Director: Stanley Kubrick
Producer: James B. Harris
Screenwriters: Jim Thompson and Stanley Kubrick
Cinematographer: Lucien Ballard
Music: Gerald Fried
Studio: United Artists 1956
Main Acting: Sterling Hayden and Coleen Gray
Like most of Stanley Kubrick’s work, form and structure largely shape what makes The Killing so great. A caper/heist film molded in the same vat as John Huston’s earlier The Asphalt Jungle, it sets forth showing every last detail of the robbery from every possible angle. The movie brazenly shifts back and forth in a non-linear fashion with miniscule precision on how the robbery gets accomplished and how things inevitably fall apart. Each character is afforded a rich detailed background and given moments in the spotlight to let us know how they landed in such a precarious position. The examination of these noir characters is successful in opening up multi-dimensional nuances and making them come to life as real people with a desperate need for money and fortune. The character actors in The Killing are a who’s who of film noir. Marie Windsor (The Narrow Margin), Elisha Cook (The Maltese Falcon), Sterling Hayden (The Asphalt Jungle), Coleen Gray (Nightmare Alley) to name just a few, all seem to be cast in roles that Kubrick once saw each of them perform in other films. For most of them, they get to give one more great performance in a classic film noir before the final curtain drops on the whole movement. At times, The Killing feels like a lifetime achievement award for these thespians as they strut their stuff again one last time. The big difference is that this Kubrick film is no consolation prize, instead it breathes with vitality and greatness. In many cases, they are putting together their best performance in a picture that would contend with the greatest in which they have ever been involved.
On the surface, Sterling Hayden’s Johnny Clay is similar to his Dix Handley from The Asphalt Jungle. Hayden plays both parts with a steely straightforward toughness that gives forth an air of no-nonsense demeanor. The main difference for me is the fact that 1950 is no longer 1956. With Kiss Me Deadly the previous year, a certain irony or self-conscious streak was starting to creep into film noir. Johnny Clay has a certain cynical air to him that feels like he knows that in this type of movie he has no chance of getting away with the loot. As the final scene unfolds, Hayden’s expression at the airport is one where he is basically slyly winking at the audience, telling them, “I told you so.” He has none of the sympathy we feel for Handley. The apathy is pumped up exponentially and The Killing‘s final moments are of crushing defeat without a sense of emotional attachment. By this time, audiences knew what to expect from a noir and showing cynicism or total disconnect from the protagonist seemed probably like the most original thing Stanley Kubrick could employ.
It is interesting that even for this late-era film noir the femme fatale gets trotted out one last time and steals the show from all the hard-working men. Marie Windsor as Sherry is simply fantastic in her role as scheming wife of George Peatty (played by Elisha Cook as a sad sack ineffectual mope that he excelled at throughout his career). Sherry is George’s Sam Wilde, a stronger unstoppable force of bad mojo and greedy opportunism that the husband can’t contain or curb. In The Killing, Sherry is the superwoman of femme fatales as her duplicitous nature and drive for money not only destroys the sucker married to her, but every single male in his orbit. Her double crossing with lover Val Cannon is the primary reason the heist falls apart and leads to all the destruction. She is grade A trouble that in classic mode brings down everyone around her. She effectively kills about eight birds with one stone and a sneer. Her interesting poodle-like haircut hides a bite more compatible to a foaming-at-the-mouth pitbull.
The heist is intricate and well conveyed on screen. Lucien Ballard does a wonderful job as cinematographer. I have read that he and Kubrick clashed on the set and that Kubrick in many ways was actually responsible for how the movie looked as a finished product. Jim Thompson, who wrote The Killer Inside Of Me (which was butchered by Michael Winterbottom last year), mostly wrote the screenplay with Kubrick from the novel, Clean Break by Lionel White. As with most egomaniacs, the director tried to take all of the credit for the script and screw over his writing partner (a practice he would continue to attempt throughout his career) by only crediting Thompson with “additional dialogue.” Thompson, commissioned to adapt the White novel, was deep into alcoholism and needed the paycheck. He would eventually be asked to write Paths Of Glory (Kubrick’s followup to The Killing) and get treated with the same form of shrewd loss of public credit that was not uncommon from the great director.
