Apparently a brief exchange between the adolescent boy (Bobby Anderson) and his father (Raymond Burr) in which the father tells him that opportunity only comes around once, is the reason why Anderson morphs into the social climbing and ruthless business tycoon played by Zachary Scott. It hardly seems like enough of an influence to change a nice kid into a prototypical (and stereotypical) greedy capitalist millionaire. Though it's difficult to establish a connection between the two, Scott makes a believable social climber, and the story has a pretty good trajectory from his adolescence through dark mansions and well furnished offices with New York skyline views, to a finale gala event where Scott is organizing a philanthropy to unload some of his millions and ease his conscience. Ulmer doles out the action in bits and pieces, but delivers a pretty memorable ending.
36 Reviews
Merciless and Selfish Ambition
claudio_carvalho28 September 2008
While in a philanthropic meeting promoted by the millionaire Horace Woodruff Vendig (Zachary Scott), the guest Vic Lambdin (Louis Hayward) tells the history of the beginning and end of his friendship with the host to his date Mallory Flagg (Diana Lynn). When they are boys, Horace is a poor boy from a dysfunctional family and Vic's best friend that saves the wealthy girl Martha Burnside from drowning in a river. Horace is adopted by the rich Burnside family and later sent to Havard and gets engaged to Martha, for whom Vic has a crush. When the ambitious Horace meets the wealthier Susan Duane (Martha Vickers) that belongs to a more influent family, he calls off his engagement with Martha and moves to New York with Susan continuing his social raise. Later he meets the shark Buck Mansfield (Sydney Greenstreet) and seduces his young wife Christa (Lucille Bremer) to profit in business, leading to tragic consequences.
I was zapping the cable TV this raining Sunday morning in Rio and I found this rare film-noir by chance, which has never been released on VHS or DVD in Brazil. Edgar G. Ulmer made a magnificent movie with a timeless plot of merciless ambition of a poor and selfish boy that wishes to climb financially and socially using and disposing wealthy women and friendships. The screenplay uses flashback to perfectly develop the lead character and his acquaintances, supported by awesome black and white cinematography and camera work. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "O Insaciável" ("The Insatiable")
Note: On 23 Aug 2019 I saw this film again.
I was zapping the cable TV this raining Sunday morning in Rio and I found this rare film-noir by chance, which has never been released on VHS or DVD in Brazil. Edgar G. Ulmer made a magnificent movie with a timeless plot of merciless ambition of a poor and selfish boy that wishes to climb financially and socially using and disposing wealthy women and friendships. The screenplay uses flashback to perfectly develop the lead character and his acquaintances, supported by awesome black and white cinematography and camera work. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "O Insaciável" ("The Insatiable")
Note: On 23 Aug 2019 I saw this film again.
I don't want to be a man. Never! I wish there weren't any men in the whole world.
hitchcockthelegend21 August 2019
Ruthless is directed by Edgar G. Ulmer and adapted to screenplay by S.K. Lauren, Gordon Kahn and Alvah Bessie from Dayton Stoddart's novel Prelude to Night. It stars Zachary Scott, Louis Hayward, Sydney Greenstreet, Diana Lynn, Lucille Bremer and Martha Vickers. Music is by Werner Jansen and cinematography by Bert Glennon.
Even as a boy Horace Vendig always got what he wanted. Then into adulthood and he manipulates himself into high society. Now a fully fledged tyro of commerce he is even more cruel and impervious to how his actions harm others. But when Horace (Scott) reunites with his old best friend Vic Lambdin (Hayward) and he falls a foul of the bitter Buck Mansfield (Greenstreet), all the resentments come crashing together as one!
"Animals kill for food or love. You and I spoil the jungle because we kill for profit, a taste of victory and revenge. Then we destroy each other after"
It was a one time hard to locate picture, where even in early releases it had been shorn of 25 minutes, but now it's out there, a full one hour and forty four minutes of Ruthlessness! Ok, that might be over selling it a touch, but this is a pretty spicy piece of greedy film noir, a scathing attack on capitalism, a telling of the corruption of a man's soul and the bitter treatment he hands out to those who care for him.
Tagged as a sort of baby brother to Citizen Kane, which is fair enough in fact, but that be in narrative drive more than visual panache. There's some nice expressionistic touches, with Glennon (Crime Wave) proving what a very talented cinematographer he was (see his Westerns output), but the pic does lack for noirish visual menace to marry up with the sour lead characterisation. Which is a crime given it's Ulmer (The Black Cat/Bluebeard/Detour/Strange Illusion) in the directors chair.
However, where the pic shines bright is with the performances, Ulmer getting his cast to turn in impressive portrayals of the human condition. The ladies are especially great (Lynn has a dual role) as they nail the respective heartbeats of women buffeted by Horace's duality of twisted emotions and lofty avarice ambitions. In short we get very mature turns in a film that's very much mature in thematics. Add it to your Ulmer "to see lists" post haste. 7.5/10
Even as a boy Horace Vendig always got what he wanted. Then into adulthood and he manipulates himself into high society. Now a fully fledged tyro of commerce he is even more cruel and impervious to how his actions harm others. But when Horace (Scott) reunites with his old best friend Vic Lambdin (Hayward) and he falls a foul of the bitter Buck Mansfield (Greenstreet), all the resentments come crashing together as one!
