by Allan Fish
(USA 1931 80m) DVD1
Aka. Dangerous Female
The strange History of the Little Black Bird
d Roy del Ruth w Maude Fulton, Lucien Hubbard, Brown Holmes novel Dashiell Hammett ph William Rees ed George Marks m Joseph A.Burke art Robert Haas cos Earl Luick
Ricardo Cortez (Sam Spade), Bebe Daniels (Ruth Wonderly), Dudley Digges (Caspar (sic) Gutman), Dwight Frye (Wilmer Cook), Otto Matieson (Joel Cairo), Thelma Todd (Iva Archer), Una Merkel (Effie Perine), Walter Long (Miles Archer), J.Farrell MacDonald (Det.Tom Polhaus), Robert Elliott (Det.Lt.Lundy),
The positioning here of Roy del Ruth’s original take on the Dashiell Hammett classic shouldn’t be mistaken for an act of preference. No-one could say that it was as good as the immortal Huston/Bogie version a decade later, and yet stranded on the desert island with these good companions by my side, there would be a gnawing itch at the back of my head while I was watching Bogie send Mary Astor over; an itch with a distinct smell of pre-code sex and sin. So that while I’d always take the remake over the original, only by being greedy and taking both would the itch go away.
For a time it lay almost forgotten, not helped by being known under the ho-hum title of Dangerous Female when showing on US TV. It’s true, it moves differently to the later film, and it’s also two reels shorter. The plot is the same, probably more so, and shows Sam Spade having an affair with his partner Miles Archer’s wife Ida, seeing Archer get killed on a somewhat dubious job for a mysterious young woman called Ruth Wonderly, and Sam get put into the spotlight as chief suspect by the somewhat dim-witted flatfoot Lundy. Sam and Ruth wind up having an affair in the aftermath, when it transpires her cover story was just that and her real motive was the recovery of a priceless black statuette of a Falcon, worthy millions of dollars and also the motive for murder of a group of three crooks led by the portly Caspar Gutman.
The biggest difference between this and the remake is in Sam’s character. Bogie seemed almost disinterested in women, looking like Gladys George’s Ida was about as important to him as one of his collar studs. Cortez’s Sam is a womaniser par excellence. Indeed, when we first see him he’s escorting a young woman from his office. Her face isn’t seen, but she’s adjusting her stockings after giving payment for services rendered. Sam goes back inside and rearranges the cushions on his sofa, left scattered on the floor after their sexual shenanigans. Spade here is the type to fancy anything young and in a skirt, and while he’s honourable with regard to his secretary Effie, he’s still not above eyeing her up occasionally and murmuring “yes, sir!” It’s interesting to see Cortez in the role, for while no Bogart, he’s still some sort of magnificent, a million miles from the hosts of crooked fly by night gangsters and brutes he generally played in early talkies.
The supporting cast is also quite strong, not perhaps as immortal as their later equivalents, but still worth the price of admission. Digges may be a little shallow round the girth for the fat man but still does a fine job, Merkel the sort of secretary everyone dreams of as Effie and Long a perfect dumb bloodhound of a Miles. Best of all, however, is Daniels’ Wonderly. There are no multiple aliases here, she begins and stays Ruth Wonderly, and it truly is a wondrous creation, for her femme fatale is so duplicitous and so morally ambiguous as to beggar belief. And she’s sexy as sin, whether indulging in a pre-code bath (probably the same tub Joan Blondell got into in del Ruth’s Blonde Crazy the same year), indignantly complying with a strip search but then not bothering to get dressed again afterwards, in one particularly see-through dress that left nothing to the imagination or, best of all, cheating at solitaire during an all-nighter but looking around to see no-one saw. Directed with typical swiftness by Roy Del Rush, as he was known, and wonderfully scripted, with even homosexual undertones, it’s heaven for pre-code buffs, with a fantastic final scene not in the remake. Truly a labour of love.
In order to find out additional information just follow this link to:
In order to donate just follow this link to:
“indignantly complying with a strip search but then not bothering to get dressed again afterwards, in one particularly see-through dress that left nothing to the imagination…”
What an excellent review Allan…
Fortunately, I do own this film. Unfortunately, I have never watched this film.
