The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
133 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Slightly Softened from Cain's 1930's Novel but Still Holds Its Own as a Noir Classic
classicalsteve27 April 2008
The original book published in 1934 by James M. Cain (author of "Double Indemnity") was a gritty unsentimental story of a low-class drifter and bum, Frank, who is taken in by a German immigrant, Nick, who owns a roadside café and his beautiful wife, Cora, who turns out to be much darker on the inside than the facade of her pure white skin. Cora, we learn, is dissatisfied with her life married to this older immigrant and the drifter becomes her catalyst to change her situation. The movie adaption of twelve years later is a slightly sentimentalized version of Cain's noir classic. That said, the movie still holds its own as a noir tale of betrayal and murder, but doesn't quite have the edge of Billy Wilder's adaption of "Double Indemnity".

Still, the movie works very well under its own terms, particularly because of the outstanding chemistry between the leads John Garfield and Lana Turner. In fact, the star of the show is really Turner who turns in a tour-de-force performance. Turner continually shows us the many faces of her character Cora Smith who is sometimes weak and vulnerable and other times resolute and stubborn, even unsympathetic, and yet oozing with unrealized sexuality. We gather that Cora is no ordinary woman, or at least not the soft sentimental Doris Day type. More like a cross between Eva Peron and Madonna. Sometimes hard and mean and other times sweet and feminine, she is the complex epitome of the Cain femme fatale of this era. She remains enigmatic from beginning to end which is I think what Cain would have wanted. Garfield, in probably the role of his career, is equally superb, at first rejecting the murder scheme and then later embracing it. Although lacking the enigmatic complexity of Cora, Frank is equally ambiguous and ambivalent to his life choices, and Garfield well conveys the multi-sidedness of Frank.

The story concerns a young man looking for work, finds a roadside café up a few hours north of Los Angeles, probably up the 101 freeway, and becomes the hired help. He is employed by Nick, a simple German-stock older-than-middle-age man, who simply wants to make enough money to be comfortable and occasionally play his little guitar. His wife, Cora, is about 40 years younger and wants to make something of their café instead of just eking out a meager living. But fleeing with Nick and beginning from ground zero is not what she wants. She would like to have the café and make something of it. And when the hired help Frank falls for her, she realizes he is the perfect means to get both of them out of their hellish existence.

A fine example of 1940's film noir with many of the stylistic considerations, such as the camera panning from feet-to-face when we first meet the woman Cora, the many unexpected twists and turns, and of course the dark desires of the leads. Every series of scenes leaves you guessing as to what will happen next. A couple of scenes were contrived that were superfluous to the book. Unfortunately, the film suffers slightly because of the stringent ethics codes that started to be imposed on films of that time. Probably film noir offerings suffered more than most because of their probing the darker sides of human nature. However, Postman still ranks as classic film noir.
40 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
What a classic
Kingslaay2 January 2022
A great black and white film from start to finish. The twists and turns keeps you engaged. Just when you thought you had the film figured out, it surprises you. Enjoyable and entertaining. They don't make movies like this anymore.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
She's funny that way....
jotix1009 June 2006
Those movie audiences who think that explicit sexual scenes shown in movies these days make a film sexy, should take a look at this 1946 steamy MGM picture. "The Postman Always Ring Twice" made an impact on the way movies looked at the time, when the censure of the Hays Code dominated what could be shown on the screen for general consumption.

James M. Cain's novel of the same title was adapted by Harry Ruskin and Niven Busch, two writers that clearly caught all the nuances of the book. Ty Garnett direction made this film a surprise and a star out of the gorgeous Lana Turner, who was at the height of her beauty when the movie was shot. The great camera work of Sidney Wagner made this movie a classic for its sensual look it focused on its female star.

Nick, the older owner of the roadside diner, has married Cora, a woman much too young for him. Cora, who clearly has found her meal ticket, is happy in the way her life has changed. When Frank Chambers arrive at the diner, Cora realizes the mistake she made in marrying Nick; Frank stands in sharp contrast with Nick. Cora's sexual needs awaken when Frank pays attention to her. As lovers, we realize they are doomed.

Because both Cora and Frank are amateurs, they botch the well laid plans they have for getting rid of Nick. Everything conspires against them because it's too clear what they have done. They will not be able to get away with the crime, or a life together because unknown to them everyone had seen through them from the beginning.

