MovieChat Forums > The Strange Love of Martha Ivers (1946) Discussion > Stunner, But There Were Two Films in One

Stunner, But There Were Two Films in One

posted 11 years ago by hilaryjrp
17 replies | jump to latest

Absolutely did not expect the way it ended. The tension was the highest of any Stanwyck film ever, and you knew something bad was going to happen--I just didn't expect that. It's interesting the way the love between Walter and Martha had to be inferred; it definitely was there, it definitely was sincere. But you got the sense (at least I did) that they would have made fantastic friends and business partners, rather than lovers.

The script is so flawless, and Heflin and Scott so excellent, that you don't realize until--well, it's all over that this really was two films in one. I'm not sure if Martha and Walter really were insane after all, and maybe that's the point, that Sam wasn't sure either.

A very very very odd movie. Brilliant.

[–] necoleman 11 years ago

I am formerly known as HillieBoliday.....Member since May 2006:

Interesting observation about two movies in one. Can you distinguish what you feel the differences are for it to be two in one?

It's interesting to know that this was Kirk Douglas' first movie role. He did a wonderful job, and I really felt his anxiety and pain from having accused an innocent man of murder.

"Ooo....I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"

[–] hilaryjrp 11 years ago

Interesting that you should ask. I searched through this board and found some negative reviews, one that claimed it was because the film seemed as if it were two-in-one that made the reviewer dislike it. A person who responded to that review said that film noir is "known for having double plots." I know a great deal about the genre and had never heard this claim before, so I spent considerable time online trying to find a source for this particular distinguishing characteristic but found none.

Of course I understand that in the end, the hero is Sam. That the film should have the title it does suggests that the heroine (or, in poor Barbara's case, anti-heroine ) will be Martha. Walter disappears for the entire last act; as a first-time viewer, I totally expected some sort of ambush at the lover's lane.

Although Lizabeth Scott steals the show from Stanwyck (can't believe I'm saying that), her character diverted time away from whatever development of the Martha/Walter marriage there might have been. Not only that, but Sam's sudden segue from morally ambiguous war hero veteran to blackmailer would have had more of an impact. I have no problem at all with the movie and think that ultimately, it's great as it is; the writer may have realized that no character development of two adolescents frozen-in-time was possible. However, for as much as I loved Lizabeth Scott, she distracted from the tragedy as well as from the noir.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

Walter was in love with Martha, but I didn't get the feeling that she loved him in return. She seemed to be obsessed with Sam, but she didn't love Sam, either. I think she only loved herself.

The film is absolutely brilliant.

~~
JimHutton (1934-79) & ElleryQueen

[–] hilaryjrp 10 years ago

The film is absolutely brilliant.

It is; and what I find as remarkable as I find it sad is that this should have been Kirk Douglas' first leading role. As a child I associated him with sandal-and-sword pictures; I disliked him. But "Martha Ivers!"

The way you know a film or television episode is brilliant is if you can't forget it; and I can remember the plot, almost all of the set-pieces, and particularly the--phew!--climax, as if I saw the film yesterday.

Thank you, Hulu. (Ironic that I should see this for free on a service I don't pay for either per film/episode or per monthly access fee.)

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

I admit that I haven't seen him in many films other than this one. When I have, I found that his work wasn't nearly as memorable as what he did here.

~~
JimHutton (1934-79) & ElleryQueen

[–] hilaryjrp 10 years ago

The plot and script are to thank for that. This film is so unique--so unique--it would be impossible to forget any of its stars. It's as unique as "Chinatown" or "Vertigo." I mean, how many films with this plot can you think of?

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

That's true. Some noirs have similar plots to each other, but the plot of this film really does stick out in my mind. I love the gothic feel to it, too.

One other good thing about this film: I like how they start out with the scenes when the characters were still teens. Somehow, I find that starting out like that helps to strengthen the story in some cases. I've seen that in some mysteries, too.

~~
JimHutton (1934-79) & ElleryQueen

[–] boxerrebellion 10 years ago

Hello, Mrs. Queen. Funny, you must be as addicted to TCM as I; I run across your posts often. I too am a die-hard Queen fan, first the books, then the TV show. I was a teen when it was on and think I had a bit of a crush on Ellery. Jim Hutton IS Ellery for me, I remember when the show started, he was exactly as I had pictured him (in my Mom's 60s/70s paperbacks with the sexy Bond type women on the covers; always thought that was odd considering the 40s style of the stories).

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

Hello! 