Which may change after reading your excellent, straight to the point, no-hold bars, review Of the film based on writer Dashiell Hammett’s book “The Maltese Falcon.”
By the way, author Eddie Muller, is using that scene that I quoted above as part [or to promote] his 10th anniversary [Of Noir-City] that is upcoming this December…[Well, the films will be announced in December Noir-City screenings take place in January, but Of course!
Cont…
Alan, I first saw this long after seeing the Huston version, but not so long after reading the novel. Cortez impressed me as coming much closer to Hammett’s description of Sam Spade as a “blonde Satan” (never mind the hair color) with facial features consisting of so many Vs, and he seemed to have the attitude right as well. The novel is less proto-noir than Huston’s movie and in many ways Del Ruth’s version is more faithful in tone — which raises the question of whether Huston’s screenplay is in fact superior to Hammett’s novel. As for overall casting, Wilmer is a wash, perfectly cast both times.
To commemorate its 10th anniversary, the NOIR CITY film festival has returned to the source. This year’s poster was created in the San Francisco apartment where Dashiell Hammett, between 1927-29, wrote Red Harvest, The Dain Curse, and The Maltese Falcon, in an inspired burst of creativity that forever changed the course of American literature and laid the groundwork for film noir.
Ms. NOIR CITY 2012, Helena Bianca Stoddard, portrays The Maltese Falcon’s delectable but duplicitous Brigid O’Shaughnessy,[and that natty dresser author Eddie Muller, as the detective Sam Spade these are my words...lol]
in a variation on the scene that Hollywood’s Production Code demanded be cut from all film versions of the book. When one of the ten $1000 bills he’s been paid to locate the Black Bird goes missing, Sam Spade demands that Brigid undress to prove she’s hasn’t stolen the money. “I’ve got to know what happened to that bill and I’m not going to be held up by anybody’s maidenly modesty.”
Hammett’s actual apartment, located at 891 Post Street, is clearly the model for Spade’s digs in the novel. It was for many years the home of NOIR CITY announcer William P. Arney, who carried the torch until local author and impresario Robert Mailer Anderson took over the lease. Under Anderson’s stewardship, and the creative hand of designer Leonardo, Hammett’s digs have been restored and preserved down to the last detail: Murphy bed, original fixtures, and all. When the fog rolls in off the ocean, and shadows streak across the ceiling, you can almost hear Sam Spade snarl, “I don’t care who loves who—I’m not going to play the sap for you.”
The actual poster will be unveiled at this year’s NOIR CITY XMAS program, December 13 at the Castro Theatre in San Francisco, as will the full schedule of films.
CREDITS: Eddie Muller (concept, slideshow); Bill Selby (art direction); David M. Allen (photography); Helena Bianca Stoddard (Brigid O’Shaughnessy); Melissa Wagner (hair and makeup); Valentine (wardrobe); Leonardo (décor); Artie Shaw (music: “Nightmare”)
Thanks for sharing!
deedee
I don’t know DeeDee. Somehow I don’t see Dashiell Hammett, Sam Spade or Bogie as self-promoters…
Preach it. I do know of one critic that does in fact think this is better than the 1941 film (Ken Hanke). I wouldn’t go that far, but the original Falcon has some interesting things in it. First, I much prefer the females in the original. Bebe Daniels actually seems sexy and very much the femme fatale, whereas to me Mary Astor seemed like somebody’s mom or something. I also prefer Thelma Todd over Gladys George (who I found kind of wasted in the remake, especially for those who recall her awesome Roaring 20s performance).
However, the remake is obviously better. Film making was simply more advanced by 1941 and the script was stronger. But the big difference is that the villains in the remake are all time level great, whereas the guys here….sorta suck. Dudley Digges was a great heel in many a Warner talkie, but he can’t help but pale in comparison to Greenstreet. And the guy playing Cairo here is a joke compared to Lorre. Frye and Cook are more or less even.
There is a scene here with Spade and a Chinese merchant that I won’t spoil, but let’s just say it turns the whole plot on its ear. Cortez is quite the pre code sleaze version of Spade. In fact it’s such a different take on the role I don’t know how to compare it to Bogey. For what it’s worth I never quite understood why the cops hated Bogart so much in the remake (he never seemed dishonest or seedy), but I can certainly see why the cops would find Spade a dubious character in this film!