Lana Turner, whose whole wardrobe is white, made a great Cora. She is heartless, but she is all sexual whenever she is around Frank. This was perhaps was one of the best things Ms. Turner did in the movies. John Garfield, who is so sure of himself, at the start, loses all his will because Cora smolders him and he doesn't think rationally. Cecil Kellaway is good as the older Nick. Leon Ames, Hume Cronyn are seen in small roles.

"The Postman Always Ring Twice" is a classic of this genre thanks to Ty Garnett's direction and a brilliant appearance by an inspired Lana Turner.
48 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Atmospheric story of lust, desire and murder
bob the moo18 February 2002
Drifter Frank Chambers applies for a job at a road side café belonging to Nick Smith, only to fall under the spell of Nick's wife Cora. He falls into desire which leads to deceit and eventually murder. Too late he falls in love but by then things have gone too far. He tells his story to us with the hindsight of a condemned man.

A classic bit of noir light. Based on Cain's sexual novel this underplays the explicit references but turns the subtle stuff way up - the film opens with a `Man Wanted' sign, while Cora is so well played that there's no doubt what she's offering. Without the explicit sex of the remake this story is a lot freer to be interesting rather than explicit. The court case and the mistrust between the lovers is as good as the early desire giving rise to murder.

Lana Turner is excellent as the femme fatale, she is smouldering and very, very desirable. Garfield is also excellent as the man trapped in her web. The two are the very center of the film and are both superb. If the film has any weakness then it may be that modern audiences need more than very subtle stuff, but that's probably our problem rather than the film's.

Overall this is very enjoyable, it has a great sense of mood and builds well to the inevitable conclusion.
71 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Totally Noir
fsquared-7852621 April 2020
If you are a fan of Film Noir, this is a must see. Beginning to end the noir penchant for uneasiness is celebrated and, surprisingly, Hume Cronyn gives a stellar performance as an amoral lawyer.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Very oddly structured movie
Itchload23 January 2003
I was not expecting a classic film noir along the lines of "Double Indemnity" or "Out of the Past" when I put this movie in, and for awhile, I thought I might have been wrong. Maybe the cover was too cheesy, I'm not sure, but I didn't have extra high hopes for this movie. Then my mood brightened when it actually started to become very entertaining. I wasn't being blown away, but I did start to enjoy the film noir 101 plot. The reviewer who noted MGM's dramatic lighting of Turner is right, it's ridiculous, but it does come with the territory I guess. Other than that, things seemed to be moving in place very smoothly.

Then an odd thing happened. The movie refused to end. It wasn't that the pace was slow, it moved speedily. Something was always happening, and there was plenty of suspense/overblown MGM music blaring out of the speakers at any given moment. But the plot was way too top-heavy. They get caught doing the murder. Okay, time for trial, some final irony, then the movie's over. But it's not! It just kept going. New subplots turned up, bribes, plot twists, double crosses, it just kept happening and happening. It was too much. I was literally standing up sweating by the final scene, wanting it to end so much. The problem was, nothing of any substance was given to the events that kept happening. It was like the screenwriters noted "okay, this happened in the book, but we have to trim it a bit, so we'll make a small 2 minute scene including it in the movie" and suddenly the movie is full of these large occurrences given very brief sketched out screen time. Garfield runs off for a weekend in Tijuana with some random women? What just happened? Things just grew too implausible. I realize that complaining the movie went on too long and claiming that not enough screen time was given to all the events in the second half is hypocritical, but there must have been ways to flesh things out. I haven't read the book, but I suspect it's much better than the movie, just based on other reviewer's comments.

During the final embarassing "what does God make of all this" speech to the priest (hey, I thought film noirs where supposed to be existential!), I happened to look at the video case and glance at the title. Realizing it hadn't been referenced in the movie yet I stared at the screen and muttered "out with it" and in return got some over-reaching ramblings concerning how "he always rings twice, always rings twice" ext. Yikes.

