes of inarguable excellence.
Setting aside the gimmick which MGM optimistically hailed as the greatest cinematic innovation since synchronised sound 'Lady in the Lake' doesn't quite measure up to other popular Chandler adaptations of the time. Robert Montgomery may have been a great actor I honestly can't say, this being my first film with him but his Philip Marlowe doesn't possess the toughness of Bogart in 'The Big Sleep (1946),' nor the cocky swagger of Dick Powell in 'Murder, My Sweet (1944).' The awkwardness of the role is only accentuated by Marlowe's constantly being behind the camera, though even the occasional direct-to-camera interruptions seem to miss the mark. I don't expect that the supporting actors had much experience in speaking directly to a piece of equipment, and so their performances are capable without being particularly memorable. The chemistry between Montgomery and Audrey Totter, the potentially-villainous femme fatale, was mostly stale for this reason, as we're really only seeing one side of their conversation.
Perhaps the film's greatest weakness and, once again, this all comes back to Montgomery's chosen gimmick is that everything moves so slowly. One would expect those 1940s movie cameras to have been incredibly clunky, and so, in these pre-Steadicam days, Marlowe ambles from A to B with devastating sluggishness. The first-person technique, however, did work wonderfully in the sequence where Marlowe is being pursued in his car, and also when he must drag himself across the gravel to a public telephone. There are lots of prolonged silences where nothing happens, and, despite striving for realism, the film should have conceded more of a musical soundtrack to fill these voids. The one piece of music put into use, however, was an eerily effective choir song that reminded me of György Ligeti's "Requiem" from '2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).' Overall, 'Lady in the Lake' is a fascinating film noir experiment that doesn't quite manage to pull it off. Even so, it's worth a look for its unique take on Philip Marlowe and several scenes of inarguable excellence.
Film Noir Christmas
johno-211 June 2008
I recently saw this at the 2008 Palm Springs Film Noir Festival. Popular actor Robert Montgomery branches out into directing in this Film Noir from 1947 with mixed results. Using a subjective camera technique, Montgemery stars as detective Phillip Marlowe in a film shot from Marlowes point of view and is rarely on screen himself except for occasional mirror reflections and in a few scenes where he relates the story directly to the camera. This POV technique for an entire film can be demanding on the actors who talk to a disembodied camera instead of an actor and can wear thin on an audience after a while but although I did like the film, I can see why others may not. Based on the the Raymond Chandler novel with a screenplay by Steve Fisher who enjoyed success in the Film Noir genre with several film screenplays it has some good witty lines. The film begins with Christmas carols and the opening credits on Chrismas cards and it does take place on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day but that's the only thing Christmasy about it. It wasn't even released for Christmas and make it's debut in theaters in late January of 1947. Marlowe is set to give up his private eye career and become a writer instead and submits his first manuscript to an agency specializing in pulp fiction and horror stories. Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter) isn't interested in Marlowe's literary talents and instead want to hire him to find out what happened to the missing estranged wife of her boss Derace Kingsby (Leon Ames). Totter's expressions, emotions, wit and beauty make a strong camera presence carry the film. Tom Tully as Cpt. Kane and Lloyd Nolan as Lt. DeGarmot make an excellent good cop-bad cop combination. Dick Simmons as Chris Lavery is excellent in a small role and Jayne Meadows as the mysterious Mildred Haveland is superb in her rapid-fire delivery. Meadows herself was on hand for the film's screening at the festival and did a Q&A for the audience after the screening in which she said she had never seen the film before even when it was first released. Beautiful blonde bit part actress Lila Leeds was only 18 years old when this was filmed in May of 1946 and was probably being groomed by MGM as the next Marilyn Monroe but in 1948 she was arrested along with Robert Mitchum for marijuana possession and as a community service part of her sentence she was given a staring role in the 1949 anti-drug film "Wild Weed." It would be her only starring role and at age 21 her film career was over. Look for great costumes on the actresses in this film by noted designer Irene. There are no location shots in this film and we never make to the lake and only learn of events that happen up there. It's an all-around strange film but a great cast and I would give it a 7.5 out of 10 and recommend it.
A great film noir, worth watching just for the first person POV experiment
kc132811 January 2014
This Movie should fit anyone's film noir definition: crooked cops, dames you cant trust, dark all interior or night scenes, protagonist as hardboiled as the bad guys, a twisted whodunit you almost forget about, who cares who did it although it still surprises in the end. The plot happens right over Christmas which often creeps into the story but Christmas is just a nuisance / inconvenience in this film noir. The first-person POV does have its hokey, awkward moments but other scenes such as the car accident and the very end make up for it. There are many films including modern films like being John Malkovich that might have first-person scenes, this is one of very few entirely shot this way, worth watching for this alone. But this film is more than a novelty, it stands on its own, the movie is two hours long, it almost feels like two movies, it reaches a certain point right at the one hour mark that feels like its going to wrap up but then goes sideways, the plot certainly did work, the time flies, you don't notice the length, always a good sign. Robert Montgomery was a believable Marlowe and the snappy wise cracking dialogue between Marlowe and Audrey Totter (Adrienne Fromsett) added up to a fun chemistry although I was having a hard time buying the usual transition to love interest. The first person technique helped Montgomery, he pulled of the dialogue but is not the greatest actor, hearing but not seeing him worked to Montgomery's advantage. Totter for the most part worked, perhaps a little melodramatic at times but undoubtedly her staring directly at the camera accentuated perhaps even created this feeling. The supporting actors were outstanding: Audrey Meadows had only two scenes, the first was captivating because we cant see her face, the second she stole to create an electric end. Lloyd Nolan as the corrupt cop totally carried his part in the plot, he was friendly enough at first but hit the just right notes as a corrupt cop. His turn at the car accident and then at the end combined with the first person technique created the two most unforgettable scenes in the movie. Even Lila Leeds had a small barely more than a walk-on role but she caught your attention, it looked like one of those "get you noticed" roles that leads to bigger and better things but alas it appears not, she went on to a series of uncredited and grind house movies.
This film, and Mr. Jordan, define Montgomery's legacy...
