In the Street (2013) User Reviews

Life in Action

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 22 May 2016]

Images of street life in New York's Spanish Harlem during the 1940s.

The film is generally considered as an extension of Levitt's (now famed) street photography in New York City, and Levitt subsequently re-used the title, "In the Street", for a volume reproducing her photographs. Loeb was a painter and photographer. James Agee was a noted writer; both Loeb and Agee subsequently collaborated with Levitt on a second film, "The Quiet One" (1948).

This really is a collection of photos of life in Spanish Harlem, although these photos happen to be moving. There is no plot, no characters, just people being people and kids being kids. Having never been there myself, I couldn't even say it had any notable landmarks. But that was sort of the point.

In the Street was an interesting short documentary of the New York tenement streets during the late '40s

[tavm · 8/10 · 28 July 2009]

Just watched this documentary short on YouTube. It's just mainly images depicted in the tenement streets of New York as photographed in the late '40s. There are faces and figures of various races, nationalities, ages, and colors all dancing, dressing in costumes, playing, fighting, walking, running, looking at the movie camera, and just being there having a time that's like no other. Among the people providing these images is one James Agee who is probably best known as a movie critic of LIFE magazine. And the whole thing is scored by a piano that tinkles some of the most sadly haunting music that sometimes turns joyful though still slowly soft. So on that note, if you like moving photos, I recommend In the Street.

A brilliant and evocative account of New York street life of the 1940s

[deane-williams · 10/10 · 16 June 2005]

This film if it was directed at all, was 'directed' by the legendary New York writer, screenplay writer, critic and reviewer James Agee. Siegfried Kracauer in his book Theory of Film wrote an evocative appreciation of the film: On the one hand, this film is nothing but a reportage pure and simple; its shots of Harlem scenes are so loosely juxtaposed that they almost give the impression of a random sample. A child behind a window is seen licking the pane; a woman with a terrible face passes by; a young man languidly watches the spectacle in the street; Negro children, intoxicated by their Halloween masks, dance and romp about with complete self-abandon. On the other hand, this reporting job is done with unconcealed compassion for the people depicted: the camera dwells on them tenderly; they are not meant to stand for anything but themselves (Kracauer 203).

16 minutes of Harlem

[Horst_In_Translation · 4/10 · 12 March 2016]

Bronx and Manhattan have their documentary short films too, so Harlem shall also have one. "In the Street" is a 16-minute black-and-white movie from 1948, so this one will soon have its 70th anniversary and it depicts the life in New York shortly after World War II. The most impressive thing about this movie is probably that there were no less than 3 directors working on these 16 minutes and all three of them became Academy Award nominees not much later, two of them for the same project. So yeah, this one here may be a good watch for people living in the area and of course for those who recognize themselves as child in here, but everybody else is not missing much. I do not agree with the National Film Registry that this is a film that stands out for whatever reason. Not recommended.

Disjointed miss.

[st-shot · 5/10 · 24 January 2021]

This eye opening timepiece of The Big Apple far from midtown is mostly a sloppy collection of snippets, poorly edited and presented by the likes of Helen Levitt and James Agee who we would expect more of. Made the same year as their Oscar nominated The Quiet One, it comes across as a compendium of outtakes that irritate rather than inform as waifs of all ages run the streets in what is called both "theatre and battleground." The imagery and history being recorded is priceless but presented in such a haphazard fashion its abrasive editing never allows the audience to dwell on the calamity of inner city poverty an spirit long enough before moving on to the next brief poorly recorded shot of repetitive child's play on the mean streets of NYC. In spite of its inept presentation some powerful moments remain as well as images, frozen in a single frame, that would make superb works of photo journalism but overall this doc is a chaotic mess.