I have to say though, the movie had some very good irony and employed a load of classic film noir tricks (the final outcome must have influenced the Coen Brothers with "The Man Who Wasn't There"), but I can't help believing the book must have been a lot better. I'd chalk this one up for noir completists and Golden Age MGM enthusiasts only.
75 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Superior film noir
LDRose29 July 2004
Lana Turner and John Garfield generate sparks in this excellent crime thriller. Turner plays Cora Smith, a restless young waitress married to a much-older man who runs the roadside diner. Garfield plays Frank Chambers, a drifter who turns up at the diner and is captivated by Cora. Cecil Kellaway is great as Cora's naive husband Nick, whose main concern is the diner. The fact that it is filmed in black and white helps create the suspenseful atmosphere and highlight Cora's striking cream outfits. This is far superior to the 1981 remake, for although it was made under a strict production code, it smolders with desire and tension and is an unforgettable classic.
56 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Weak-ish Noir
watkins396 May 2006
This film has all the ingredients of classic noir without actually being a very good movie.

The biggest problem I had with the film was that the characters are an unconvincing blend of naivety and cunning. One minute they're suckered by an old man running a burger bar, the next they're foiling a blackmail plot hatched by corrupt lawmen and wielding guns like they're hardened gangsters.

The ending is equally unconvincing, with the protagonist happily latching onto his death sentence as some kind of salvation that gives him moral certainty in the amoral noir world he's been floundering in. It's as if this is a noir made by people who were anti-noir.

Noir will always involve a clash between innocence and experience but it's not convincingly handled here. It isn't the first noir I'd make that complaint against, either - things like SHadow of a Doubt and Night of the Hunter have a similar unreal atmosphere.

In my opinion the best noir is both believable and hellish; like The Third Man, Double Indemnity, Notorious or Chinatown.
47 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A solid murder mystery with star power
NewEnglandPat7 February 2004
Lana Turner and John Garfield are great in this classic tale of deception and murder and its hard to imagine that another actress, save Barbara Stanwyck or Joan Crawford, could have played the role of the wayward wife as well as did Turner. Cecil Kellaway has a thankless role and it's hard to believe that he was as clueless as he was about the fires burning around him as Turner and Garfield carry on their affair. Kellaway seems more preoccupied with pinching pennies than noticing how his young, attractive wife is bursting with sexual energy. Turner is as beautiful as ever but she and Kellaway don't make a credible married couple. Hume Cronyn is good as the smug attorney but the courtroom drama is a bit of a letdown. Garfield brings a restless energy to his role and matches Turner's smoldering sexuality.
26 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Excellent, if watered-down version of James M. Cain's steamy novel
moonspinner553 February 2008
Hard-bitten drifter comes upon a diner run by a friendly, middle-aged coot and his glamorous, sinister-eyed spouse; soon, the dangerous femme fatale is conspiring with the handsome stranger to bump off her husband. Glossy but still potent film noir was--due to the times--a softened variation on James M. Cain's bestseller, yet is helped by the exciting star-performances from John Garfield and Lana Turner. Occasionally overwrought, but tightly-wound, absorbing and enjoyable. Remade in 1981 as an R-rated noir featuring Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange in the leads, and who proved to be a surprisingly dull screen duo. Stick with the taut original. *** from ****
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
books v. movies
zygimantas7 May 2005
Funny, the comment there about the title - it's the strangest part of the adaptation because at least it IS mentioned in the film, but nowhere in the book. It's an absolute mystery to me how this title made it through intact when great titles like "Farewell My Lovely" were dumbed down to "Murder My Sweet" for the sake of Hollywood audiences. James M. Cain originally submitted the story to Alfred Knopf with the title "BBQ" (which makes sense in context) and was asked to change it; he considered "Black Puma" and "The Devil's Checkbook" before settling on the mystifying title by which the novel and both adaptations are well known.

Anyway, I like the film and think it's a great straight adaptation of the book, though the dialogue in the beginning seems a bit hurried (for the sake of the quick establishment of character and story) - the book does a better job of painting the hobo/gypsy lifestyle Frank embraces, and I think it's pretty central to the eventual conflict between him and Cora, so it's a shame it wasn't better depicted in the film.

Lana Turner is good, but probably just a bit mis-cast - she's a little too "glamorous" for Cora, which is also established immediately in the famous opening shot of her legs and lipstick (in contrast to the book, where she was introduced in an apron, working hard for the business like she always says she wants to.)

One note for femme-fatale buffs: Cora and Nick in the film are surnamed "Smith," which in the book was Cora's maiden name. (Nick in the book was Greek - "Papadakis") Is this a statement on marriage in general, or perhaps a desire to eliminate the racial implications in what happens? Seems unlikely; it is what it is, for smarter people than me to unravel.

