I thought Kubrick was different - who changed the style of films for the better. But he obviously didn't start out that way. The Killing was exactly like all the other cheesy, poorly acted, extremely-old-fashioned movies of the 50s. I really just can't get into many of them. Movies started getting good from the 60s, with very few exceptions from the 50s (namely 12 Angry Men).
shareThis might sound condescending, but I'd advise against confusing the quality of a film with whatever factors prevent you from getting "into many of them" from a particular era. It's hardly uncommon -- many people have blind spots when it comes to assessing the quality of films from "the old days" (whenever those days happen to be).
Aside from the occasionally ham-fisted narration (which I suppose he felt was necessary in order to prevent chronological confusion) I'd say this hard-boiled little nugget is a pretty timeless piece of work. It might not strike the viewer as a cinematic trail blazer like 2001, but it has a lot going for it, particularly the performances from a terrific collection of character actors. And I love the dialogue.
Every decade since cinema began has been rich in cheesy, poorly acted films, with the arrival of television and then home video probably lowering the overall standard since the 1950s. It is the few films rising above the swamp of mediocrity that are worth watching.
In “The Killing”, Kubrick uses the cheesy devices of the contemporary crime film to create his own unique take on the genre. The acting is not bad but exaggerated, to conform to noir conventions. How often in real life do you meet a Russian wrestler who is also a chess master, or a little old lady who addresses airport staff through her dog?
As for narration, didn’t Kubrick often use it as a device? In “Barry Lyndon” a knowing Irish voice comments ironically on the foibles of the characters, while in “2001” we shiver at the eerie expressionless voice of the sinister computer Hal. In “The Killing” isn’t the narration used to give a documentary feel to the sometimes almost neorealist outdoor scenes, by contrast to the more artificial almost expressionist indoor scenes?
While on the surface there appears to be similarity to many films back then, there are major differences, just for example, the overtly racist moment in the movie, also there definitely appears to be signs that the older member of the gang may be homosexual and is love with Sterling Hayden's character. In most other movies back then, the "racism" was more soft, just only casting black actors as maids, butlers, etc. But in this movie, you had a scene of direct racism! That was definitely taboo back then. And even movies that may have had gay undertones weren't as "realistic" about it as it was in The Killing. In this movie, you could really feel the old man's emotions of possibly being "in love with" Johnny. And some of the acting, especially by Elisha Cook and Marie Windsor, was deeper and more complex than you'd get from other "by-the-numbers" 50s movies back then. Not to mention the dialogue is much more adult than typical movies back then.
share"Movies started getting good from the 60s, with very few exceptions from the 50s (namely 12 Angry Men)."
Wizard of Oz, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Sunset Blvd, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Metropolis, City Lights, Rashomon, Seven Samurai, The General, Double Indemnity, The Third Man, Modern Times, and I'm only scratching the surface.
On The Waterfront
Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.
Kubrick was in a box. 1950's cinema was much more restrictive in terms of censorship than it was 10 years later. It's unbelievable when you watch films in the 1950's compared to just 10-15 short years later where filmmakers were allowed to run rampant with gore, language and nudity - all in glorious color. I think that's why 1970s film seems more modern to younger generations today compared to something from the 1950s.
If you watch 'Lolita', Kubrick had to use so many innuendos and suggestions - it's hard to believe 'Lolita' wouldn't have been substantially different if Kubrick made it 5-10 years later.
I actually like the narration in 'The Killing - whether Kubrick intended it or not (I've read it was mandated by the studio because of the non-linear plot structure, which in itself was forward thinking for the time). In retrospect especially watching now, it gives the film a very cool, classic noir tone.
Movies started getting good from the 60s
Beneath the surface of this film there are some important things though. The way the timeline is shuffled around is a very difficult way to script a film, but this film did it very well without any others to learn from.
It also makes comments about how the future can never be assured, no matter how meticulous you plan. Bad fortune will trump all, and cannot be planned around.
- Nicky reverses over a horseshoe (there's some irony there, though it may be trite for todays standards).
- The suitcase keys don't fit (trivial, but fatal).
- The poodle runs at the luggage driver inexplicably, and so on...
Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.
Why do hipsters insist on using 12 Angry Men as an example of the only good film from pre-1960?
12 Angry Men is good, but it's hardly the only good film to come out of the older era. In fact, it's not even old, it's pretty new wave. Some of the greatest films of all time came from the 1910s, 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s:
Intolerance, Sherlock JR, The General, It Happened One Night, King Kong, Stagecoach, Sullivan's Travels, Stalag 17, Out of the Past, It's a Wonderful Life, Streetcar Named Desire, Night of the Hunter,
Just because they were in black and white doesn't make them poorly acted and cheesy. In fact, I sometimes prefer films from the 'production code' days, because they concentrated solely on the story and filmmaking aspect with no frills. None of these hamfisted attempts to "shock" the audience, with over the top violence, swearing, nudity, that is frankly distracting and ruined a lot of New Hollywood films for me (Chinatown, Raging Bull shining examples). With the Old Hollywood films, you can become completely immersed in the story.
~ I've been very lonely in my isolated tower of indecipherable speech.