MGM was not the right studio for this film. The MGM gloss works against it. Garfield was perfect as Frank, but kittenish Turner was badly miscast as Cora. And the gimmick having Cora dressed in 'virginal' white was just plain silly.
Highly overrated, and just not that interesting.
"The flip side of fear is understanding."
I'm sure if this had been filmed at Warner Bros. or even Fox, it would have been grittier and would have taken on a whole other dimension. Turner being in white went over my head the first time I saw this (admittedly, I was 14 or so). It was likely daring or thought provoking at the time but now, yes, it does seem silly.
I don't get people saying how this film is overrated. I rarely hear anything about it except comments on how fetching Lana was. I think it's decent film. There are corny parts but I think it still holds up well as Garfield was good as was Cecil Kellaway (who is one of those great character actors who always gets overlooked). There are certainly better film noirs like Leave Her To Heaven but I still like it.
I agree with you. If Warners, Fox, or even RKO had made the film, it probably would have been grittier. The leading actress needed to be one with a more sensual persona than Lana, and one who was a better actress (and don't get me wrong, I am a Turner fan). Audrey Totter, shining briefly as Madge in this, had the right stuff, but wasn't a big enough star to carry the film at the box office.
I saw the remake with Lange and Nicholson, and it was awful. The period detail was there, along with the sexual tension between the two leads, but not much else.
The best screen adaptation of the book is still the 1942 Italian version with Massimo Girotti and Clara Calamai. Quite an exceptional film.
PS. LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN is one of my all time favorite movies!
"The flip side of fear is understanding."
I saw this last night on TCM. Lana was great to watch. Garfield seemed out of place.
shareTurner was more than just eye candy in this. In fact, I think she was pretty much perfect herself (or very close) as Cora.
Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!
I still have never seen this film...only a few scenes here and there. However, it's been on in the background now (no chance to watch it uninterrupted right now), and all I can say about it at this point is how struck I am by Lana Turner's performance, and not really in a good way. I've seen her in other films, but in this one, it's as if she's trying to sound like Marilyn Monroe...who probably hadn't even become famous yet (1946). It's strange. I just think that Turner's voice and speech pattern was too affected.
And, I am not a big fan of Marilyn Monroe, either.
I thought it was perfectly cast. Garfield made a living playing drifters. Yes, Lana Turner is way too stunning to have settled for old, homely Cecil Kellaway, especially since Nick wasn't nearly rich enough to make him attractive. But Lana Turner is so stunning looking that it's easy to believe a man would commit murder for her.
Soy 'un hijo de la playa'
I agree - the cast is simply terrific, and MGM's version hasn't, and never will be,
improved upon.
And not every film about murder has to have the cliche Warner Brothers grit. The
"gloss", as you put it, works wonderfully, giving a warm, California feel to
the diner and beach, while the dark undertones come from the story and sinister
moves the characters undertake.
One other possibility. Lana had many affairs during her lifetime and maybe Garfield was one at the time, so she may have pushed the studio bosses to cast them together. Their chemistry seemed good, at least I thought so.
shareYou may have missed Lana's backstory in this film since it is revealed quickly. She was obviously a dancer in some low class joint. You know, the type of job a girl could get back then but little pay and no future. Nick, quite the drinker, popped the question and a business in the country seemed like a chance for her to improve her lot in life. BTW, this was the stunning Lana Turner's favorite role and her acting is tremendous. She takes every scene away from Garfield.
shareAgreement
L Turner
just ruins this film
not a good film to begin with
especially for Classic Era
but big time disappointment
after all that hype
J Garfield
and the boys do good
but cannot save this mess
from bad writing
bad production
bad direction
and very bad leading lady miscast acting
very bad
very very bad
that says it all
"Highly overrated, and just not that interesting."
that says even more
and that terrible ending is even
a bigger mistake
than miscasting L Turner
[harp] 🎻 [saint] [candle] [piano]
♪  Not even Mad Scientists
get it right every time