"So long mister, thanks for the ride!"
23 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Noir Noir Noir
gavin694216 November 2015
A married woman and a drifter fall in love, then plot to murder her husband... but even once the deed is done, they must live with the consequences of their actions.

Surprisingly, this version was actually the third filming of The Postman Always Rings Twice, but the first under the novel's original title and the first in English. Previously, the novel had been filmed as Le Dernier Tournant (The Last Turning) in France in 1939, and as Ossessione (Obsession) in Italy in 1943.

Bosley Crowther gave the film a positive review and lauded the acting and direction of film, writing, "Too much cannot be said for the principals. Mr. Garfield reflects to the life the crude and confused young hobo who stumbles aimlessly into a fatal trap. And Miss Turner is remarkably effective as the cheap and uncertain blonde who has a pathetic ambition to 'be somebody' and a pitiful notion that she can realize it through crime." Despite the multiple versions, this is probably the "definitive" one. It certainly is the one that went on to be influential. I even recall such an unlikely place as "Sesame Street" making a parody of it, which is bizarre considering this was probably not a movie that appealed to kids.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Garfield and Turner are terrific...steamy version of the James M. Cain novel is still the best...
Doylenf16 April 2001
Someone previously questioned the meaning of the title. In my view, it refers to the double twist imposed on the story's ending by the author--especially once the legal wrangling between opposing lawyers (near the conclusion) is exposed. Then, finally, after winning a victory of sorts, the unexpected happens--thus, the irony of the title. Anyway, this is as good as it gets--you won't find a better version of this story than this 1946 film. I'm always amused to read that someone on these posts "never looks at black-and-white films", a total putdown of all the great classics that came before color was even possible. How dumb can you get? For fans of complex, hard-bitten murder yarns with gritty background and suspense that tightens slowly like a knot, this is for you. Watch as the two leads get more and more entangled in their own web of deception and lies. Turner established herself as a strong actress who could play a role to the hilt when she identified with it. Garfield, of course, was always at his best in tough guy roles. Watch for my article on Lana Turner in an upcoming issue of FILMS OF THE GOLDEN AGE--much of the inspiration for it came from this particular film noir.
19 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Those Late John Garfield Blues
Hitchcoc17 December 2016
One of the greatest of the Film Noir classics. This is the story of an unhappy woman who enlists the aid of a drifter to kill her husband. It begins with what appears to be a mere flirtation and escalates to a torrid love affair. Lana Turner is sumptuous, and John Garfield has that masculine edge, a dark man, somewhat mysterious, and truly clueless as he gets into more and more trouble. The two begin a sophisticated plot to do in her old man. He can't believe his good fortune to have this beautiful woman want him. Oh well. The best laid plans. The desolation of the place and the use of fine black and white cinematography enhance the danger.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Great
aratron-0039114 October 2021
Greed and lust corrupt . I like movies with this theme. Great story and acting was superb. Lana is beautiful. Moral of the story if you trust to much it could cost you big time. The remake was also well done.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
This Postman Had To Ring 3 Times
ccthemovieman-124 December 2005
It took me three viewings before this postman finally delivered for me. Giving that many opportunities for a film is not normal but my film noir friends all liked this so much, I thought I'd missed something on previous viewings, so I kept trying.

My patience was rewarded on the first viewing of it on DVD. Maybe the clearer picture helped. At any rate, if someone else viewed this and found it boring - particularly the first half - I would understand. Finally, however, I, too,I found it interesting all the way through.

Hume Cronyn, not the stars of the film John Garfield and Lana Turner, sparked my interest. He gave a fascinating portrayal of a lawyer and I wish his role had been bigger. Cecil Kellaway also is good as Tuner's husband, and I enjoyed Leon Ames as the district attorney.

The film almost makes the two low-life leads into sympathetic characters, which is just plain wrong and probably also why twisted critics all like this. They prefer to side with the criminals rather than the victims. Both Garfield and Turner's characters are morally bankrupt. Garfield even jokes early on in the film about how fooling around with another man's wife "is nothing."