"Animals kill for food or love. You and I spoil the jungle because we kill for profit, a taste of victory and revenge. Then we destroy each other after"
It was a one time hard to locate picture, where even in early releases it had been shorn of 25 minutes, but now it's out there, a full one hour and forty four minutes of Ruthlessness! Ok, that might be over selling it a touch, but this is a pretty spicy piece of greedy film noir, a scathing attack on capitalism, a telling of the corruption of a man's soul and the bitter treatment he hands out to those who care for him.
Tagged as a sort of baby brother to Citizen Kane, which is fair enough in fact, but that be in narrative drive more than visual panache. There's some nice expressionistic touches, with Glennon (Crime Wave) proving what a very talented cinematographer he was (see his Westerns output), but the pic does lack for noirish visual menace to marry up with the sour lead characterisation. Which is a crime given it's Ulmer (The Black Cat/Bluebeard/Detour/Strange Illusion) in the directors chair.
However, where the pic shines bright is with the performances, Ulmer getting his cast to turn in impressive portrayals of the human condition. The ladies are especially great (Lynn has a dual role) as they nail the respective heartbeats of women buffeted by Horace's duality of twisted emotions and lofty avarice ambitions. In short we get very mature turns in a film that's very much mature in thematics. Add it to your Ulmer "to see lists" post haste. 7.5/10
He wasn't a man... he was a way of life
Howard_B_Eale20 February 2009
This may be Edgar G. Ulmer's masterpiece. RUTHLESS is a terrific noir/melodrama - sharply written (by the to-be-blacklisted Alvah Bessie and Gordon Kahn), consistently beautifully photographed (by the underrated Bert Glennon), and truly adventurous in its editing and flash forward-flash backward construction.
Zachary Scott is the "ruthless" title character, but the title is more a cheap shot than anything else; Scott's Vendig is more an emotionally bankrupt, pathological character than a villain per se. The narrative takes pains to reveal - gradually - the series of events from childhood through adulthood which affected his perverse makeup, making for a fascinating character study. Subtle revelations and plot twists come about every fifteen minutes, but they're deliberately ambiguous when they hit the screen, forcing the viewer to pay close attention as the truth of the situation is revealed. This technique alone puts RUTHLESS way ahead of any other Poverty Row melodrama of the period and cements Ulmer's reputation as a thoughtful stylist.
Louis Hayward plays a sort of Greek chorus, an often acquiescent voice of conscience/best friend/nemesis who keeps the episodic story moving along. Diana Lynn (in two roles), Martha Vickers and Lucille Bremer each give terrific performances as the various women who appear, disappear, and reappear in the lives of both men. All are sharply drawn, a testament to the determination of Bessie, Kahn and other blacklisted writers to put strong female characters on screen in defiance of the Production Code, which seemed to encourage either submissive or predatory roles for women.
And as if all that isn't enough, Sidney Greenstreet drops in and sets the screen on fire in every sequence he appears in. A classic coiled spring, his portrayal of a similarly greedy corporate boss is perfectly slimy, and provides a genuine shock when he suddenly grabs Lucille Bremer by the hair and jerks her backwards for a kiss. Likewise, a later sequence where Bremer drags him in front of the mirror so she can brutally compare him to her new, younger lover is unforgettably painful.
RUTHLESS sits comfortably alongside DETOUR, THE MAN FROM PLANET X and THE STRANGE WOMAN, other Ulmer gems of note. A great movie.
Zachary Scott is the "ruthless" title character, but the title is more a cheap shot than anything else; Scott's Vendig is more an emotionally bankrupt, pathological character than a villain per se. The narrative takes pains to reveal - gradually - the series of events from childhood through adulthood which affected his perverse makeup, making for a fascinating character study. Subtle revelations and plot twists come about every fifteen minutes, but they're deliberately ambiguous when they hit the screen, forcing the viewer to pay close attention as the truth of the situation is revealed. This technique alone puts RUTHLESS way ahead of any other Poverty Row melodrama of the period and cements Ulmer's reputation as a thoughtful stylist.
Louis Hayward plays a sort of Greek chorus, an often acquiescent voice of conscience/best friend/nemesis who keeps the episodic story moving along. Diana Lynn (in two roles), Martha Vickers and Lucille Bremer each give terrific performances as the various women who appear, disappear, and reappear in the lives of both men. All are sharply drawn, a testament to the determination of Bessie, Kahn and other blacklisted writers to put strong female characters on screen in defiance of the Production Code, which seemed to encourage either submissive or predatory roles for women.
And as if all that isn't enough, Sidney Greenstreet drops in and sets the screen on fire in every sequence he appears in. A classic coiled spring, his portrayal of a similarly greedy corporate boss is perfectly slimy, and provides a genuine shock when he suddenly grabs Lucille Bremer by the hair and jerks her backwards for a kiss. Likewise, a later sequence where Bremer drags him in front of the mirror so she can brutally compare him to her new, younger lover is unforgettably painful.
RUTHLESS sits comfortably alongside DETOUR, THE MAN FROM PLANET X and THE STRANGE WOMAN, other Ulmer gems of note. A great movie.
Ruthless
random_avenger21 October 2010
Edgar G. Ulmer (1904-72) may be best remembered for the pessimistic 1945 film noir Detour, but that is only one of his several directing credits, many of which have fallen out of fame over the past decades. One of Ulmer's lesser known works is his 1948 drama Ruthless, a character study of a superficially successful but inwardly broken man, in some ways evoking memories of the themes in Orson Welles' legendary debut feature Citizen Kane (1941).