As we all know, Kubrick would go on to make many classic films for the remainder of his life. Pictures like 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange and The Shining need no introduction. He is for many, the greatest American director and on a short list of perhaps the most accomplished filmmaker of any region of planet earth. The Killing is only one of at least a half dozen films of his that often get labeled as a masterpiece. This was the beginning for Kubrick and soon the end for classic film noir. Thank god they happened to meet and intersect this one time to create the brilliant The Killing.
I would also like to mention the uniqueness of Timothy Carey. Appearing in both The Killing and Paths Of Glory, the actor has the strangest screen presence I have ever seen. Fascinating and disturbing, you get the sense that he is not so much acting as just playing himself. A very odd and intoxicating blend of sinister mannerisms and goofball ticks and flinches.
Kubrick and Jim Thompson, what’s not to love? Damn, need to check this flick out then. Can’t write neo-noir if I don’t know the classic noir. Looks, great, thanks.
Yeah Richard The Killing is pretty essential stuff. Let me know what you think once you see it.
“The heist is intricate and well conveyed on screen. Lucien Ballard does a wonderful job as cinematographer. I have read that he and Kubrick clashed on the set and that Kubrick in many ways was actually responsible for how the movie looked as a finished product.”
Indeed Maurizio! It’s one of the greatest heist films of them all, and it belongs on any noir list in my view. As you intimate, it’s a perfect wedding here of Kurick’s visual artistry with his gifted cinematographer Lucien Ballard. Actually for my money, it recalls Melville’s BOB LE FLAMBEUR more than any other film, but there’s no doubt Dassin’s RIFIFI is recalled as well. The claustrophobia is the film is stifling, the action sequences first-rate, and the unique aspect here is that the participants here aren’t in it strictly for adventure or gain, but rather because they were dealt some bad cards in their own lives. The editing in the film is as deft as in any other Kubrick film, and the lack of a time sequence stucture adds to some spellbinding rhythm. No doubt of course that Tarantino was greatly influenced in this sense. Sterling Hayden is extraordinary, in what I consider to be his greatest performance. This is a great and passionate review!
Yeah Pulp Fiction does come to mind when I see The Killing as well Sam. The rhythm is indeed spellbinding throughout. The editing is a major plus. I think it still holds up and can be considered one of Kubrick’s best.
OK, OK, I don’t really adore this film as I’ve said elsewhere around here.
But this review? Yeah, it shakes the shit out of the foundation of my feelings on it (I can’t give higher praise). I’ll be seeing it again soon.
Oh, and that top screencap didn’t hurt to remind me of the goofy precursor to CLOCKWORKS masks.
Thanks for the compliment Jamie. Let me know what you think after you see it again.
Clean Break anticipates the movie’s famous non-linear structure, the main difference being that Lionel White saved the experimentation for the second half of the novel. The story’s told linear style until the day of the robbery, and then each chapter follows a character from the morning to his role in the heist. In The Killing Kubrick and Thompson tell the entire story that way. There’s also a significant difference in the ending, if I recall right, that isn’t necessarily to White’s advantage. In any event, Kubrick’s a natural for noir given its fatalism, but only to a point given his own satiric tendencies. Just the right balance is struck here.
I agree about Timothy Carey. He’s a phenom whether you encounter him in a Cassavetes or an AIP Beach Party film. You do get the feeling that he was director-proof, but would Kubrick have used him twice if that were so?
Haha Samuel, I saw Carey on some Annette Funicello picture on TCM once and thought I had taken some hallucinogens by accident. Very odd to see him in something like that. I quickly flipped through one of my Kubrick biographies this morning and the author/writer said that Carey was a terrible actor that Kubrick purposely used because of his oddness and uniqueness. Seems Timmy was director proof, but that Kubrick liked what he brought to the table in the two roles he was cast for.
I am not sure if I prefer this to “The Asphalt Jungle” or vice versa. Well I prefer Kubrick to Huston, does that help? hehe.
I do like learning about all the heist characters, and Hayden has never been better. Great review.
Solid response David. Your first sentence sounds like it came out of my own mouth lol. I initially had them ranked back to back. I decided to place Double Indemnity between to create some distance. I now realize it was to no avail and rather futile. Both films are joined to the hip forever. ***** film noir classics regardless.