A_Different_Drummer15 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Robert Montgomery was already an A-List star with many films to his credit. Nonetheless, if, in his entire career, he had only done this film, and HERE COMES MR JORDAN, he would have carved a legacy as good as or better than actors with many more productions under their belts. This reviewer has already reviewed Mr. Jordan. This film superficially seems yet another Philip Marlowe filme noire, yet with a few twists. First is the subjective camera angles. You don't see that very often, and it works surprisingly well. Second is the casting. Montgomery as (like a prior reviewer here has said) a very cranky Marlowe with a sharp tongue and even sharper delivery. And an astonishing performance from Audrey Totter as Adrienne Fromsett. OMG, just the name tells you this is going to be a fascinating character. It seems that Montgomery's character puts more effort into trying to tease and torment Totter than in capturing in the bad guys, and that little sub-plot makes the film even better (as does the way Montgomery can never resist insulting the cops at every opportunity.) If this is not one of the best films you have ever seen, you need to re-consider whether talking pictures is really your preferred form of entertainment after all.
A Unique Marlowe Movie
seymourblack-111 February 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This is a unique Philip Marlowe movie as it's filmed in a way that enables its audience to see the action through Marlowe's eyes. This approach was intended to enhance the viewers' experience by enabling them to see what the detective sees, follow the various clues and maybe even solve the murder mystery before Marlowe does.
It's a fascinating experiment and as all the Marlowe stories are inherently subjective anyway, it's perfectly understandable why trying this technique out in "Lady In The Lake" would seem perfectly logical and maybe even a natural extension of the private eye's usual narration. In reality, however, it had the unfortunate effect of making the interaction between the characters unnatural and also slowing down the pace of the action (an example of this is a scene in which Marlowe climbs the stairs of a house where he finds a dead body).
Fortunately, after acclimatising to such an unorthodox way of seeing a movie, the story which is based on Raymond Chandler's novel "The Lady In The Lake", proves to be very enjoyable. It's typically convoluted and involves a missing person, a series of murders and numerous memorable characters (including one who has three different identities).
Philip Marlowe (Robert Montgomery) attends a meeting at "Kingsby Publications" with Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter) who's the company's editor-in-chief. Although they're ostensibly there to discuss the possible publication of a story that Marlowe had recently submitted, it soon becomes clear that Fromsett is much more interested in hiring him to find her boss' missing wife, Chrystal Kingsby. The deeply cynical detective also quickly recognises that Fromsett is a gold-digger who wants to do everything possible to speed up her millionaire boss' divorce so that she can marry him without any undue delay.
Marlowe's investigation takes him to the home of one of Mrs Kingsby's boyfriends, a gigolo called Chris Lavery (Dick Simmons) who takes exception to some of the questions he's asked and knocks Marlowe out. When the private eye regains consciousness, he's in a police cell and has a black eye. Marlowe is uncooperative when he gets questioned by Bay City police officers, Captain Kane (Tom Tully) and Lieutenant DeGarmot (Lloyd Nolan) but after getting warned by them not to cause any further trouble in their district, he's released from custody.
After he learns that the dead body of a woman has been found in a lake near a vacation cabin owned by Derace Kingsby (Leon Ames), Marlowe hears that the reported victim is Muriel Chess, who's the wife of Kingsby's caretaker. She's a woman with a shady past and a further piece of evidence that Marlowe finds reveals that her real name was Mildred Haveland and that she like Chrystal had previously been linked with Chris Lavery. Marlowe's continued investigations then lead to the discovery of another dead body and numerous further complications before he eventually manages to untangle the mysteries surrounding the disappearance of Chrystal Kingsby.
The dialogue in this movie is consistently sharp and witty and the various exchanges between Marlowe and Fromsett are especially entertaining. Audrey Totter is hilariously over-the-top as she looks haughty, indignant and amused at various points and also tries to use her charm to conceal what her real motives are. The rest of the cast also do well in what must've been a challenging undertaking for everyone concerned.
It's a fascinating experiment and as all the Marlowe stories are inherently subjective anyway, it's perfectly understandable why trying this technique out in "Lady In The Lake" would seem perfectly logical and maybe even a natural extension of the private eye's usual narration. In reality, however, it had the unfortunate effect of making the interaction between the characters unnatural and also slowing down the pace of the action (an example of this is a scene in which Marlowe climbs the stairs of a house where he finds a dead body).
Fortunately, after acclimatising to such an unorthodox way of seeing a movie, the story which is based on Raymond Chandler's novel "The Lady In The Lake", proves to be very enjoyable. It's typically convoluted and involves a missing person, a series of murders and numerous memorable characters (including one who has three different identities).
Philip Marlowe (Robert Montgomery) attends a meeting at "Kingsby Publications" with Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter) who's the company's editor-in-chief. Although they're ostensibly there to discuss the possible publication of a story that Marlowe had recently submitted, it soon becomes clear that Fromsett is much more interested in hiring him to find her boss' missing wife, Chrystal Kingsby. The deeply cynical detective also quickly recognises that Fromsett is a gold-digger who wants to do everything possible to speed up her millionaire boss' divorce so that she can marry him without any undue delay.
Marlowe's investigation takes him to the home of one of Mrs Kingsby's boyfriends, a gigolo called Chris Lavery (Dick Simmons) who takes exception to some of the questions he's asked and knocks Marlowe out. When the private eye regains consciousness, he's in a police cell and has a black eye. Marlowe is uncooperative when he gets questioned by Bay City police officers, Captain Kane (Tom Tully) and Lieutenant DeGarmot (Lloyd Nolan) but after getting warned by them not to cause any further trouble in their district, he's released from custody.
After he learns that the dead body of a woman has been found in a lake near a vacation cabin owned by Derace Kingsby (Leon Ames), Marlowe hears that the reported victim is Muriel Chess, who's the wife of Kingsby's caretaker. She's a woman with a shady past and a further piece of evidence that Marlowe finds reveals that her real name was Mildred Haveland and that she like Chrystal had previously been linked with Chris Lavery. Marlowe's continued investigations then lead to the discovery of another dead body and numerous further complications before he eventually manages to untangle the mysteries surrounding the disappearance of Chrystal Kingsby.
The dialogue in this movie is consistently sharp and witty and the various exchanges between Marlowe and Fromsett are especially entertaining. Audrey Totter is hilariously over-the-top as she looks haughty, indignant and amused at various points and also tries to use her charm to conceal what her real motives are. The rest of the cast also do well in what must've been a challenging undertaking for everyone concerned.