Like many noirs, Ruthless utilizes extensive flashbacks in its narrative. The frame story takes place in a high society party where Vic Lambdin (Louis Hayward) and his lady friend Mallory Flagg (Diana Lynn) have arrived to meet Vic's old friend Horace Vendig (Zachary Scott), a millionaire philanthropist. Upon meeting Mallory, Vendig is startled by her resemblance to a girl called Martha Burnside, Vic and Vendig's common friend who was once engaged to marry the latter. Several flashbacks then cast light on what has happened between Vendig, Vic, Martha and other figures from the past, some of whom are present at the party. In spite of his generous donations to charitable organizations, in his personal life Vendig is revealed to be far from perfect.
Vendig's personality is seen stemming from his childhood trauma of feeling unwanted by his parents. Perhaps this is why he never really allows anyone get close to him, always handling his relationships in a cold and calculating manner. Even though the premise sounds fairly interesting, the execution is not without its problems. Namely, a lot of the lengthy flashbacks feel too long and seem to merely present the actions of Vendig rather than providing insight on his inner world. He mentions that he is aware of his irresistible urge to strive for success which causes him to knowingly hurt his loved ones by dumping them in favour of business opportunities, but the scenes of him going through numerous financial negotiations and meetings start feeling tiresome soon. How does he feel about what he does? I don't think we, the audience, ever get to know him very well, but he does not really carry an aura of mystery around him either because the writing leaves his traits too scarce. Some might call this lack of clearness subtlety, but I would have wanted to see more clues about Vendig's thoughts and how he became what he is at the dramatic ending.
Regardless of my complaints above, I enjoyed many aspects of the film. For one thing, the acting is generally good throughout; especially the women are at home in their roles, from the beautiful Diana Lynn in a double role as Martha and Mallory to Lucille Bremer as the frustrated Christa Mansfield and Martha Vickers as Vendig's fiancée Susan. Sydney Greenstreet also delivers a great performance as Bremer's on-screen husband Buck Mansfield, an aging businessman who has to face his limitations due to Vendig's schemes. On the other hand though, the kid actors in the first flashback are not as impressive as the adults, but Ruthless is hardly the first (or last) movie with kids as the weakest link. Zachary Scott's "old" makeup could have been more convincing too; a small moustache is hardly enough to convey the feel of an older man. Other than that, the melancholic-looking Scott suits the lead role somewhat comfortably.
Some of the shadowy photography in the exterior scenes and low camera angles looks pretty nice, even though the visuals are not really as starkly contrasted as in many proper noirs. It is probably best to see Ruthless as a withdrawn character study instead of expecting anything very 'hard-boiled' to ever step into the picture. In the end, with more fleshed out character development Ruthless could have been a very enjoyable film, but I think it is easily watchable as it is now as well, flawed or not.
Like many noirs, Ruthless utilizes extensive flashbacks in its narrative. The frame story takes place in a high society party where Vic Lambdin (Louis Hayward) and his lady friend Mallory Flagg (Diana Lynn) have arrived to meet Vic's old friend Horace Vendig (Zachary Scott), a millionaire philanthropist. Upon meeting Mallory, Vendig is startled by her resemblance to a girl called Martha Burnside, Vic and Vendig's common friend who was once engaged to marry the latter. Several flashbacks then cast light on what has happened between Vendig, Vic, Martha and other figures from the past, some of whom are present at the party. In spite of his generous donations to charitable organizations, in his personal life Vendig is revealed to be far from perfect.
Vendig's personality is seen stemming from his childhood trauma of feeling unwanted by his parents. Perhaps this is why he never really allows anyone get close to him, always handling his relationships in a cold and calculating manner. Even though the premise sounds fairly interesting, the execution is not without its problems. Namely, a lot of the lengthy flashbacks feel too long and seem to merely present the actions of Vendig rather than providing insight on his inner world. He mentions that he is aware of his irresistible urge to strive for success which causes him to knowingly hurt his loved ones by dumping them in favour of business opportunities, but the scenes of him going through numerous financial negotiations and meetings start feeling tiresome soon. How does he feel about what he does? I don't think we, the audience, ever get to know him very well, but he does not really carry an aura of mystery around him either because the writing leaves his traits too scarce. Some might call this lack of clearness subtlety, but I would have wanted to see more clues about Vendig's thoughts and how he became what he is at the dramatic ending.
Regardless of my complaints above, I enjoyed many aspects of the film. For one thing, the acting is generally good throughout; especially the women are at home in their roles, from the beautiful Diana Lynn in a double role as Martha and Mallory to Lucille Bremer as the frustrated Christa Mansfield and Martha Vickers as Vendig's fiancée Susan. Sydney Greenstreet also delivers a great performance as Bremer's on-screen husband Buck Mansfield, an aging businessman who has to face his limitations due to Vendig's schemes. On the other hand though, the kid actors in the first flashback are not as impressive as the adults, but Ruthless is hardly the first (or last) movie with kids as the weakest link. Zachary Scott's "old" makeup could have been more convincing too; a small moustache is hardly enough to convey the feel of an older man. Other than that, the melancholic-looking Scott suits the lead role somewhat comfortably.
Some of the shadowy photography in the exterior scenes and low camera angles looks pretty nice, even though the visuals are not really as starkly contrasted as in many proper noirs. It is probably best to see Ruthless as a withdrawn character study instead of expecting anything very 'hard-boiled' to ever step into the picture. In the end, with more fleshed out character development Ruthless could have been a very enjoyable film, but I think it is easily watchable as it is now as well, flawed or not.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
the_old_roman27 August 2001
That's the lesson learned too late by all the good souls who help ruthless Zachry Scott in this movie. Scott is appropriately hard and tough in the unsympathetic lead role, and Diana Lynn, Sydney Greenstreet, and Raymond Burr head up a marvelous supporting cast. Still, there's an element missing here, although I cannot put my finger on precisely what it is, that would have made this movie truly memorable instead of merely interesting.
Edgar G Ulmer with an A production
mysterymoviegoer28 May 2009
I just returned from an American Cinemateque screening of a UCLA restored print of this movie. Here is ample evidence that Ulmer, the King of the B's, given bigger budgets might well have had a much bigger career. Detour may be his most famous movie, but this is his best. The Alvah Bessie screenplay about greed and the relentless pursuit of success has dated not at all. The cinematography is excellent, with strong noirish elements. The sets and costumes are very good. Zachary Scott, one of the screen's great cads, is somewhat toned down here if still fairly nasty. There is strong work by Diana Lynn, Lucille Bremer, and Martha Vickers as women who get used and discarded along the way. Sidney Greenstreet shows up mid film as an equally greedy and grasping character, dominating all his scenes. But the standout, unexpectedly, is Louis Hayward as a sympathetic boyhood friend and link to the entire storyline. Ulmer brings out more warmth in this actor that was usually seen. Raymond Burr has a small part early in his career when he seemed to be copying Laird Cregar as Scott's father seen in flashback. Ulmer's daughter this evening explained that the studio Eagle-Lion/Paramount cut some scenes just before release with a particularly anti-capitalist tone. I hope the footage still exists somewhere. That aside, it is thoroughly accomplished film that needs no explanation or apologies. The current recession gives it renewed meaning. Hopefully a DVD release will soon follow.
Wall Street Noir: Sidney Greenstreet Must Be Obeyed!
museumofdave19 February 2013
I call this Wall Street Noir as a way of simple classification, but it's a odd film from Britain's Eagle Lion, directed by the usually "B" director of Bluebeard and Detour, this dark film detailing the rise to financial power of a man who lacks ethics, certainly mirroring many of the financial scandals surrounding us today. Director Edgar G. Ulmer had considerable talent, and here is given a literate script, a popular leading man in Zachary Scott, and lots of outstanding support, namely Sidney Greenstreet, Diana Lynn, Martha Vickers, and in a small,unrecognizable role Raymond Burr. Its a talky film with rich visuals, and it is a sad truth, not to be a crybaby about it, but most available DVDs appear to be made from bad VHS copies taken from a television print. The copies one finds today runs only 86 minutes, while the original film, richer and deeper in motivation, is 104. Apparently the streaming versions are much better--and lets hope the DVD Gods read the various reviews and provide the print this film deserves; I have a suspicion the ratings would ramp up with enthusiasm!
The Citizen Kane Sequel
midnightblack-113 January 2005
I felt like i was watching the sequel to Citizen Kane episode two, loved the movie kept me on the edge of my seat but it needed Orson Wells! I've only known Zachary Scott through westerns so to see him as a chilling uncaring person was a surprise to me that i enjoyed very much. Diana Lynn disappointed me playing a duel role as MarthaBurnside/ Mallory Flagg she shows the same personality for both characters. But great supporting role up against Zachary Scott. The movie is slow at spots but sustains its plot throughout.Sydney Greenstreet plays the villain no surprise there but would we want to see him in film in any other way think not! I give it a ten Raymond Burr gets a small scene in the beginning of the film as the father to Zachary Scott's character well acted scene though he doesn't have much of a part too short i think he should've stayed in the movie longer. Buy it, Rent it. Tape it but whatever you do get it !...
Nice Bit of Soap - Ruthless
arthur_tafero18 August 2022
Zachary Scott gives the best performance of his career in this hard-to-find drama about a poor boy who rises from poverty through adoption by a rich family. A little bit of Citizen Kane, a little bit of The Wolf of Wall Street, and a dash of The Scoundrel (a favorite George Saunders film of mine), provides the basis of a great soap that will keep your interest from beginning to end. And I thought I had seen a lot of ruthless people on Wall Street when I was younger. This one takes the cake.
Don't judge a movie by its title: a slow disappointment
bmacv24 April 2001
The combination of Edgar G. Ulmer (of "Detour" notoriety), Zachary Scott, Sidney Greenstreet, Raymond Burr and Martha Vickers, under the title "Ruthless," promises a fairly robust slice of film noir. Alas, what one gets is a faintly Citizen-Kaneish look back over the life of a heartless tycoon (Zachary Scott, who, whatever his strengths, was no Orson Welles). It's a puzzling movie. Scott was a poor child (Burr briefly plays his dad, dressed up to look like a carnival barker) who saved the life of a wealthy girl, whose family then took him under its wing. This, for some reason, became his sole act of altruism, as he turned into a self-centered, manipulative ladder-climber. The story does manage to keep one's interest, but just barely; Greenstreet provides some welcome slices of ham. But the script is tedious, the stylishness nonexistent. If this is your kind of movie, by all means enjoy, but don't mistake it for something it isn't. What it isn't is a tense little shocker along the lines of Anthony Mann's Raw Deal or Railroaded (which I foolishly thought it might be).