Another extraordinary film noir!!! Though I would perhaps have placed Asphalt Jungle slightly higher than The Killing, but this early Kubrick film, too, is a marvelous movie – and, at the end of the day, this is your list, not mine 🙂
As you mentioned, this might be one of a half a dozen movies that Kubrick made that might be qualified as a masterpiece, what with the likes of 2001, Dr. Strangelove, Clockwork Orange et al – all among my favourite films.
The Killing thus sadly tends to get lost in his stupendous body of work, but its a great film alright. The non-linear narrative was an amazing achievement since it wasn’t as common a narrative technique then as it is now. And the ultra-fatalistic finale – boy, that gets to me each time I watch that scene!
Another great work here Maurizio.
Yes Shubs The Killing and The Asphalt Jungle are both of equal value for me. Putting one over the other was just because I was forced too. When asked in person I would argue a tie and change the subject.
For me the Kubrick masterpieces are…
The Killing
Paths Of Glory
2001
A Clockwork Orange
The Shining
and on a good day Barry Lyndon and Dr Strangelove
Well, Shining, despite the enormous fame that precedes it, didn’t impress me as much as I’d liked it to; Jack Nicholson’s acting was of course amazing as always. I was bowled over by the 1st half of Full Metal Jacket – especially the opening sequence, but the second half couldn’t (in my humble opinion) carry forward the velocity of the first half, though it was still good alright. As for Paths of Glory, unfortunately I haven’t watched it yet.
I always think of “Pulp Fiction” ‘s disarranged chronology when I watch this. And yeah, Kubrick used the clown masks again in “Clockwork.”
As for K. being the greatest American film director, he’s just a pup snapping at the rear ends of Welles, Griffith, Chaplin and Ford.
Why isn’t this ranked higher, Maurizio? If you put “Sunset Boulevard,” which is more Hollywood Gothic than noir, in your top 5, I swear I’ll eat dogshit.
Just joshing, my friend. Your countdown has been stupendous.
I’ll take Kubrick over Griffith and Ford any day of the week Marky Mark. I won’t argue Welles as I love the guy immensely. Chaplin is a master, but I do prefer Stanley by quite a bit. Unless your a Clansman or get hung up about innovation without the benefit of watchability than Griffith is for you. I understand the mark he left on cinema and no one can argue that the man was a genius, but other than Broken Blossoms and perhaps Orphans Of The Storm/Way Down East his films are a long painful bore. Sunset Boulevard is 100% film noir in my eyes and it generally gets considered as such. As for you eating dogshit….. time will tell.
I just posted a comment about “The Birth of a Nation,” which was on TV last night.
I saw that comment Marc, and I will soon be spending some hours responding to it and many other comments at the site that are crying out for responses. My apologies for falling behind.
I watched part of it before I went out for dinner Mark. Was much more entertained than when I was younger, but still can’t take the film serious other than its incredible innovations and technical achievements.
Early Kubrick… I don’t know.
It happened with this and it happened with Lolita (1962), but I find that Kubrick is one of the best directors of all time, and there’s no denying that the majority of the films he made are masterpieces, but this is not one of them.
In this and Lolita, I found some sloppiness, something that doesn’t compute when it’s compared to his later work, perfectionist and delicate in every sense of the word. These feel rushed, as if there was someone behind Kubrick, whipping him so he could finish soon.
Now, it’s not that I don’t like the film (or Lolita), they’re fun in their own way, but they feel different, it’s the strange case in which a director gets better with age.
Now this is about the second time I’ve commented in this countdown below a movie I’ve actually seen. I need to see more noir. The other one I don’t remembered, but it replaced Gaslight at last moment, so I commented on Gaslight, which I had seen.
Early Kubrick includes PATHS OF GLORY though which may be his masterpiece.