Huston’s faithfulness to the book is it ‘s strength. His 1941 screenplay was the first serious attempt to bring the hard-boiled nature of Hammett’s fiction to the screen. The 1931 version may have more closely followed the story of the novel, but it did not carry the hard-boiled spirit of Spade to the screen, and the 1936 version, Satan Met a Lay, with Bette Davis played the story as broad comedy.
David Spicer wrote in his book Film Noir (2002) that Huston’s film “was much closer than previous versions to the cynical tone of Hammett’s hard-boiled novel, retaining as much of Hammett’s dialogue as possible”. William Luhr, in his book on the 1941 version says that: .“Spade does not happily juggle a plethora of women but is bitterly involved with only two… For him, sexuality is not carefree but dangerous and guilt-ridden. The mystery and the evil world it reveals dominate the mood of the movie, and this sinister atmosphere does not entirely disappear at the end. Such an atmosphere presages film noir.”
The Spade of Hammett’s novel is deeply cynical, and at the end of the novel, but not in Huston’s film, he is ready to resume his affair with Archer’s wife. Mayer and McDonnell in The Encyclopedia of Film Noir (2007), say this about the final scenes in Huston’s screenplay: “Huston replaces Hammett’s cynicism with a more romantic gesture from Spade as he tells Brigid, ‘Maybe I do [love you]‘. While Ricardo Cortez’s Spade in 1931 is more or less resigned to handing Wonderly over to the police, Huston extends this sequence by accentuating the psychological disturbance within the detective. His torment is palpable, especially when he shouts into her face that ‘I won’t [fall for you] because all of me wants to, regardless of the consequences’. While this is not an existential moment, as some claim, it does represent a significant moment in the development of film noir. Unlike the novel, where survival is all that matters to the detective, Spade’s torment in the 1941 film nearly destroys him.”
Tony D’Ambra said,”Huston’s faithfulness to the book is it ‘s strength. His 1941 screenplay was the first serious attempt to bring the hard-boiled nature of Hammett’s fiction to the screen. The 1931 version may have more closely followed the story of the novel, but it did not carry the hard-boiled spirit of Spade to the screen, and the 1936 version, Satan Met a Lady, with Bette Davis played the story as broad comedy.”
Right you are Tony, “actor Warren Williams played it for comedy, Bogie and Cortez played it for keeps.”
deedee
Tony said, “I don’t know DeeDee. Somehow I don’t see Dashiell Hammett, Sam Spade or Bogie as self-promoters”
[Laughter!] Omg!
But for a good cause my friend, but always for a good cause…always! [I think it would be self-promotion if the monies was going into his pocket, but the monies is going to finance the restoration Of classic black and white films [most importantly, it's a non-profit organization] that “we” promote even to this day. I never read or see him promoting self, but others.]
Especially, with the “dough” going toward the restoration hopefully, toward the restoration Of these classic [film noir]“Too Late For Tears,” “Cry Danger,” “Guilty Bystander,” and “Try and Get Me.” [They maybe even restoring films that we the viewing public aren't aware Of yet, with "yet" being the operative word here...]
[Note: I'm quite sure if Dashiell Hammett and Bogart were living they would approve Of what the Film Noir Foundation and the "Prez" Of the Film Noir Foundation is doing...Wholeheartedly.
[Addendum: I can just envision Bogie's facial expression after reading my comment...The same expression used as he bid actress Ingrid Bergman good-bye and tapped her chin and said, these immortal words:"Here looking at you, kid!"]
[Another Addendum: Tony, I didn't mean to promote Noir City, I was just pointing out the similarity between Noir City advertisement and the information that Allan Fish, pointed out in his review. [Let say for argument sake that I was promoting Noir City...the question that begs to be answered is: What is so wrong with promoting Noir City?]
By the way, Tony, you knew I was going to response in order to defend his…honour!]
“For what it’s worth I never quite understood why the cops hated Bogart so much in the remake (he never seemed dishonest or seedy), but I can certainly see why the cops would find Spade a dubious character in this film!”