The ending was a bit strange. Once again, the first two viewings I didn't like it, but on the third I thought was happened was appropriate.
18 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The postman always rings twice review
Molly047 April 2010
Although I didn't get to watch this film with the rest of the class; i'm almost tempted to say my review was more enjoyable and personal, making it a totally different experience for me. This face paced and thrilling film-noir from 1946 is certainly a classic... one of my favorite films from class, to date. Many elements of film making went into this piece. Great lead role acting, particular camera angles, and appropriate mood lighting make this film the high quality that is. For example, Lana Turner's character Cora is unforgettable, her excellent acting skills allowed her to be enticing on screen but not carnal or even just too dramatic. John Garfield's character Frank Chambers is a strong supporting role and I really liked his sense of humor and the way he portrayed his infatuation with Cora, I felt the passion between those two after that infamous lip lock. The camera aids her in this smooth sense of seduction as well. Lighting throughout the film also helped to make the mood suspicious (in the way of her careless husband Nick) yet captivating and sensual (Cora's form fitting outfits and intense kissing scene) I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and enjoyed it all to myself this time too!
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Man Wanted
AAdaSC25 May 2010
John Garfield (Frank) drifts into a small town and gets work at a café/diner run by an unlikely husband and wife team, Cecil Kellaway (Nick) and Lana Turner (Cora). Garfield and Turner have an attraction for each other that reaches a dangerous level and we follow the consequences of their actions...

The cast are all good - my favourite is Hume Cronyn who plays "Arthur Keats", a very cunning lawyer, and he steals the show in every scene that he is in. Lana Turner is also a very cool customer and one of her best moments occurs after she has just been kissed by Garfield for the first time. Instead of the customary slap in the face that we are all expecting, she just re-applies her make-up and walks past him. How cool is she?

As for the story, you need to suspend belief on a few occasions. First of all, it is just completely impossible to believe the marriage between fat, old Kellaway and young, attractive Turner. Even less difficult to take in is the willingness on Kellaway's part to encourage the much younger, better-looking and better suited lover for Turner to spend as much time possible as he can with her. WHAT!!? This Kellaway character is INCREDIBLY stupid. Another corker of an idea is to have Garfield and Turner plan to kill Kellaway by throwing some marbles under him so that he will slip and kill himself. This is getting pretty stupid now, isn't it?

There are some memorable scenes but the ending is rather too convenient and the final scene has some rather forced dialogue to try and justify the film's title. Overall, it's an entertaining film that is a little long but deserves another look.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
SHE'S FUNNY THAT WAY...
tcchelsey3 February 2021
What a tangled web.

THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE, perhaps one of the greatest film noirs of all time. One film you cannot and will definitely not get enough of, no matter how many times you see it.

Human nature at its very worst, defined.

Credit the chemistry between John Garfield and Lana Turner who, actually, had a brief affair during production. No question this classic inspired so many similar screenplays, but none to capture the perfect storm as displayed here. The cleverist thing about it all -- you may even catch yourself secretly rooting for the bad guy and girl, and ain't that the kicker?

Author James M. Cain had a sly sense of humor.

Great support from Leon Ames, Audrey Totter and especially crafty Hume Cronyn, in a role he defined. Masterfully directed by Tay Garnett, who began his long career in comedy films. Ames and Totter also co-starred in LADY IN THE LAKE.

There has been a long debate, comparing this version and the 198l remake starring Jack Nicholson. But you can't top Garfield and Turner. Bette Davis summed it all up, stating "It's highway robbery, Lana Turner did NOT win an Oscar!" Her next starring film would be GREEN DOLPHIN STREET opposite Van Heflin.

Forever on dvd and remastered blu ray for a new generation.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The postman didn't ring for me
maraudertheslashnymph23 July 2008
I watched this movie when it was on TV recently, knowing it was a classic movie. I didn't have any expectations, seeing as I barely knew what it was about - I just figured it would be good.

"The Postman Always Rings Twice" is never boring, but it's too long by half an hour, if not more, and it's hard to believe that Frank and Cora would risk so much for each other when their relationship is based purely on physical attraction. Perhaps Cora, stuck in a loveless marriage, could realistically fall for a handsome man who showed an interest in her - but why does Frank plot murder for the sake of a woman he barely knows? Surely he could continue on his travels and find another, equally sexy woman in a less complicated and dangerous situation? Cora and Frank are devoted to each other because the plot requires them to be, not because they have any sort of plausible emotional connection. I believed they were strongly sexually attracted to each other, but I didn't believe that they were connected on any other level.