Yeah Paths Of Glory is one of his best. I don’t know where the sloppiness of The Killing resides Jaime G. I see it as Kubrick making his first grand statement after his two earlier apprentice type pictures. It seems you don’t have much experience with film noir and perhaps older movie in general (you allude to such in your comment) and may need to see more before a solid critique can be made. You may just admire later Kubrick more, which is fine, as there are many who feel the opposite. I do agree with your overall opinion on Lolita, though it has less to do with sloppiness and more to do with censorship issues. Sloppy Kubrick is a clearly artificial New York City in Eyes Wide Shut which hurts my suspension of disbelief. I’m not buying the “its a dream scenario” either. The old man had started to slip at that point. Sometimes you need to do some real location shoots to New Yawk and leave the confines of England behind for a bit… not to mention that failing to realizing Kidman is stinking up the joint with her awful stoner acting is shocking.
Agreed Maurizio you can look at that claim of sloppiness in two ways:
1.) the supremely crafted editing of THE KILLING makes the ‘sloppiness’ claim irrefutably false, or
2.) you concede that is somehow is sloppy, making it a sort of anomaly in Kubrick’s otherwise tightass canon. Thus, it could be argued it’s the most ‘human’ of his films. Which to someone like me means it could be his best…
I haven’t seen Paths of Glory, but I can say that from Dr. Strangelove onwards, it’s pure genius, being that one my 2nd favorite and my 10th favorite of all time.
I don’t know what’s in it, but it felt rushed, maybe I’m accostumed to slower paces in his films (which Lolita did have, but somewhat failed).
And Eyes Wide Shut is a masterpiece as well, maybe I’m not american and I’ve never been to New York, but I loved every second of that film.
And I didn’t allude to any inexperience of older films. Not consciously, but I can say I haven’t seen all, but I’m happy with what I’ve seen (not in a conformist way, just in a ‘No one is rushing me’ way).
It did remind me of Reservoir Dogs, now you just can predict which I liked more.
Still, this is a solid ****.
It’s OK Jaime, I feel LOLITA is pretty much crap (Lyne’s version is quite superior), and EYES WIDE SHUT to be pretty much an oppressive masterpiece. It being shot in fake NY is one of it subtle points IMHO, and if it isn’t it makes for a better film.
Jaime not being from New York probably helps. I assume that you have been pot free for life as well, since only a straight edged (ahh Minor Threat reference) person can claim Kidman was in any way on point during her abomination of a reefer scene. My comment on seeing old films was your alluding that you have not watched many film noirs on the countdown. They are like …insert any addictive habit or hobby here…. and once you see a few in a row you will most likely be hooked forever. Then you may return to The Killing and scream Hallelujah from some rooftop after its noir greatness washes over you.
Oh, Jamie U., must I scrape the scales from your eyes, too. lol
“Lolita” is a beautiful film and while it’s not the novel (how could it be since Nabokov’s writing is full of wordplay, puns, anagrams, etc.?), but Kubrick has substituted a fine satiric sense, with Mason the perfect Humbert (his scene in the bathtub is beyond praise) and Sellers is brilliant as Quilty. Sue Lyon’s a bit long in the tooth for the nymphet role, but I never said “Lolita” was perfect. For me, it’s Kubrick’s best work after “Strangelove”. Another minority opinion here, I realize.
And I’m sure Roca will have me eating dogshit before his noir countdown is over.
Mark what’s your take on Lyne’s version? I think it’s quite a bit better.
I recall discussing it once here in a thread I’ll see if I can find it for you to read since some loose thoughts are contained therein.
here it is, the conversation is quick but a bit is there about LOLITA.
Not sure why I was not in on that discussion Jamie, but while I love Kubrick I don’t consider all his films to be perfect. Lolita is one of my least favorite actually. I also dislike Spartacus and The Killers Kiss. Barry Lyndon and Eyes Wide Shut are good but not great for me. Lyne’s Lolita I saw a while ago and remained unimpressed. Perhaps I need to see it again through refreshed eyes before I can judge it properly.
Our western talk yesterday has made me put some recent stuff (I don’t own) on the genre in my Netflix. Open Range, Tombstone, The Long Riders, and Appaloosa all have been added. I must admit to being disappointed by Dead Man. Since Unforgiven…. Assassination of J.J.B.T.C.R.F., The Proposition, and True Grit remain my three favs. Meek’s Cutoff is an eager film I plan on seeing soon. Wrong thread to post this but whatever.
No worries.
I also thought about it some more (westerns I mean). Of the ones you list I wouldn’t say any are great, though TOMBSTONE is probably the best popcorn Western I’ve ever seen (unless RIO BRAVO is contained herein). Other ‘great ones’ post-UNFORGIVEN are NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (I consider this a Western), LONE STAR, I liked Miike’s ‘Sukiyaki Western: Django’ but then I’m a pretty big fan of his, ‘Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee’ is DROP DEAD brilliant, and ‘The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada’ is the most underrated Western by far post-UNFORGIVEN.
Oh, and if you can find it seen THE TRACKER asap. Rolf De Heer is my favorite contemporary director that no one knows about (I highlighted his ALEXANDRA’S PROJECT during the Horror countdown). You love the feel of THE PROPOSITION, you’ll adore this one.
I have never seen Open Range and The Long Riders. I remember not being super impressed by Appoloosa or Tombstone the one time I watched them, but would like to give both a second go. No Country is indeed great, but for me it is more noir than western though I can see the connection. Lone Star and Three Burials I like but not love. Django I am not a fan of. The Tracker will be further investigated as I have not seen it.
Maurizio Roca said,”Like most of Stanley Kubrick’s work, form and structure largely shape what makes The Killing so great. A caper/heist film molded in the same vat as John Huston’s earlier The Asphalt Jungle, it sets forth showing every last detail of the robbery from every possible angle…”
Hi! Maurizio Roca…
What another well-written and very detailed review about a film that I would place in the same category as Huston’s Asphalt Jungle. Great description Of each character and their (almost) last hoorah!
This film is loaded with several great quote…I really like the back and forth banter between actor Elisha Cook Jr. and actress Marie Windsor…
Such as:
George Peatty: “I have been kinda sick today. I keep getting pains in my stomach.
Sherry Peatty: Maybe you got a hole in it, George do you suppose you have?
George Peatty: A hole in it? How would I get a hole in my stomach?
Sherry Peatty: How would you get one in your head? Fix me a drink George, I think I’am developing some pains myself.”
Classic Stuff!
Another classic line from The Killing between Sterling Haydn and Marie Windsor…
This Is One Of My favorite quote from the film:
Sherry Peatty:”You don’t understand me Johnny, you don’t know me very well. (As she flutter her eyelashes…)
Haydn: I know you like a book, you’re a no good little tramp you’d sell out your own mother for a piece of fudge.”
Maurizio Roca said,”As the final scene unfolds, Hayden’s expression at the airport is one where he is basically slyly winking at the audience, telling them, “I told you so.” He has none of the sympathy we feel for Handley. The apathy is pumped up exponentially and The Killing‘s final moments are of crushing defeat without a sense of emotional attachment…”
[SPOILER ALERT! FOR THOSE WHO NEVER WATCHED THE FILM “THE KILLING…”]
Thanks, for sharing!
DeeDee 😉
O.M.G. Dee Dee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is an all-time great submission at this site. You’ve done it all here and then some. Great, great stuff!!!!
I second Sam’s assessment Dee Dee. Great comment!
Windsor sure does stand out. I love that innocent poodle haircut she sports. It hides her vicious nature on the surface quite well.
Hi! Sam Juliano and Maurizio Roca…
Sam Juliano said,”This is an all-time great submission at this site. You’ve done it all here and then some. Great, great stuff!!!!”
Maurizio Roca said,”I second Sam’s assessment Dee Dee. Great comment!”
Sam Juliano and Maurizio Roca…
Thank-you, for your very kind words…
Maurizio Roca said,”Windsor sure does stand out. I love that innocent poodle haircut she sports. It hides her vicious nature on the surface quite well…”
(Laughter!) Maurizio, I inserted a picture Of actress Marie Windsor in order for readers, to take a look at her “infamous” haircut that you, referred to in your post and comment too!
[Side Note: Actress Marie Windsor, was very tall…if you notice in some Of her films she was always “shot” in a reclining position. (Because she towered over her leading men in some scenes…and instances.)
She was also featured in author [Eddie] Muller’s interesting book “Dark City Dames” being that she was one Of the original Dark City Dames.]
DeeDee 😉