Hello! Brianpaige…
I’m not quite sure who you are directing your comment toward, but I think that only the character that didn’t like or trust Bogie’s character Sam Spade, in Huston’s “The Maltese Falcon” was Barton Mac-Lane’s character Lt. Of Detectives Dundy.
Personally, I think that Ward Bond’s character Detective Tom Polhaus from all indication liked [Bogie's Sam Spade] well enough to always be that wedge between the friction between both Barton Mac-Lane’s character Lt. Detectives Dundy and Bogie’s Spade.
On the one hand, I could observe from his [Detectives Dundy] facial expression, roughhouse mannerism, the nasty tone in speech whenever he talked to Bogart character Sam Spade, giving one the impression immediately, that he didn’t like or trust Sam Spade at all…I would say to the very end Of the film.
On the other hand, I thought that Ward Bond’s character Detective Tom Polhaus character liked Bogie’s Spade because of their interaction at the beginning of the film [after Miles Archer's body was found on the hill...] he never tried to roughhouse, manhandle, or bully him instead, he was very inquisitive and through out the film he was never confrontational with Sam Spade as oppose to his partner Lt. Detectives Dundy.
[Who I thought was very confrontational when ever he and Sam Spade interacted together.]
In the end, I think the main reason that they didn’t trust or was hounding him [Bogie's Spade] because they though he was withholding evidence in the case Of his partner Miles Archer’s [actor Jerome Cowan] death.
“The Maltese Falcon is a 1941 Warner Bros. film based on the novel of the same name by Dashiell Hammett[1][2] and a remake of the 1931 film of the same name.[3][4] Written for the screen and directed by John Huston, the film stars Humphrey Bogart as private investigator Sam Spade; Mary Astor as his femme fatale client; Gladys George, who received third billing despite having a relatively minor role; and Peter Lorre as an effeminate criminal. The film was Huston’s directorial debut and was nominated for three Academy Awards.
The story concerns a San Francisco private detective’s dealings with three unscrupulous adventurers who compete to obtain a fabulous jewel-encrusted statuette of a falcon.
[The Maltese Falcon has been named as one of the greatest films of all time by Roger Ebert,[5] and Entertainment Weekly,[6] and was cited by Panorama du Film Noir Américain, the first major work on film noir, as the first film of that genre.”[7]
[Which Tony, have addressed so eloquently, in his excellent comment above...On a personal note: I consider film noir a style, but I'm quite sure that debate will go on...]
]
The film premiered on October 3, 1941, in New York City and was selected for inclusion in the Library of Congress’ National Film Registry in 1989.[8]
To read the Wiki article in it’s entirety just follow the link
deedee
Yeah I was referring mostly to the MacLane character. He seemed to really have it in for Spade in the remake for whatever reason, whereas in the original I think the cops were more or less right to wonder about Spade.
For what it’s worth Warren William would have made a truly awesome Sam Spade if that version had been done Pre Code. Satan Met a Lady was just off the mark in its goofy tone.
“but I can certainly see why the cops would find Spade a dubious character in this film!”
Oh! I see you are referring to the original 1931 version Of “The Maltese Falcon”…Unfortunately, I have not watched that version yet, but I plan to rectify that “oversight” hopefully, this week-end.
For what it’s worth Warren William would have made a truly awesome Sam Spade if that version had been done Pre Code. Satan Met a Lady was just off the mark in its goofy tone…”
Unfortunately, I’m not too familiar with actor Warren Williams’ films, but I’m familiar with his face and know that he appeared in the second version Of “The Maltese Falcon” which I plan to watch alone with the original version Of the film based on writer Dashiell Hammett’s book.
[I'm still trying to see if I will be able to grapple with or come to term with Hammett's Falcon as a comedy...lol]
deedee
According to author Eddie Muller “FANTASTIC NEWS! We are aiming to debut 7 brand new 35mm prints of rare film noirs at NOIR CITY X in January — and we just confirmed 3 of them! The prints are done! A trio of movies not seen on ANY screen in DECADES. Speculate away!
lol
The announcement won’t be made until December 13, at the NOIR CITY XMAS show in San Francisco.”
All I can say is…Wow! you know what makes this news so fantastic is the mere fact, that these films may one day end up on DVD or better yet in a box-set.
deedee