I don't have TCM anymore, but I do own a handful of DVDs and I watch some movies on youtube. I have a DVD copy of The Strange Love of Martha Ivers.

As for your other comments: I have read some of the books as well, and I've seen the 1930s and 1940s movie adaptations as well. There are also some EQ radio plays on archive.org, including some interesting EQ minute mysteries. There is even a half hour radio play called The Strange Love of Martha Ivers, which is a very condensed version of this film.

Maybe I'll bump into you on some other board.  Maybe we could have a long chat about Ellery on the EQ board or something. He was very, very hot....by far the most attractive of all the actors who played Ellery.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

[–] marhefka 10 years ago

@hilaryjrp.

The ending also threw me. At first, I predicted that Sam would call the police when Walter was laying on the floor. But, he wasn't dead like I had thought.

Later, I realized that Martha had to die because this was a "noir." But, I was shocked when Walter killed her. Or, did he because she actually pulled the trigger.

Still more surprises when Walter killed himself.

My final surprise was when Sam just walked away from the whole scene. After all, couldn't someone still be alive?

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

I think that Sam just had enough of both of them, so he just walked away from the house. He might have called the police from a pay phone somewhere. That would have been safer than calling from the house, because if he was found in the house, he could be considered a suspect or accomplice or something. If he called from a pay phone, he could just say that he was walking past and that he heard the shots. He wouldn't get in trouble.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

[–] hilaryjrp 10 years ago

I agree with this, but I suppose there exist harder viewers who see Sam as less moral than I (and apparently you) think he was. The film leads us to assume that Martha is a moral person. The back-story of the three kids as children shows us she is abused, and it offends our moral sense to even consider that an abused child will not grow up to be good...in movie-land.

So we infer goodness about Martha from the start, which in turns sets us up to perceive her marriage to Walter as the result only of the hateful pressure Walter's father puts on her. When we see that Martha just might not be as much a victim in this marriage as she seems early on, we nevertheless continue to perceive her as a victim due to previous victimization.

I personally believe it's only when Sam--of all people, Sam--returns to her and offers her the real world (not the semi-Satanic world Martha ogles far below the dark lovers' lane) that her real moral nature emerges. Yes, she was a victim as a child, ten times over. Yes, her vicious aunt more than deserved what came to her. But Sam is a stand-in for us, the viewer, and when we see the twisted fate Martha's complacency and perversion choose, there is nothing to do but...walk away.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

None of the characters in the film were moral. Martha certainly wasn't.

Sam might not have been a killer (except in self-defense), but he was a gambler and a user.

The aunt was certainly cruel. Walter's father was just an older and more educated version of Sam. Walter came across as a whiny little sissy, but underneath it all, he was quite the evil and sneaky little jerk.

Martha appeared to be following in her aunt's footsteps.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

[–] hilaryjrp 10 years ago

Just caught this before I go back to work!

I don't agree that Sam is like Walter's father. Walter's father is evil. He let an innocent man hang for a crime he didn't commit. The whole point of Sam's return is that, yes, he is an indifferent crumb when he rolls into town--but Martha changes him. Such change wouldn't be possible for a man totally given over to wicked selfishness and ambition, as Walter's father was.

Martha changes him, but he certainly does not change Martha.

This is a very bleak film, and thank God for Van Heflin and Ms. Scott.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 10 years ago

Okay, aside from letting an innocent man hang, Walter's father seemed to be an older version of Sam. Okay, so Sam didn't do such a thing, but he seems like the kind that might have if it would have worked to his advantage.

Terrific film, filled with a lot of unlikable characters. It sure made for some excellent noir!

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

[–] greenbudgie 9 years ago

Normally I don't like films of this length. A lot of the time, I wanted to see what Walter and Martha were up to. Rather than Sam and his girlfriend. But the finale with Walter and Martha is so good and unexpected, that I'm glad that I was made to wait for it by watching the other pair. And I must say that all four leads were excellent.

I agree that Walter and Martha were ideal business partners. They were in love too, I feel. How much of this love was caused by the years of shared guilt feeling that they had to burn up together, I'm not sure. But a very interesting relationship. And a very noir relationship too.

[–] hilaryjrp 9 years ago

I agree that Walter and Martha were ideal business partners. They were in love too, I feel. How much of this love was caused by the years of shared guilt feeling that they had to burn up together, I'm not sure. But a very interesting relationship. And a very noir relationship too.

Very good way of expressing the relationship. Walter and Martha were in love. They were also evil, so each time either of them realized it, they had to fVck it up by hurting the other. As you say, very noir.