Throughout this film, I kept thinking of ways that it could be a better movie. I didn't try to, it just happened. At one point I was convinced that Nick had figured out Cora and Frank's plans and was telling them various things just to see them squirm, but no such luck. The movie drags on and on in the last hour, with Frank and Cora going from one melodramatic plot point to the next without really thinking or reflecting on any of them. I got sick of Frank and Cora. I wanted them to be smarter, to do unexpected things - oh, and I wanted Frank to stop successfully punching out guys who look like they could crush him with one arm tied behind their backs.

The acting is good. Once you accept the plot dragging on and on, the script is fairly decent. Still, I wouldn't recommend this movie except perhaps to hardcore film fans, and I wouldn't watch it again.

A note: There is no postman in this film, and the significance of the title is not revealed until the last scene, where we find out it's a lot more boring than we were expecting.
11 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Noir is poetry
laurentsaletto12 January 2022
Tay Garnett. Not exactly a household name in directors heaven. Tay was an MGM director who did pretty much what he was told but this is his claim to eternal recognition, no less. A fantastically tightly directed movie. I won't get into what it's about, plenty here have done already.

For those here who dont understand the style or the era, I would suggest they stick to the usual mindless output of Netflux et al. To understand and love noir, you just have to suspend disbelief a while. And have a sense of poetry borne from nostalgia and great books. The story is fabulous, Turner never better. Garfield is still the best actor of his generation... The images keep on coming...When that lipstick rolls across the floor.... still wow. For those who dont understand plots yes Cora is married to an old man yes... to escape a worst life. Before you judge people, LISTEN closely. This ain't a pop video, needs a brain cell to enjoy to the full.

If you can, watch it close to watch Double Indemnity made 2 years before. Similar plot changes such as the murder happening halfway through the film and the other half about doomed lovers destroying themselves are in evidence. Love DI, love Wilder but prefer Postman.

I have watched postman a hundred times and I hope to watch it a hundred more in my lifetime. Yes, it is THAT great.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Superior film noir emerges slightly tainted
funkyfry29 October 2002
This film packs sadistic humor and a nice murder with no mystery into a solid punch (the suspense of waiting for the inevitable "second ring" of justice supplies the necessary force to move the plot to its conclusion). Garfield makes the movie with his convincing portrayal of a drifter drawn into murder by femme fatale Turner.

What kind of bugs me is Lana Turner's bad acting and MGM's usual insistence that the character she plays be shown in the best possible light -- as if Turner could play a murderess, but only as long as she wasn't unlikeable or unglamorous.

Still, a good suspense film well photographed and directed. Audrey Totter makes a brief appearance (she should have been allowed to steal the movie).
13 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Feeling hot...hot...hot
Ed-Shullivan8 May 2020
Lana Turner who plays the young and very hot looking Cora Smith gets tired quickly of her choice of (older) husbands and living the rest of her very fertile life as the wife and waitress of a short order cook road stand restaurant owner named Nick Smith played by Cecil Kellaway. In comes the young and good looking actor John Garfield who plays a drifter named Frank Chambers who accepts a job from the friendly restaurant owner Nick Smith.

As much as he tries to keep his distance from the restaurant owners hot looking wife Cora, once he sees Cora in her white short shorts and white top and those long silky legs you can see why Frank may feel a bit woozy in his own legs around her. Like two dogs in heat these two star crossed lovers just can't keep their hands off each other but what to do with Cora's older and frugal husband?

So a plan is made and the execution just does not go as well as originally planned. But that's life eh? It is a great story about crime/love/deception/murder/ and human conflict well worth watching at least twice.

I give it an 8 out of 10 IMDB rating
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Talky version of Cain's first novel
DennisLittrell10 July 2002
The best thing about this rather vapid 1946 production of the James M. Cain pulp novel/turned literature is Lana Turner as Cora, but not for her acting, which was ordinary, but because she looked so good. Director Tay Garnett had her in stunning, shapely white dresses, pants and uni's that showed off her figure, complemented by a platinum hairdo that in glorious black and white was so intense it was almost colorful. (People on the set may have needed to wear shades.) After she returns from her mother's funeral, Garnett has her in the blackest black from a black hat to her black shoes--heels, I should emphasize, since she was almost always in heels in the movie, even returning from the beach or crawling up a canyon in the Santa Monica Mountains, she was in heels.

