The Big Clock ***1/2

No one can seem to agree what movie was the first film noir since no one can agree on what the exact definition of film noir is. It’s another of those many categories in film where you know it when you see it.

There is not even a consensus over critical elements, but in many of them you have a hapless male protagonist, a femme fatale, quick, snappy dialogue, and dark, shadowy photography with most scenes taking place at night. It’s a formula that’s effective and can make films that would otherwise only be ordinary, special.

Take for example The Big Clock: This is the story of a crime magazine editor who gets a snootful one night, wakes up the next day, and the woman he was with is dead. He doesn’t remember a thing, but all of the evidence points toward him. Right off the bat, I think they made two mistakes in this film. First, I see what they were trying to do, but they gave away the mystery too soon. I understand this was necessary to enhance Charles Laughton’s part, but it doesn’t work. Another critical aspect of film noir is that the main character cannot know more or less than the viewer. If he does, then what’s the point of the story? If he does not, then he just looks like a boob. The story has to be told through the main character’s eyes.

Speaking of the main character, that brings me to the second problem. Whenever I hear anyone say that Broderick Crawford was the actor with the least talent to win a Best Actor Oscar, I need to remind all of those people that Ray Milland took home the trophy for a lame performance in The Lost Weekend. B.C. at least gives you an honest effort as opposed to the ridiculous hystrionics that Ray employs. Picture an old silent melodrama film star cast in a modern day soap opera - that’s Ray. Milland gets exposed even more because he is working with Charles Laughton who completely outclasses him. I almost wish Laughton had Milland’s role because Charley’s part was clearly expanded to give him something to do. It’s great to see him, but he really has no impact on this movie.

Milland’s acting gets completely out of hand during the scene when he gets loaded because Raybo won the Oscar for his performance as a drunk, so ipso facto he is an expert. John Barrymore covered in bacon is less hammy, but the scene does inspire me to mix myself something green like in the movie (combinng Curacao and bar mix with vodka and gin does the trick).

Now with all of that said, you might be surprised to find out that I actually liked the movie. The main reason for that is the formula simply works. There have been many classic film noirs and even more good ones, but there has not been too many bad films made in this dark world.

Being the intelligent film student that your are, you would probably now ask how can I say that right after admitting it’s impossible to define what a noir is? Fair enough. In my mind, there are two critical elements that are necessary in a movie for me to be able to call it film noir – first, the film must be told through the eyes of the protagonist and second, the photography must be dark and filled with shadows.

For half of the film, both of these goals are accomplished, but around the midway point the secret is revealed to show the steps that the villain is taking to protect himself. It is at this point that the The Big Clock begins to fall apart because once the film moves away from the formula; the other faults (such as casting Milland) become more glaring. The film noir story-telling technique is so effective in relating the protagonist to the viewer that even a melodramatic boob like Milland can come across as compelling. Once the director and screenwriter let you in on who is behind the whole set up, then Milland come across looking like an idiot and the whole story starts to disintegrate.

If I wanted to show you an example of film noir at its best there are at least two dozen movies I could review over this one, but I picked this one for a reason. It’s a good movie and it could have been a great movie even though there is no reason for it. The casting and acting are bad and worse. The writing is good with the exception of the fatal flaws that I have already documented.

In the end, this is a movie that people still search out 60 years later even with all the mistakes that I’ve have gone over. Why? Because the formula works.