No Wonder Chandler Was Outraged
Athanatos7 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Montgomery substitutes a gimmick for quality film-making. He and Fisher and have absolutely no ear for Chandler-esquire writing. Actors hit marks and then don't move from them through the rest of scenes, and lines are delivered as if read from cue cards. The film is essentially confined to interior scenes shot in sets that look like sets -- the pivotal scene of the book, in which the lady is found in the lake, is replaced with mere narrative. In the one scene in which he appears -- at a mirror -- Montgomery doesn't capture the demeanor of Marlowe, "who himself is not mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid" but is nonetheless wearied beyond his years by going down "mean streets". And that scene at the mirror proves that Montgomery hadn't even the competence to master his gimmick, as it is plainly shot at an angle to hide the camera, so that the camera does not see Marlowe's reflection as he would have seen it.
What an exceptional Noir film--too bad Robert Montgomery didn't make more like this one
planktonrules24 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This film is unusual in that Robert Montgomery not only stars as the private detective "Philip Marlowe" but he also directs the film. In a way, this actually makes sense, as so much of the film is filmed from Marlowe's point of view. So it's easy to imagine the director/actor speaking his lines along side the camera--a VERY novel experiment that worked very well. I think that is because he WAS visible now and again when necessary so the film didn't seem too unconventional.
In addition to this interesting trick, the film features some of the most wonderfully "Noir" dialog of any detective film ever made. Marlowe isn't just fast-talking, but also exceptionally rude and abrasive--so much so that I actually laughed out loud several times--something you usually DON'T do with this sort of film! While I loved Bogart as Marlowe in THE BIG SLEEP, I actually preferred Montgomery'--both his style and much snappier dialog. This is saying a lot, as Bogart's version of Marlowe was great and had so many great lines.
The story itself, not surprisingly, is a tad confusing--something definitely true in several other Raymond Chandler movies. But, provided you pay close attention, it shouldn't be a problem. But I honestly think the exact details of the story are far less important to the dialog and relationship that grows between Marlowe and his one-time employer, Adrienne Fromsett (played by Audrey Trotter). While many Noir love interests seem at best secondary to the film, this one really improved the film--giving it added dimension and leading to an exceptional, though a tad up-beat, ending.
The bottom line is for Noir fans, this is a must-see film. I just can't understand why it's only got an overall score of 6.6--it's MUCH better than that and is a great example of an overlooked Noir classic.
In addition to this interesting trick, the film features some of the most wonderfully "Noir" dialog of any detective film ever made. Marlowe isn't just fast-talking, but also exceptionally rude and abrasive--so much so that I actually laughed out loud several times--something you usually DON'T do with this sort of film! While I loved Bogart as Marlowe in THE BIG SLEEP, I actually preferred Montgomery'--both his style and much snappier dialog. This is saying a lot, as Bogart's version of Marlowe was great and had so many great lines.
The story itself, not surprisingly, is a tad confusing--something definitely true in several other Raymond Chandler movies. But, provided you pay close attention, it shouldn't be a problem. But I honestly think the exact details of the story are far less important to the dialog and relationship that grows between Marlowe and his one-time employer, Adrienne Fromsett (played by Audrey Trotter). While many Noir love interests seem at best secondary to the film, this one really improved the film--giving it added dimension and leading to an exceptional, though a tad up-beat, ending.
The bottom line is for Noir fans, this is a must-see film. I just can't understand why it's only got an overall score of 6.6--it's MUCH better than that and is a great example of an overlooked Noir classic.
Lady in the Lake
Perception_de_Ambiguity27 May 2010
Did I ever tell you I like films with a gimmick that isn't necessarily needed to tell the story? Well, I do. 'Lady in the Lake' is such a movie. The whole film is shot from Phillip Marlowe's POV. Instead of a voice-over it has a narration in which we actually see the actor, but instead of adding some diversity those segments also have the actor speaking directly to the camera, just like in the rest of the movie in which the other characters speak to Phillip Marlowe and look at him...and us
This Phillip Marlowe is cynic beyond description. No matter how well-meaning the people are, no matter what is said to him, he smashes it down and makes fun of what is said and of who is saying it. All of this in a mean and cold-hearted tone. This gets a bit monotonous and I thought "lighten up already", but I enjoyed his snarky comebacks (some of them even cracked me up) as well as his grumpy attitude in general. It's funny how the other characters kept coming back to him although the guy surely was no fun to be around. Especially the movie's femme fatale, if we can call her that. They simultaneously loved and hated each other. Marlowe for one mainly hated her because he didn't know if he could trust her or not. I for one enjoyed the numerous minutes in which the blonde looked at me, not only for her being pretty but she had nice exaggerated mimic.
The plot is very straight forward and probably would have made an unremarkable film if told conventionally. Naturally the structure of the plot also is straight forward and it's only in the piling up of events, clues and facts that it offers something challenging to the viewer. And although it's a bit clumsy at times I enjoyed how the plot unfolded. I felt it ended with a bang when a reoccurring line of dialogue finds its final purpose and the love/hate relationship between Marlowe comes to a satisfying conclusion.
Generally the shots go on for several minutes and quite often you can see where scenes were stitched together but I didn't mind that at all. In all its staying true to the gimmick it visually doesn't look or feel much like a film noir, despite its hard-boiled-ness.
Overall the gimmick works pretty seamlessly. The often-used effect of Marlowe looking at himself in the mirror (the camera had to always stay out of the frame) is quite convincing. Only when he is interacting with things, when we see Marlowe's hand, or smoke shoots out from under the camera as he's having a cigarette it requires a certain suspension of disbelief as the positions usually don't really work out all too greatly. And if you think about it it is a bit odd how static the camera usually is. Obviously nowadays this would be shot hand-held and in the light of this we should probably be thankful the camera is this static.
Maybe having everybody look right at you becomes a bit redundant at times, but that comes with the gimmick. It surely can't be said that the movie offers much diversity nor is it even overly inventive and adventurous in the use of its gimmick, but in spite of this it always had my attention and I had fun watching it. A big reason for this IS the gimmick, which is the source of many of the movie's pluses as well as minuses.