John Garfield, who plays Frank Chambers as though wandering through the role (which is not entirely inappropriate), is sympathetic and has the kind of raw animal appeal that we would expect to see in Cain's depression-era antihero. But he too was not out to win any acting awards. Cecil Kellaway, who plays Nick (in this case a "Nick Smith," not the Greek immigrant Nick Papadakis from the novel) does the best acting job as he brings a bit of the delusive psychology of an older man with a beautiful young wife to life when he announces that he selling the café and moving to the backwoods of Canada so Cora can take care of him and his invalid sister! This bit of senile daydreaming was not in the novel; indeed a lot of what transpired in this self-conscious, misconstructed flick was not in the novel, including a sappy post-ending in which the title is "explained." I won't go into the explanation except to say it wasn't convincing, but I can understand why they tacked it on since nowhere else (that I know of) is the title explained. Cain's original, and appropriate title was, "Bar-B-Que." See my review of the novel at Amazon.com for some speculation on how they came up with the rather magical title.

A better rendition of the Postman is the 1981 production starring Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange. It too is no masterpiece, but it is both truer to the novel and less talky. A true to the spirit of the novel adaptation would require a terse, stream-lined directorial style with an emphasis on blind animal passions unconsciously acted out, something novelist Cormac McCarthy might accomplish if he directed film. I think that Christopher Nolan, who directed the strikingly original Memento (2000) could do it.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A Sensual Version of James M. Cain Story
Rodrigo_Amaro26 July 2011
One of the most exciting and provocative film noir of the 1940's (and of one of the most simplest also) "The Postman Always Rings Twice" brings the bittersweet love story between a drifter and a married woman that turns out into a plot of murder, tragedies and deceptions. John Garfield plays Frank Chambers, the mysterious man who entered in a almost abandoned restaurant conduced by Nick (Cecil Kellaway) and his wife Cora (Lana Turner), who is the main factor of why he takes a job in the place just to be near her. They want to be together and in order to fulfill their lustful desires they decide to kill Cora's husband. But the plan and its executions (yes, the guy just don't die that easily) has its problems, imperfections, complications and they might even forget their original plan when things start to become badly for them.

Based on a novel by James M. Cain (who also wrote "Double Indemnity", story very similar as this one), "TPART" follows the book at parts, changes some of the names (Nick's Greek last name in the book was translated as Smith in the film, Hollywood had those xenophobic feelings sometimes) and situations (Lana's Cora is way more aggressive/controlling/smart than the one of the novel while Frank is quite well-mannered opposed to the dirty one of Cain's book), improving other suitable for a story considered scandalous in its time but the basis of the book is present here and is brilliantly presented. The relationship between Frank and Cora is precisely well made, delivering lots of sensuality by showing less than we want to see and this whole thing made the film a perfect stage for Turner and Garfield to show their acting abilities. One must consider two things: 1) in 1946, films had to pass the strict Hays Code to be allowed to pass on theaters which means they couldn't show much in terms of sex and kisses (which could only last for five or ten seconds, and somehow, a tongue kiss passed the censors view in these film) and 2) the remake made in 1981 with Jack Nicholson and Jessica Lange, who had the advantage of displaying more than just looks and kisses on the screen, it was a explosive sexual encounter. As Lana Turner pointed out her task was more difficult given what she and Garfield had to work, and the way they built their relation in the film without showing sex and body parts was more effective than the one of the remake, which was quite gratuitous at times (but I like both versions).

But the film is not just a love story, it's also a noir and Tay Garnett directed a wonderful film noir, wise in setting the musical score in a good way (musics were excessive in films those days played all the time) creating tension not only between the attempts of murdering Nick but also during the heated discussions between Frank and Cora, when one turned against the other when things didn't happened the way they planned. Coming as a strange fact the movie decides to explain the title (which never happens in the book) as something like the Postman ringing twice being something like a warning for things, in this case, a warning for bad things that should be avoided before they turn into something difficult or impossible to unmade. Notice that almost everything important in the story happens twice: two attempts to kill Nick; two trials; and the list goes on. The explanation worked as a morality device for the film, things very common in that era (thankfully, the remake avoided this).

Great performances by the cast which also includes Hume Cronyn playing Frank and Cora's lawyer, who always keeps repeating to them "I'll handle it" referring about the case; great plot and a great film, this is a really must see for film noir fans out there. 10/10
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed