I did something wrong…once.
So says the Swede (Burt Lancaster) as he lies in bed bereft of all hope, and calmly awaits his end. I love that scene near the beginning of the 1946 version of The Killers. It is one of the great moments of film noir and says so much about the genre – if you can even call it a genre. A good deal of its bleak power comes from the fact that it seems to run contrary to all normal human instincts. If someone were to burst into your room and breathlessly inform you that a couple of mean-looking hitmen had just rolled into town with the express aim of rubbing you out, most people would take the opportunity to make tracks fast. But Lancaster just remains prone in the shadows and delivers that line in the detached tone of a man already dead; when fate pays that last call there’s no ducking out.
Robert Siodmak’s film takes Ernest Hemingway’s short story (and it’s a very short story) and uses it merely as the jumping off point. The rest of the movie follows insurance investigator Reardon (Edmond O’Brien) as he tries to find out why the Swede ended up in a small New Jersey town waiting passively to greet a hail of bullets. The story is revealed by a succession of characters who had known the Swede, and a number of flashbacks gradually piece together all the events that brought about his demise. The Swede starts off as a medium grade fighter who, after breaking his hand and ending his career, begins the slow descent into the criminal underworld. This culminates in a payroll heist, the aftermath of which leads to the eventual downfall of just about everybody involved. The character of the Swede is basically a good-natured oaf whose desire for easy money allows him to be dazzled and duped by the grasping and predatory Kitty Collins (Ava Gardner). In a sense the whole film is as much about Kitty as anyone else; as we see her manipulations provide the catalyst for the betrayals that litter the story.
The Killers marked the screen debut of Burt Lancaster and his tough vulnerability is shown to good effect in the movie. There’s enough innocence in the Swede for you to genuinely sympathise with him and despair at the big lug’s stupidity as Kitty plays him for the ultimate sucker. Ava Gardner’s Kitty gets the classic femme fatale intro; we first see her as the Swede does – seductively clad in black satin and vamping for all she’s worth in a night club. Her character is rotten all the way through – effortlessly hooking the smitten Swede, playing the gang off against each other, and finally, tearfully begging a dying man to save her neck by damning himself. The role of Edmond O’Brien is to offer perspective and lead the viewer through the labyrinth of deceit; he’s really the linking device between all the small episodes that make up the whole. O’Brien’s own guide along the way is police lieutenant Lubinsky (Sam Levene from the Thin Man movies) and there is good support from gang members Albert Dekker, Jack Lambert and Jeff Corey. However, two of the most memorable turns come from William Conrad and Charles McGraw as Max and Al, the killers of the title. Their roles don’t extend much beyond the first ten minutes of the film, but those are ten truly magical minutes. They get some of the choicest dialogue (and deliver it perfectly) as they simultaneously mock and menace the occupants of the Brentwood lunch counter.
Robert Siodmak made some of the best noirs of the forties and I feel The Killers is his standout work. This is one of those films where plot, direction, characterization and photography all seem to come together harmoniously. Deep, dark shadows are everywhere and only the policeman’s terrace, where the ideal wife serves lemonade on a hot day, seems to rise above the murkiness. I should also say a word about the powerful score by Miklos Rozsa which is especially effective whenever Messrs Conrad and McGraw make an appearance.
The Killers is out on DVD from Criterion in R1 and from Universal in R2. I can’t comment on the presentation on the R2 disc as I haven’t seen it but bitter experience has taught that Universal’s UK releases are a hit and miss affair, with a high proportion of misses. The Criterion is everything you would expect from them with a beautiful, clean transfer to show off those deep, black shadows. As you would expect, the film comes packed with useful and informative extras – and, best of all, it is paired with Don Siegel’s 1964 remake (and Andrei Tarkovsky’s student film version). All in all, this represents the definitive presentation of what is probably my favorite film noir.
14 thoughts on “The Killers”
Nice one Livius. I heartily agree with you about Siodmak’s film and its merits. It’s been too long since I caught up with it, but I also find it to be completely representative of film noir. Lancaster is perfect and, of course, John Huston’s uncredited screenplay work doesn’t hurt.
In Siegel’s version, I think I like Lee Marvin more than I do the film, but it’s not bad either. Probably one of my favorite Criterion releases even now. I can remember pre-ordering it (when I was still in college) and it may have been only the second or third Criterion DVD I bought.
Thanks for that clydefro.
I also think that Lee Marvin is one of the best things about the ’64 film. I did enjoy it as an alternative take on the story, but it’s quite different in style and emphasis to Siodmak’s movie.
A nice review of a great film noir. You captured the essence of Lancaster’s performance.
As I have said elsewhere: In Hemingway’s text the Swede’s explanation to Nick is “I got it wrong”, but this is changed in the script to “I did something wrong – once”. These stronger words are the fulcrum of the picture. Ole’s repentance is established from the outset and his tragic redemption seared into the viewer’s sympathies even before his story unfolds.
Thanks for the comment ‘films noir’.
Much of the great dialogue in the opening segment is lifted directly from Hemingway, including the glorious “We’re killing him for a friend.” I agree that the script change you mentioned is an improvement – it turns it into one of those defining lines in noir.
Very good review. I haven’t watched the film in ages but I do remember that it was well-filmed and well acted.
I know some people have a few issues with the flashback structure in particular but I think it works really well. I’ve also heard it said that the film as a whole fails to live up to the spectacular opening (the reproduction of Hemingway’s story). However, I feel it takes Hemingway’s intriguing short story and fills in the background ideally. This remains one of my all-time favourite noirs.
Pingback: Angel Face | Riding the High Country
Pingback: The Killers in HD | Riding the High Country
Pingback: The Asphalt Jungle | Riding the High Country
The Lancaster film is a top 5 noir. I trot this one out every year or so for a watch and it never fails to deliver.
The remake, not so much. Watched it a couple times and that will do for a decade at least. LOL Good thing Marvin was in it. I’m a fan of the director but this one is not one of his better. My take on it anyway.
Must write something on the Siegel film sometime. They are two very different animals of course, made in different climates with different aims. I certainly prefer the Siodmak movie myself but I like the remake fine as well.
Pingback: Deported | Riding the High Country
I think Siodmak’s subsequent “Criss Cross” (also featuring Lancaster, Rozsa, a big heist in flashback, a femme fatale, and a betrayal or two) is a tighter, better film. It lacks the improbable triumphant weekend sleuthing of an insurance man. The death of producer Mark Hellinger may have freed Siodmak to express a more truly noir viewpoint.
I think I’d agree with that. Back when I first wrote about this movie I felt like it might have the edge, but I’m not so sure now.