Ruthless philanthropist.
michaelRokeefe29 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Director Edgar Ulmer wants RUTHLESS to put himself up there with the bigger directors. This is one of those old black and white dramas you won't walk away from. Horace Vendig(Zachary Scott)is the product of a broken home; not having any of the luxuries his friends had. Horace honed his intelligence to become a cold-hearted, callous and ruthless financier. Even his childhood friend Vic(Louis Hayward)could not believe what he made of himself. Vendig would charm women to just throw away when another caught his eye. Love was out of the question. All Horace was interested in was notoriety and wealth. He sold himself as a respectable philanthropist; while all along he shamelessly trampled on anyone that got in his way. Matinée idol Scott plays the role very well. Scenery and storyline are interesting and the cast is strong. Other players: Diana Lynn, Martha Vickers, Sydney Greenstreet, Lucille Bremer and Raymond Burr. Robert J. Anderson plays Horace with Arthur Stone playing Vic in the flashback scenes. Borderline Film Noir.
Greenstreet and Bremer are the real stars of the film
JuguAbraham25 August 2021
Good story. What stands out are the performances of Mr and Mrs Mansfield (Sidney Greenstreet and Lucille Bremer). One great visual sequence which is unforgettable--Mr Mansfield opens the twin doors to his wife's bedroom with both hands, a majestic entry of power, and returns from the bedroom opening just one door of the the same set of doors with one hand. Many viewers might have missed the metaphor. Director Edgar Ulmer may be unknown but that was a wonderfully planned sequence!
Not as hard-boiled as the title suggests
dierregi18 September 2019
Loosely considered a film noir, this plot is barely gray and does not have much mystery or drama. It is however, mildly entertaining.
The story opens with a young actor (Hayward), playing an unconvincingly aged version of Vic, who used to be best pal with Horace (Scott) allegedly many years previously.
Horace is nowadays a mega rich guy who invited lots of people to his mansion to - sort of - making amends for his ruthless ways of the past.
The narrative works mainly in flashbacks during the party, showing how Vic and Horace were friends and how Vic grew disenchanted with his greedy friend (and later associate) and parted ways.
The first scenes may be slightly reminiscent of Citizen Kane, without the artsy pretentiousness (but also the superior skills of Welles).
Not much happens in terms of drama, once the philandering, greedy nature of Horace has been established. Horace just continues being an unredeemable character to the end.
Still, worth watching, also for the rather unexpected lavish production.
The story opens with a young actor (Hayward), playing an unconvincingly aged version of Vic, who used to be best pal with Horace (Scott) allegedly many years previously.
Horace is nowadays a mega rich guy who invited lots of people to his mansion to - sort of - making amends for his ruthless ways of the past.
The narrative works mainly in flashbacks during the party, showing how Vic and Horace were friends and how Vic grew disenchanted with his greedy friend (and later associate) and parted ways.
The first scenes may be slightly reminiscent of Citizen Kane, without the artsy pretentiousness (but also the superior skills of Welles).
Not much happens in terms of drama, once the philandering, greedy nature of Horace has been established. Horace just continues being an unredeemable character to the end.
Still, worth watching, also for the rather unexpected lavish production.
On Your Way Up, Be Careful Who You Step On
dougdoepke22 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
With a name like "Vendig" and an actor like Zachary Scott, you know who's ruthless without seeing the movie. Actually, the character here is an allegorical one, standing for the barracuda side of capitalism. Old Vendig doesn't give a darn who he steps on or how many "little people" he ruins in his relentless drive for power and riches. It's a heckuva climb up the proverbial ladder, told in occasional flashback that fills in the personal stories and motivations.
It's also a great cast, Scott at his most arrogant, Lynn at her sweetest, Hayward at his most likable, and of course Greenstreet at his most Greenstreet. Too bad we don't get a scene between him and the equally corpulent Raymond Burr with its interesting possibilities. This is the impressive Greenstreet's most emotional and perhaps most pitiable role, especially when he looks forlornly into the mirror. Then too, in that last scene, he's almost like a berserk rhino and just as scary.
The message here has been sharpened, I expect, by uncredited leftist writer Alvah Bessie. Except I don't take it as an attack on capitalism per-se— after all, Hayward's Lambdin wants to build things like the symbolism of bridges, but is undercut by his power-mad partner Vendig. Instead, I take Vendig as a 40's version of 1987's Wall Street where Gordon Gekko's barracuda claims that "greed is good". Likely, the movie's message would resonate with today's audiences who've also been taught a lesson by Wall Street's destructive side.
Anyway, it's a darkly riveting morality tale that gets the most out of its modest budget thanks to a shrewd cast and expert direction from cult director Edgar Ulmer. My only complaint echoes that of another reviewer— the gap between nice boy Vendig and the power-mad adult is not properly filled in; then again, maybe it's because of poor editing.
Nonetheless, what a nice bit of irony in the ending. Bad adult Vendig drowns where good boy from years earlier survived. In short, the ruthless adult has misused the opportunities earned by his earlier heroic act, and so, must return full circle to the water to right the wrongs. At the same time, the deserving Lambdin finally ends up with his beloved Martha, even if it's through her look-alike Mallory (which is why Lynn plays both parts). So things straighten out after all. All in all, it's a fine, under-rated movie, even if a rather bitter brew.
It's also a great cast, Scott at his most arrogant, Lynn at her sweetest, Hayward at his most likable, and of course Greenstreet at his most Greenstreet. Too bad we don't get a scene between him and the equally corpulent Raymond Burr with its interesting possibilities. This is the impressive Greenstreet's most emotional and perhaps most pitiable role, especially when he looks forlornly into the mirror. Then too, in that last scene, he's almost like a berserk rhino and just as scary.
The message here has been sharpened, I expect, by uncredited leftist writer Alvah Bessie. Except I don't take it as an attack on capitalism per-se— after all, Hayward's Lambdin wants to build things like the symbolism of bridges, but is undercut by his power-mad partner Vendig. Instead, I take Vendig as a 40's version of 1987's Wall Street where Gordon Gekko's barracuda claims that "greed is good". Likely, the movie's message would resonate with today's audiences who've also been taught a lesson by Wall Street's destructive side.
Anyway, it's a darkly riveting morality tale that gets the most out of its modest budget thanks to a shrewd cast and expert direction from cult director Edgar Ulmer. My only complaint echoes that of another reviewer— the gap between nice boy Vendig and the power-mad adult is not properly filled in; then again, maybe it's because of poor editing.
Nonetheless, what a nice bit of irony in the ending. Bad adult Vendig drowns where good boy from years earlier survived. In short, the ruthless adult has misused the opportunities earned by his earlier heroic act, and so, must return full circle to the water to right the wrongs. At the same time, the deserving Lambdin finally ends up with his beloved Martha, even if it's through her look-alike Mallory (which is why Lynn plays both parts). So things straighten out after all. All in all, it's a fine, under-rated movie, even if a rather bitter brew.
Slow-starting character study becomes a fascinating drama with elements of noir
declancooley10 July 2022
A childhood incident propels Horace Vendig (Zachary Scott) onto a new path in life into the circles of the well-to-do and he does everything he can to capitalise on this unexpected turn of events. Having carried out a much-lauded good deed as a child, at first, his "ruthlessness" is not very apparent; he seems to be more of an opportunist as he attempts to valiantly bootstrap himself out of a broken, poverty-stricken, neglectful family. Although the story starts off quite glacially and tamely, the psychological damage caused by his upbringing and how this drives his behaviours is soon all too apparent. Even Horace himself seems to be at moments self-aware of his twisted personality and how devastating this is to those around him but his compulsion to persist in his Machiavellian maneuvers overcomes him, discarding business partners, friends and lovers like trash for the next 'big thing' as he clambers his way to the 'top'. Later, any glimmers of contrition and self-recrimination he had wither away as we see the 'ruthless' lengths he is willing to go to get the women and the status he craves. The noir-ish elements include multiple extensive flashbacks, ambiguity in the motives and morals of some of the players, a weird 'doubling' of a female character (the same actress plays two women), unexpected fateful reverses, and a "good versus evil" streak that runs through this film. This dark energy gets amped up at the halfway point when Sydney Greenstreet turns up as a bigger-than-life tycoon. His Buck Mansfield brings a fresh dimension to the movie as a wily big shot who Horace treats as a white whale to be harpooned, and whose position he schemes to usurp. In addition, there are quite a few other threads including a few romances that are not as straightforward as they look at first glance, and the meaning of friendship between men as they mature with different values (to say the least). Initially slightly dull, stuffy and stiff, I was pleasantly surprised by the increasing depth, twistiness, and darkening of tone of the film, with great acting all round from Scott, Hayward, Greenstreet, Vickers, Lynn and others. It is fascinating to watch the central character's initially quite blank and ambiguous character become ever more morally depraved (even deranged). By the end we get a somewhat nuanced and riveting portrait of Horace Vendig, a man we almost feel sorry for at some points: a sociopath driven by his own avaricious demons, who even seems to be sincerely ready to return to the path of 'good' at various times, aided by well-meaning people around him, but who is ultimately consumed by his own insatiable envy and overweening ambition. Get through the first 30 mins and you will be rewarded with a rarely-seen little gem.
Zachry ice-cold perfect, but story drags on.
aromatic-222 April 2001
Kind of cross between Keeper of The Flame and Citizen Kane, Zachry is perfect as the ice-cold schemer who confuses love and friendship for weakness and folly. Burr is great in minor role, explaining Scott's character.
But it goes on too long, and after awhile, it becomes tiresome how many people with warning are still being taken in by him. After all, Zachry's smooth, but he's no Bill Clinton. Too, Greenstreet is over-the-top in pivotal role, spoiling some of the effect.
Overall, worth watching, but by no means, great.
But it goes on too long, and after awhile, it becomes tiresome how many people with warning are still being taken in by him. After all, Zachry's smooth, but he's no Bill Clinton. Too, Greenstreet is over-the-top in pivotal role, spoiling some of the effect.
Overall, worth watching, but by no means, great.
Totally ruthless, but with a charming smile...great stuff
secondtake18 January 2011
Ruthless (1948)
A great, layered melodrama, with flashbacks and male and female rivalries and a really strong narrative thread. There are a bunch of interesting actors at work who never had huge careers, the main man being familiar to me from "Mildred Pierce" two years earlier, Zacharay Scott. The director, though, is a favorite noir director of mine, Edgar Ulmer, who had a string of great films in the late 1940s. So this is one of them, though not quite a noir.
In fact, this is a kind of financiers movie, which isn't actually a genre thank God. But the weakest part of the film (at least for a non-Wall Street viewer) is a lot of talk about business deals. Luckily, you don't need to follow them to the letter, because it's the characters--their tricks, their greed, their games--who make it come alive. And of course there are women involved (compelling ones like Diana Lynn), and memories of a childhood girlfriend, so we feel something for the good friend of the leading capitalist male, and even for Sydney Greenstreet, who plays an aging businessman, even amusing.
The whole enterprise gets fairly involved and makes you pay attention, which is good, and leads to a pretty spectacular last scene off the pier.
A great, layered melodrama, with flashbacks and male and female rivalries and a really strong narrative thread. There are a bunch of interesting actors at work who never had huge careers, the main man being familiar to me from "Mildred Pierce" two years earlier, Zacharay Scott. The director, though, is a favorite noir director of mine, Edgar Ulmer, who had a string of great films in the late 1940s. So this is one of them, though not quite a noir.
In fact, this is a kind of financiers movie, which isn't actually a genre thank God. But the weakest part of the film (at least for a non-Wall Street viewer) is a lot of talk about business deals. Luckily, you don't need to follow them to the letter, because it's the characters--their tricks, their greed, their games--who make it come alive. And of course there are women involved (compelling ones like Diana Lynn), and memories of a childhood girlfriend, so we feel something for the good friend of the leading capitalist male, and even for Sydney Greenstreet, who plays an aging businessman, even amusing.
The whole enterprise gets fairly involved and makes you pay attention, which is good, and leads to a pretty spectacular last scene off the pier.
Greenfield and wife need thick Southern accents--Zachary Scott miscast as womanizer
filmalamosa18 August 2012
This movie is sort of a bargain basement Citizen Kane. It follows the life of an ambitious opportunist who takes after women who can do him the most good. One flaw here is that Zachary Scott is not a credible womanizer--he is just not sexy or handsome enough.
The movie lags and drags until Greenfield appears with his wife-- here the biggest deficit in the movie also occurs. Greenfield plays Buck Mansfield a predatory corrupt rich Southern business tycoon/plantation owner---he is perfect in the role over weight etc.. But neither him nor his wife have anything remotely resembling a Southern Accent which would have really cemented the roles--and seems like something so easy to correct. Maybe because Ulmer was foreign he didn't realize this powerful bedrock of Americana.
And of course Hollywood can never let a bad guy get away--damn it.
Another flaw = the props are too cheap looking. In fact, the first time I started watching it, I stopped after about 10 minutes because of this. This movie also fails as it tries to copy Citizen Kane cinematography with long black and white shadows etc...the items filmed that way were things like fake chandlers--almost like a parody.
With more money...and some tuning and recasting this could have been a great classic.
Still RECOMMEND--
The movie lags and drags until Greenfield appears with his wife-- here the biggest deficit in the movie also occurs. Greenfield plays Buck Mansfield a predatory corrupt rich Southern business tycoon/plantation owner---he is perfect in the role over weight etc.. But neither him nor his wife have anything remotely resembling a Southern Accent which would have really cemented the roles--and seems like something so easy to correct. Maybe because Ulmer was foreign he didn't realize this powerful bedrock of Americana.
And of course Hollywood can never let a bad guy get away--damn it.
Another flaw = the props are too cheap looking. In fact, the first time I started watching it, I stopped after about 10 minutes because of this. This movie also fails as it tries to copy Citizen Kane cinematography with long black and white shadows etc...the items filmed that way were things like fake chandlers--almost like a parody.
With more money...and some tuning and recasting this could have been a great classic.
Still RECOMMEND--
Edgar G. Ulmer an underrated director deserves a second chance !!!
elo-equipamentos4 July 2019
I've really appreciated Edgar G. Ulmer's works, he was totally underrated director, apart Ruthless that has a big budge, he always works on tight budge even in Detour which l'm quite sure his best picture, indeed, Ruthless has a fine treatment, the story has a non-linearity concept, about a boy who was neglected by his parents, adopted by a good family and raise very closed with their half sister who falling in love for him, his nature is ambiguous and he forgetting all the past, he climbed to upper class high society just for a unique purpose, becomes rich and get power, even left behind many damages around and his best friends, a greedy man, played by the magnificent Zachary Scott, but everything has a price to pay, he faces his destiny, an splendid Noir, Edgar G. Ulmer is best knowledge by your B Science fiction pictures, he deserves to be reviewed by the new generation of cinephiles!!
Resume:
First watch: 2012 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8.25
Resume:
First watch: 2012 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8.25
Uneven Drama
kenjha12 February 2011
Via flashbacks, this uneven drama tells the rags to riches story of a philanthropist. Scott is OK if somewhat one-dimensional as the ruthless social climber willing to do whatever it takes to get to the top. This is one of the better films of the legendary Ulmer, who has been championed by the likes of Peter Bogdanovich. The B-movie maestro is particularly good here in recreating the small town atmosphere of Scott's youth. Unfortunately, the script is meandering and gets too bogged down in financial dealings as Scott tries to grow his business. Wholesome Lynn and promiscuous Bremer are among the women Scott becomes romantically entangled with.
Straight as an arrow
newjersian1 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Don't expect any nuances or half tones in this movie. Everything is straight like in a newspaper headline. Funny: an old and very overweight man drowned the much younger hero who is also a Harvard swimming champion. Couldn't they invent something more believable?
Like the robber barons of old
bkoganbing20 January 2014
I am sure that Zachary Scott was cast in the lead role in Ruthless after the folks at Eagle-Lion remembered his debut in The Mask Of Dimitrios. As proof of that I'm sure that every effort was also made to acquire the services of Sydney Greenstreet who was also part of the cast of that film.
Under Edgar Ulmer's direction, Scott paints a careful and calculated portrait of a driven and Ruthless man going back to his childhood. Some elements of Citizen Kane are present here as in several flashback sequences we see what has made Scott what he is today.
What he's trying to do now is cover up what he's been in much the same manner as the robber barons of old by donating his vast sums of money. Like Andrew Carnegie when we meet Scott he's having a huge banquet where he's pledging the mansion and lots of money to a world peace foundation. Scott's invited a whole lot of people from his past including his oldest friend Louis Hayward who really knows him from way back when.
And it's back in his childhood just as we were introduced to Charles Foster Kane and the events that shaped we are likewise meeting Zachary Scott, Louis Hayward, and Diana Lynn as the characters they are before they are adults. All I can say is that Scott as a kid was really traumatized by the antics of his parents. He goes to live with Dennis Hoey and his rich and genteel family which includes the daughter who grows up to be Diana Lynn and they give him a Harvard education.
But what makes this a real Zachary Scott role is that it's not just business he's in, it's business mixed with bedroom pleasure. He woos many a woman and discards them with equal abandon. He steals Sydney Greenstreet's trophy wife Lucille Bremer for the 48% of the stock she has in her husband's company.
Ulmer who may have done more with less than any other director around, gets if not a box office cast, a really competent one who suit their roles admirably. The script for Ruthless was written by Alvah Bessie of The Hollywood Ten and I can see why the GOP and Southern Democratic mastodons of the House Un American Activities Committee got their underwear knotted. Zachary Scott is Gordon Gekko 40 year ahead of his time. Some of the observations made by Bessie's characters could hold true for Lillian Hellman's Little Foxes as well as in Citizen Kane.
A real crackerjack film and a fascinating portrayal by Zachary Scott in the lead makes Ruthless a must see.
Under Edgar Ulmer's direction, Scott paints a careful and calculated portrait of a driven and Ruthless man going back to his childhood. Some elements of Citizen Kane are present here as in several flashback sequences we see what has made Scott what he is today.
What he's trying to do now is cover up what he's been in much the same manner as the robber barons of old by donating his vast sums of money. Like Andrew Carnegie when we meet Scott he's having a huge banquet where he's pledging the mansion and lots of money to a world peace foundation. Scott's invited a whole lot of people from his past including his oldest friend Louis Hayward who really knows him from way back when.
And it's back in his childhood just as we were introduced to Charles Foster Kane and the events that shaped we are likewise meeting Zachary Scott, Louis Hayward, and Diana Lynn as the characters they are before they are adults. All I can say is that Scott as a kid was really traumatized by the antics of his parents. He goes to live with Dennis Hoey and his rich and genteel family which includes the daughter who grows up to be Diana Lynn and they give him a Harvard education.
But what makes this a real Zachary Scott role is that it's not just business he's in, it's business mixed with bedroom pleasure. He woos many a woman and discards them with equal abandon. He steals Sydney Greenstreet's trophy wife Lucille Bremer for the 48% of the stock she has in her husband's company.
Ulmer who may have done more with less than any other director around, gets if not a box office cast, a really competent one who suit their roles admirably. The script for Ruthless was written by Alvah Bessie of The Hollywood Ten and I can see why the GOP and Southern Democratic mastodons of the House Un American Activities Committee got their underwear knotted. Zachary Scott is Gordon Gekko 40 year ahead of his time. Some of the observations made by Bessie's characters could hold true for Lillian Hellman's Little Foxes as well as in Citizen Kane.
A real crackerjack film and a fascinating portrayal by Zachary Scott in the lead makes Ruthless a must see.
Monty Baragon reborn
howardmorley5 December 2016
Yes, as Mildred Pierce (Joan Crawford's Oscar winning role of 1945) was so compelling and the character of Monty Baragon (Zachary Scott) her eventual ill fated screen husband; I found it hard to separate the two roles ZS played in that role & "Ruthless" (1948).Whereas "Monty" only "loafed", Horace is obsessed by work and making money to the detriment of his personal life.I found it hard to accept ZS playing a young university student at Harvard.The inter varsity swimming competition I found unconvincing since when they swam the freestyle event, none of the undergraduates did a tumble turn when they reached the end of the pool.Peversly I missed not seeing ZS helping an undergraduate with his economic notes as it would have added depth to the character of Horace.Equally I found it hard to believe he would give up studying at Harvard and hence obtaining an economics degree, by being seduced by the offer of an assistant manager post at a New York firm of stockbrokers.Sydney Greenstreet played his usual "heavy" role a la "THE Maltese Falcon".The female leads in pre-sexual equality days were only interested in love & marriage and were just adequate.Passable 6/10
Atypical odd melodrama.
onepotato22 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is initially intriguing in it's oddness. It's hard to name the genre. It's like a Horatio Alger story that becomes, um, I don't know, a boy's romance?
But what might have been intriguing is exposed as just so much floundering. There is no way that cheerful, caring George Baily (Robert J Anderson) can grow up to become preening, effete villain Zachary Scott. It's just not possible. Anderson is way sympathetic. Scott is like a weird alien, who never has the audiences identification. Horace the child is not dreaming of growing up to go to black-tie balls.
The first 40 minutes will intrigue fans of atypical movies, But the middle hour just sits there and dies. It's too bad the film's message ends up being the homily: "Stay home, have no ambition & lead a trite life!"
But what might have been intriguing is exposed as just so much floundering. There is no way that cheerful, caring George Baily (Robert J Anderson) can grow up to become preening, effete villain Zachary Scott. It's just not possible. Anderson is way sympathetic. Scott is like a weird alien, who never has the audiences identification. Horace the child is not dreaming of growing up to go to black-tie balls.
The first 40 minutes will intrigue fans of atypical movies, But the middle hour just sits there and dies. It's too bad the film's message ends up being the homily: "Stay home, have no ambition & lead a trite life!"
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