This Phillip Marlowe is cynic beyond description. No matter how well-meaning the people are, no matter what is said to him, he smashes it down and makes fun of what is said and of who is saying it. All of this in a mean and cold-hearted tone. This gets a bit monotonous and I thought "lighten up already", but I enjoyed his snarky comebacks (some of them even cracked me up) as well as his grumpy attitude in general. It's funny how the other characters kept coming back to him although the guy surely was no fun to be around. Especially the movie's femme fatale, if we can call her that. They simultaneously loved and hated each other. Marlowe for one mainly hated her because he didn't know if he could trust her or not. I for one enjoyed the numerous minutes in which the blonde looked at me, not only for her being pretty but she had nice exaggerated mimic.
The plot is very straight forward and probably would have made an unremarkable film if told conventionally. Naturally the structure of the plot also is straight forward and it's only in the piling up of events, clues and facts that it offers something challenging to the viewer. And although it's a bit clumsy at times I enjoyed how the plot unfolded. I felt it ended with a bang when a reoccurring line of dialogue finds its final purpose and the love/hate relationship between Marlowe comes to a satisfying conclusion.
Generally the shots go on for several minutes and quite often you can see where scenes were stitched together but I didn't mind that at all. In all its staying true to the gimmick it visually doesn't look or feel much like a film noir, despite its hard-boiled-ness.
Overall the gimmick works pretty seamlessly. The often-used effect of Marlowe looking at himself in the mirror (the camera had to always stay out of the frame) is quite convincing. Only when he is interacting with things, when we see Marlowe's hand, or smoke shoots out from under the camera as he's having a cigarette it requires a certain suspension of disbelief as the positions usually don't really work out all too greatly. And if you think about it it is a bit odd how static the camera usually is. Obviously nowadays this would be shot hand-held and in the light of this we should probably be thankful the camera is this static.
Maybe having everybody look right at you becomes a bit redundant at times, but that comes with the gimmick. It surely can't be said that the movie offers much diversity nor is it even overly inventive and adventurous in the use of its gimmick, but in spite of this it always had my attention and I had fun watching it. A big reason for this IS the gimmick, which is the source of many of the movie's pluses as well as minuses.
Silly gimmickry.
ozlock24 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I think I remember the original reviews of this movie, and they were universally bad. But sometimes one might enjoy a bad movie when it is seen as a historical context--but this is not such a movie. It is unfaithful to the wonderful writing of Raymond Chandler. As an adaptation to the silver screen it does not even come close to "The Big Sleep," "Double Indemnity" or any other of Raymond Chandler's stories. Montgomery's attempt at tough guy speech is ludicrous; it's as though he is trying to emulate Humphrey Bogart while at the same time avoiding a comparison. Furthermore, it is derivative of Hitchcock and Orson Wells but falls ridiculously short of these standards to be thought of as something revolutionary in film. Probably the only value of this movie is to see Jayne Meadows at a very young age. She comes across as the perfect ingenue but is too sweet to have been a primary villain.
Interesting...very interesting.
rhapsodist91225 December 2000
I saw this film on TMC on Christmas Eve 2000. I thought it was pretty interesting. The first first-person film I've ever seen. It really caught the first-person POV with which Chandler wrote the novel. I loved Marlowe, wise-cracking, one-liners ("Do you fall in love with all of your clients? Only the ones in skirts.") I thought the director handled the camera very well, with the mirrors to show the first-person perspective. I like it a lot. Great noir! Kept me riveted.
See it through my eyes
jamesjustice-9226 June 2020
An interesting movie I just watched. The idea of having a movie shot from the first person perspective is not new but it was so back in 1946 and Robert Montgomery has handled this idea almost perfectly, give or take a couple of times when the narrative gets too slow and stresses the attention out on unnecessary things for the sake of its own merits which turns out deadly unrealistic in the end product. Overall the movie still feels fresh and it's something each viewer in love with cinema must experience in the lifetime. The plot itself is a simple detective story but it's the way the story is told that's uniquely ambiguous and keeps you interested throughout. Each character looks directly into the camera, right at us and we see the pure emotions, although at times I couldn't help but noticing how confused the actors themselves were at what they were doing. As a director, in his debut, Robert has done a splendid job but I would rather see him perform than hear his voice and catch a glimpse of him here and there. The absence of almost any music in the movie also makes it all very lifelike, like I was in the movie myself but in the end it's still just another murder mystery however done well.
Great directing and writing hampered by the camera trickery...
secondtake4 May 2010
The Lady in the Lake (1947)
This classic film noir is shot almost entirely from the point of view of the protagonist, and it is this subjective camera technique (or trick) that has made the film famous. (Hollywood regular Paul Vogel is behind the camera here.) But it is not its best point. The star is Robert Montgomery, who is not its best point, either, because he makes a sluggish and steady kind of Philip Marlowe, the famous Raymond Chandler detective played better by Bogart in The Big Sleep and Dick Powell in Murder, My Sweet (and much later by Robert Mitchum in two films).
But Montgomery turns out to be a marvelous director. If you remove the affectation of the camera, which is both intriguing and distracting, you have a really smart and increasingly dense telling of a great plot. And with growing admiration you have to appreciation the really sharp writing behind it all. Chandler isn't just some pulp fiction hack, and his books and their movie adaptations have stood the test of seventy years very well.
But the camera-work does demand a lot from a viewer. At times it's brilliant, playing with black out or with glancing around a room in a real time way. At other times, it makes the movie stiff. One curious decision was to have the other characters look Marlowe (the camera) in the eye, often without looking away, and so the characters are staring right at you when they speak. This isn't just the painfully stiff opening where Montgomery introduces the whole yarn, but in the midst of tense encounters. For a movie that has half an hour of this kind of camera, used with far more ingenuity and energy, check out Dark Passage from the same year (released eight months after this one).
And there is the problem of Montgomery the actor, a rather nice fellow with a solidity and calmness bordering on dull that is just not quite what we want from our detective. He delivers famously terrific lines, but there is some edge, some sarcasm, so necessary loneliness missing. This is the guy who when asked by the leading lady, "Where do you spend your Christmases," says, "In bars."
This classic film noir is shot almost entirely from the point of view of the protagonist, and it is this subjective camera technique (or trick) that has made the film famous. (Hollywood regular Paul Vogel is behind the camera here.) But it is not its best point. The star is Robert Montgomery, who is not its best point, either, because he makes a sluggish and steady kind of Philip Marlowe, the famous Raymond Chandler detective played better by Bogart in The Big Sleep and Dick Powell in Murder, My Sweet (and much later by Robert Mitchum in two films).
But Montgomery turns out to be a marvelous director. If you remove the affectation of the camera, which is both intriguing and distracting, you have a really smart and increasingly dense telling of a great plot. And with growing admiration you have to appreciation the really sharp writing behind it all. Chandler isn't just some pulp fiction hack, and his books and their movie adaptations have stood the test of seventy years very well.
But the camera-work does demand a lot from a viewer. At times it's brilliant, playing with black out or with glancing around a room in a real time way. At other times, it makes the movie stiff. One curious decision was to have the other characters look Marlowe (the camera) in the eye, often without looking away, and so the characters are staring right at you when they speak. This isn't just the painfully stiff opening where Montgomery introduces the whole yarn, but in the midst of tense encounters. For a movie that has half an hour of this kind of camera, used with far more ingenuity and energy, check out Dark Passage from the same year (released eight months after this one).
And there is the problem of Montgomery the actor, a rather nice fellow with a solidity and calmness bordering on dull that is just not quite what we want from our detective. He delivers famously terrific lines, but there is some edge, some sarcasm, so necessary loneliness missing. This is the guy who when asked by the leading lady, "Where do you spend your Christmases," says, "In bars."
daring experiment
SnoopyStyle24 March 2019
Hard-boiled Los Angeles private eye Phillip Marlowe (Robert Montgomery) decides to submit a real story to pulpy Kingsby Publications Inc. He's brought in to talk about his story with executive Adrienne Fromsett (Audrey Totter). Instead, she hires him to find her boss Derace Kingsby's wife Chrystal without informing him. Chrystal had runaway to Mexico. She wants a divorce and marry Chris Lavery. Marlowe immediate suspects Fromsett of ulterior motives.
The premise of the first person POV is an intriguing and unique experiment which does not always work. There is something very disturbing about the actors staring right into the camera. It gets to be off-putting except for a few great touches in some of the scenes. Whether it's lingering on a beautiful girl or getting sucker punched, there are incidents where this gimmick really works. The one thing that I hadn't considered is that the scenes stop being edited. There is no back and forth during a conversation. It becomes a play directed at the audience. Again, it's off-putting and becomes difficult to maintain my focus. Totter acts her big eyes to their maximum. There is a liberal use of mirrors to get Montgomery into frame. They're really pushing the envelope but cinema may not function this way. Modern examples such as Hardcore Henry uses the concept to do action which works a little better by turning cinema into a video game. Others like 84 Charlie Mopic use found footage as the excuse to do 1st person which helps a little. The experimentation continues.
The premise of the first person POV is an intriguing and unique experiment which does not always work. There is something very disturbing about the actors staring right into the camera. It gets to be off-putting except for a few great touches in some of the scenes. Whether it's lingering on a beautiful girl or getting sucker punched, there are incidents where this gimmick really works. The one thing that I hadn't considered is that the scenes stop being edited. There is no back and forth during a conversation. It becomes a play directed at the audience. Again, it's off-putting and becomes difficult to maintain my focus. Totter acts her big eyes to their maximum. There is a liberal use of mirrors to get Montgomery into frame. They're really pushing the envelope but cinema may not function this way. Modern examples such as Hardcore Henry uses the concept to do action which works a little better by turning cinema into a video game. Others like 84 Charlie Mopic use found footage as the excuse to do 1st person which helps a little. The experimentation continues.
If I should die before I live!
hitchcockthelegend9 December 2018
Lady in the Lake is directed by Robert Montgomery and adapted to the screen by Steve Fisher from the novel The Lady in the Lake written by Raymond Chandler. It stars Montgomery, Audrey Totter, Lloyd Nolan, Tom Tully, Leon Ames and Jayne Meadows. Music is by David Snell and cinematography by Paul Vogel.
It's the Christmas Holidays and private detective and part time writer Phillip Marlowe (Montgomery) strolls into Kingsby Publications to submit his latest novel. Although he didn't know it at the time, his reason for being there is for different matters, and soon he is involved in missing persons and dead bodies...
Famous for being the film that used a first person gimmick (the camera is Marlowe for most of the picture), Lady in the Lake has a very divisive reputation for a number of reasons. Be it the gimmick or the portrayal of Marlowe (a much loved character to Chandler and film noir fans) by Montgomery, you will find for every person who likes the film greatly, the next person hates it. So with that you have to roll the dice and take your chance.
I have an allergy against getting mixed up with tricky females who want to knock off the boss's wife and marry him for themselves.
If able to leave aside Chandler's novel (and the writer's agitation about the film in general) , and to not let the camera as the active protagonist trick take you out of the story, then there's a good picture here. As is the Chandler way, there's a pot boiler at work as Marlowe tries to solve the cases at hand. He gets punched and slapped about, drops sarcasm quips a plenty, flirts roughly with Adrienne Fromsett (Totter) and jousts with the police as a course of nature. The mystery element is delightfully strong, suspicious behaviours and dubious motives are prominent, all of which reach a satisfying conclusion at pics end.
When it comes to women, does anybody really want the facts?
Montgomery's take on Marlowe isn't for everyone, and coming as it did just a year after Bogart had laid down a considerable marker in The Big Sleep, he was up against it. He actually does well in my book, stentorian like in delivery, wonderfully brusque of manner, and a filthy laugh to boot! His interactions with the yummy Totter and battle of wills with the cops are what make the picture worthwhile.
Perhaps you'd better go home and play with your fingerprint collection.
Unfortunately, with the gimmick in such loaded prominence, it does get a bit weary come the mid-point. The film also lacks some biting noir visuals, the story and its plotting screams out for dark shadow play and chilly chiaroscuro, but no joy in that department here. So some various irks for sure. It starts off with Christmas carols for the opening credits, and finishes on an un-noirish note, but everything in between - gimmick be damned - makes this an intriguing and entertaining Marlowe noir piece. 7/10
It's the Christmas Holidays and private detective and part time writer Phillip Marlowe (Montgomery) strolls into Kingsby Publications to submit his latest novel. Although he didn't know it at the time, his reason for being there is for different matters, and soon he is involved in missing persons and dead bodies...
Famous for being the film that used a first person gimmick (the camera is Marlowe for most of the picture), Lady in the Lake has a very divisive reputation for a number of reasons. Be it the gimmick or the portrayal of Marlowe (a much loved character to Chandler and film noir fans) by Montgomery, you will find for every person who likes the film greatly, the next person hates it. So with that you have to roll the dice and take your chance.
I have an allergy against getting mixed up with tricky females who want to knock off the boss's wife and marry him for themselves.
If able to leave aside Chandler's novel (and the writer's agitation about the film in general) , and to not let the camera as the active protagonist trick take you out of the story, then there's a good picture here. As is the Chandler way, there's a pot boiler at work as Marlowe tries to solve the cases at hand. He gets punched and slapped about, drops sarcasm quips a plenty, flirts roughly with Adrienne Fromsett (Totter) and jousts with the police as a course of nature. The mystery element is delightfully strong, suspicious behaviours and dubious motives are prominent, all of which reach a satisfying conclusion at pics end.
When it comes to women, does anybody really want the facts?
Montgomery's take on Marlowe isn't for everyone, and coming as it did just a year after Bogart had laid down a considerable marker in The Big Sleep, he was up against it. He actually does well in my book, stentorian like in delivery, wonderfully brusque of manner, and a filthy laugh to boot! His interactions with the yummy Totter and battle of wills with the cops are what make the picture worthwhile.
Perhaps you'd better go home and play with your fingerprint collection.
Unfortunately, with the gimmick in such loaded prominence, it does get a bit weary come the mid-point. The film also lacks some biting noir visuals, the story and its plotting screams out for dark shadow play and chilly chiaroscuro, but no joy in that department here. So some various irks for sure. It starts off with Christmas carols for the opening credits, and finishes on an un-noirish note, but everything in between - gimmick be damned - makes this an intriguing and entertaining Marlowe noir piece. 7/10
private eye searches for missing wife in classic film noir.
rogerjillings10 April 2005
Robert Montgomery direct & play Philip Marlowe in this classic film noir where the camera is the eye's of Marlowe through out the film until you see his face later on in brief opening & closing sequences of this clever technique,in this he's searching for a missing wife,he's hired by the wife's husband's secretary the sultry Adrienne Fromsett(Audrey Totter)who he meet's while trying to sell his stories to a magazine establishment.Soon enough the punches fly & the deception begin as he manoeuvre's around to get to the truth where people
aren't what they seem as well as the police who don't like a private eye snooping on their patch & their residents, the movie teems with surprises with the usual gritty dialogue as well as the lowlife & of course the lady in distress.
aren't what they seem as well as the police who don't like a private eye snooping on their patch & their residents, the movie teems with surprises with the usual gritty dialogue as well as the lowlife & of course the lady in distress.
Great Classic 40s acting
scw121721 May 2010
The most notable thing about this movie is the odd camera work, as everything is seen literally through the main actor's eye (Robert Montgomery). It does help to set the mood for the movie though. I loved the use of mirrors to show his face occasionally and how I felt like I was walking through each scene. I especially liked the scene where Robert Montgomery's character is crawling through the dust.
Great classic 40s "overdramatized" acting all around. No one in real life, of course, acts like that, but that is why it has such appeal.
It was full of great one-liners worth repeating. I caught a new (to me) old phrase "go on a toot" and had to look it up. Dialogue was fast, but that seemed to keep the pace of the movie.
On the lighter side, It is a fun movie to watch and a great way while away a couple hours! As it moved along, I dearly wanted to know how it would end.
Great classic 40s "overdramatized" acting all around. No one in real life, of course, acts like that, but that is why it has such appeal.
It was full of great one-liners worth repeating. I caught a new (to me) old phrase "go on a toot" and had to look it up. Dialogue was fast, but that seemed to keep the pace of the movie.
On the lighter side, It is a fun movie to watch and a great way while away a couple hours! As it moved along, I dearly wanted to know how it would end.
There are Marlowes Then there is Marlowe
KingCoody18 June 2005
The POV of Lady the In The Lake experiment hides the fact that Robert Montgomery wasn't up to the task of being Philip Marlowe. Oh he had the tough talk down pat, but as someone said earlier he was better in Ride The Pink Horse. In this movie he doesn't feel like Marlowe, a Marlowe who can take and give a hard punch. The first confrontation he takes a punch that results in a black eye but it leaves him unconscious! Dick Powell- the surprise Philip Marlowe of all time-and Humphery Bogart-one of the best Marlowes of all time-would've required a shot from Moose Malloy or a sap to the head by some strong arm thugs to go down from one blow like that. Perhaps it was her reaction to a camera instead of an actor that made Audrey Totter seem chilled in their "scenes" together rather than Claire Trevor's cold hearted user and Lauren Bacall's cool cynic in the earlier Marlowe incantations. And MGM was never at that time at least a studio known for hardboiled,gritty crime dramas. The Christmas carols though were a nice touch and Lloyd Nolan who should have played the lead was good as usual in his role as the crooked cop. Nolan had played a PI in some Michael Shayne Bs before the noir cycle began so he knew the mannerisms and Philip Marlowe a tarnished knight with principles would've been a perfect fit. All in all Lady In The Lake is noteworthy for it's groundbreaking experiment, the appeasement of a fading leading man's ego (not the last time either)and some vision into the world of Chandler's alter ego. George Montgomery as Philip Marlowe? Blasphemy! James Garner- a 60s laidback version suitable but also a precursor to Jim Rockford who had his Chandler moments. Roert Mitchum was Philip Marlowe both in looks and world weariness a perfect match only Bogart equals him. Mr. Montgomery would ride a pink carousel horse to better success.
Marlowe and P.I. 101
higherall726 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I remember seeing this movie as a kid. The fascinating thing was how the Private Investigator Phillip Marlowe invited you to come along and see how he plied his trade. He promised that we would see everything as he saw it right up to the payoff when the real killer is revealed. I found this such a generous and friendly way for a shamus to usher the viewer into his world that to me it was a foolproof narrative hook. I loved the way it starts all sweetness and light before the gun comes out and we're advised by Marlowe that we've got to watch 'em all the time. The first time I saw it, I felt like a child (which I was) being taken by an adult to see how he spent his day at work.
Robert Montgomery used a novel idea of having us see everything from the camera's point of view (i.e. his own as private investigator) and for the most part it works to build up anticipation for the coming dangers ahead. The reveals of Montgomery's character in reflections from the mirrors could have been more adroitly handled, as a few of them come across as a little self congratulatory, but I enjoyed so much being asked to walk a mile in the private detective's gumshoes it seemed a negligible drawback. It is one thing to watch a private eye being tough and resourceful and quick with the wisecracks when encountering suspects, but quite another to feel you are tough and resourceful and to watch Miss Fromsett played by Audrey Totter get a quip in the face to her dismay when she is expecting a smack on the kisser. The point of view gimmick worked best for me when Marlowe was getting socked or socking someone or being tailed by an ominous mysterious suspect or on the verge of discovering a dead body.
This is a less adult version of the Murder Mystery. Phillip Marlowe comes on at the beginning and then at the end like he's going to award you with a decoder ring once you've guessed correctly who the real culprit has been all along. That to me is it's primary strength, the fact that it takes the viewer in and along as a sidekick and to some extent as an equal. The plot itself is rather run of the mill, but the reaction shots of several of the characters to Marlowe's presence or snappy one-liners are vividly priceless. Leon Ames as the guilty looking book publisher Derace Kingsby and Lloyd Nolan as the brutally determined Lt. DeGarmot along with Jayne Meadows as a duplicitous Mrs. Falbrook come particularly to mind. Tom Tully as Capt. Kane has the most endearing moment when he is talking to his wife and kid in the Police Station House outside of and excepting Montgomery's and Totter's romantic banter.
A New York Times Film Critic states that Montgomery as the Director of the piece did not explore the full possibilities of this cinematic version of the first-person narrative. This may be so, but what Montgomery did actually accomplish is so vivid in my mind that I think he employed the camera as the viewpoint of the central character to useful and workmanlike effect. There is no doubt that this version of a Marlowe Adventure comes across to some as childish and barely above the level of a comic book or story in a TRUE CRIME magazine. But that's partly its charm the way I see it. It's a tale for a rainy afternoon complete with tough guys and babes and dead bodies all done with a light touch, but not to be taken without a grain of salt. The hero takes you into his confidence and then when all is said and done and the case is closed hints that you should beat it as he and his lady fair go off to fly the friendly skies. He wishes you Merry Christmas and all that stuff about Holiday cheer. Just watch that you don't get blood on your shoes on the way out and keep your hands off the bullet holes in the walls.
The last thing worthy of mentioning is how much like a radio play this whole thing comes across. I understand that it was done as a Radio Adaption with Robert Montgomery and Audrey Totter reprising their roles and I could easily see it also done as an audio book. Those who have played video games will also see this first person investigator as similar to the first person shooter they are used to manipulating with a joy stick.
That being said; good luck as you test your smarts discovering who is that Lady in the Lake!
Robert Montgomery used a novel idea of having us see everything from the camera's point of view (i.e. his own as private investigator) and for the most part it works to build up anticipation for the coming dangers ahead. The reveals of Montgomery's character in reflections from the mirrors could have been more adroitly handled, as a few of them come across as a little self congratulatory, but I enjoyed so much being asked to walk a mile in the private detective's gumshoes it seemed a negligible drawback. It is one thing to watch a private eye being tough and resourceful and quick with the wisecracks when encountering suspects, but quite another to feel you are tough and resourceful and to watch Miss Fromsett played by Audrey Totter get a quip in the face to her dismay when she is expecting a smack on the kisser. The point of view gimmick worked best for me when Marlowe was getting socked or socking someone or being tailed by an ominous mysterious suspect or on the verge of discovering a dead body.
This is a less adult version of the Murder Mystery. Phillip Marlowe comes on at the beginning and then at the end like he's going to award you with a decoder ring once you've guessed correctly who the real culprit has been all along. That to me is it's primary strength, the fact that it takes the viewer in and along as a sidekick and to some extent as an equal. The plot itself is rather run of the mill, but the reaction shots of several of the characters to Marlowe's presence or snappy one-liners are vividly priceless. Leon Ames as the guilty looking book publisher Derace Kingsby and Lloyd Nolan as the brutally determined Lt. DeGarmot along with Jayne Meadows as a duplicitous Mrs. Falbrook come particularly to mind. Tom Tully as Capt. Kane has the most endearing moment when he is talking to his wife and kid in the Police Station House outside of and excepting Montgomery's and Totter's romantic banter.
A New York Times Film Critic states that Montgomery as the Director of the piece did not explore the full possibilities of this cinematic version of the first-person narrative. This may be so, but what Montgomery did actually accomplish is so vivid in my mind that I think he employed the camera as the viewpoint of the central character to useful and workmanlike effect. There is no doubt that this version of a Marlowe Adventure comes across to some as childish and barely above the level of a comic book or story in a TRUE CRIME magazine. But that's partly its charm the way I see it. It's a tale for a rainy afternoon complete with tough guys and babes and dead bodies all done with a light touch, but not to be taken without a grain of salt. The hero takes you into his confidence and then when all is said and done and the case is closed hints that you should beat it as he and his lady fair go off to fly the friendly skies. He wishes you Merry Christmas and all that stuff about Holiday cheer. Just watch that you don't get blood on your shoes on the way out and keep your hands off the bullet holes in the walls.
The last thing worthy of mentioning is how much like a radio play this whole thing comes across. I understand that it was done as a Radio Adaption with Robert Montgomery and Audrey Totter reprising their roles and I could easily see it also done as an audio book. Those who have played video games will also see this first person investigator as similar to the first person shooter they are used to manipulating with a joy stick.
That being said; good luck as you test your smarts discovering who is that Lady in the Lake!
Philip Marlowe, P.I.
jotix1004 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Robert Montgomery's take on the Raymond Chandler must have appeared as revolutionary at the time it was released. For his second directorial job Mr. Montgomery decided to bring the Raymond Chandler's novel to the screen with and adaptation by Steve Fisher. Since he was directing, as well as playing the lead, Robert Montgomery saw a way to do both jobs in a way that left him time for more important things by being both the narrator and creating his own gimmick by having the viewer see the action as Philip Marlowe saw it. The result is a film in which actors deliver their lines to the camera, as though they were talking to the P.I.
The case which Philip Marlowe is engaged to solve, like all Raymond Chandler's fiction had a lot of twists and false expectations. The mere idea of having actors speaking their lines directly to the viewer is not exactly an exciting way to stage the action. Part of the problem is that, at times, the effect is a bit disorienting.
With this film, Mr. Montgomery got better results, than in his previous effort. Audrey Totter dominates the action, as her Adrienne Fromsett has a lot at stake in the case that brings Marlowe into solving a mystery. Mr. Montgomery is fine, as usual, whenever he decides to show his face. LLoyd Nolan, Tom Tully, Leon Amers, and especially a surprising Jayne Meadows give life to Mr. Chandler's characters.
The fine copy that showed on cable recently is a tribute to Robert Montgomery's fine career in the movies.
The case which Philip Marlowe is engaged to solve, like all Raymond Chandler's fiction had a lot of twists and false expectations. The mere idea of having actors speaking their lines directly to the viewer is not exactly an exciting way to stage the action. Part of the problem is that, at times, the effect is a bit disorienting.
With this film, Mr. Montgomery got better results, than in his previous effort. Audrey Totter dominates the action, as her Adrienne Fromsett has a lot at stake in the case that brings Marlowe into solving a mystery. Mr. Montgomery is fine, as usual, whenever he decides to show his face. LLoyd Nolan, Tom Tully, Leon Amers, and especially a surprising Jayne Meadows give life to Mr. Chandler's characters.
The fine copy that showed on cable recently is a tribute to Robert Montgomery's fine career in the movies.
Didn't Work.
rmax30482314 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Early in his movie-making career Orson Welles, playing around with the camera, did a little experiment in which the camera took the point of view of the audience. It was pretty funny. First, Welles has the camera inside a cage and tells the audience, "You are a canary. I'm trying to feed you an olive." The canary doesn't want the olive. What canary does? This evidently annoys Welles because he next puts the audience in the place of a golfer who blows his drive. Welles chides them for it. But that's nothing. Next, Welles puts the audience in the death house and takes him through his own electrocution.
It was macabre but it was also amusing because we knew the director didn't want us to take it seriously, there was no plot or story to speak of, and mainly it was short.
"Lady In The Lake," using the same first-person technique, has Robert Montgomery as Raymond Chandler's sleuth, Phillip Marlowe, and involves him in a long, labyrinthine murder story in which we are supposed to seriously identify with a character whom we cannot see -- because, after all, the character's eyes are the camera and the camera is what we're looking through.
I found it excruciating. There is the usual hard-boiled dialog but it's not up to the best of Chandler. And, throughout, that subjective camera is distracting and wrenches the head off the notion of "suspension of disbelief." In case you've forgotten you're watching a technologically difficult movie on a TV screen, there is always an occasional fist in your eye to remind you. Or a tarty blond who presses her forehead against the lens when she smooches you. Or a few solid moments of real time when a dazed Marlowe is crawling across a night-time street and we see his hands, one at a time, being placed one before the other, and that street and that quadruped crawl seems endless. Epochs could come and go. Dynasties could rise and fall. And Marlowe's hands continue their unsteady pace.
The plot? Oh, the plot. I don't know. Somebody's wife is reported missing and Marlowe is invited to investigate. Stuff happens before he winds up with Audrey Totter. Chandler wrote a lot of stories for pulp magazines in the 30s. (They paid by the word at that time.) Then he went back and cannibalized them, adopting several already-used plot, and jamming them together -- insert Flap A into Slot B -- until they bore some resemblance to a novel.
Chandler's appeal was never in his plots anyway. They were full of trickery and deception and ambiguity. The style was the thing. His prose was full of man-in-the-street word play and metaphors. "Her hair was the color of gold in old paintings." That prose is usually conveyed by a narration in the other movies that have been adapted from Chandler's work. But there's no narration here. How could there be? If we heard Robert Montgomery's voice carrying on about the color of somebody's hair, we wouldn't know whether it was what Montgomery was saying to someone else, saying to himself, or just thinking. We can't see Marlowe's face so we can only hear what he says, not read his mind.
I thought it was a noble attempt at innovation but a disaster as a feature film. Welles' little joke, I could handle. But, in all seriousness, if a director wants to give us a character's point of view, he's best off doing what Hitchcock did with the technique. Use it sparingly and only when it's important to the story.
It was macabre but it was also amusing because we knew the director didn't want us to take it seriously, there was no plot or story to speak of, and mainly it was short.
"Lady In The Lake," using the same first-person technique, has Robert Montgomery as Raymond Chandler's sleuth, Phillip Marlowe, and involves him in a long, labyrinthine murder story in which we are supposed to seriously identify with a character whom we cannot see -- because, after all, the character's eyes are the camera and the camera is what we're looking through.
I found it excruciating. There is the usual hard-boiled dialog but it's not up to the best of Chandler. And, throughout, that subjective camera is distracting and wrenches the head off the notion of "suspension of disbelief." In case you've forgotten you're watching a technologically difficult movie on a TV screen, there is always an occasional fist in your eye to remind you. Or a tarty blond who presses her forehead against the lens when she smooches you. Or a few solid moments of real time when a dazed Marlowe is crawling across a night-time street and we see his hands, one at a time, being placed one before the other, and that street and that quadruped crawl seems endless. Epochs could come and go. Dynasties could rise and fall. And Marlowe's hands continue their unsteady pace.
The plot? Oh, the plot. I don't know. Somebody's wife is reported missing and Marlowe is invited to investigate. Stuff happens before he winds up with Audrey Totter. Chandler wrote a lot of stories for pulp magazines in the 30s. (They paid by the word at that time.) Then he went back and cannibalized them, adopting several already-used plot, and jamming them together -- insert Flap A into Slot B -- until they bore some resemblance to a novel.
Chandler's appeal was never in his plots anyway. They were full of trickery and deception and ambiguity. The style was the thing. His prose was full of man-in-the-street word play and metaphors. "Her hair was the color of gold in old paintings." That prose is usually conveyed by a narration in the other movies that have been adapted from Chandler's work. But there's no narration here. How could there be? If we heard Robert Montgomery's voice carrying on about the color of somebody's hair, we wouldn't know whether it was what Montgomery was saying to someone else, saying to himself, or just thinking. We can't see Marlowe's face so we can only hear what he says, not read his mind.
I thought it was a noble attempt at innovation but a disaster as a feature film. Welles' little joke, I could handle. But, in all seriousness, if a director wants to give us a character's point of view, he's best off doing what Hitchcock did with the technique. Use it sparingly and only when it's important to the story.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
