Night and the City (1950)

"If you ain't got socks you can't pull 'em up, can you?", 24 April 2007

Harry Fabian (Richard Widmark) is a small-time hustler with big-time aspirations. All he needs is that one big chance. Fate seems to be smiling his way when he meets a very famous Greek wrestler and his protégé. If he plays it just right, Fabian is convinced he can turn this chance meeting into a wad of cash and make himself the biggest wrestling promoter in England. Just as things are looking up, forces beyond his control and a series of inopportune events conspire to destroy Fabian's dreams. But at what price to Fabian and those around him?

One word often used to describe film noir is "dark". Night and the City is as dark as they come. It's as dark and black as midnight. None of the characters comes out of this one unscathed. Not Fabian, not his girl, not his business partners, not his wrestlers, not the competing promoter, not the people he once hustled for – No one! There is no "happily ever after" Hollywood-style ending to this movie. Every character with more than 30 seconds of screen-time ends up like damaged goods. But it's this nihilistic view that makes Night and the City so compelling. It's akin to watching a train wreck – impossible to turn away.

The acting in Night and the City is, for the most part, outstanding. Widmark, Herbert Lom, Hugh Marlowe, Mike Mazurki, Francis Sullivan, and Googie Withers are all tremendous. But the performance that really caught my eye was that of Stanislaus Zbyszko as the Greek wrestler Gregorius. Zbyszko was a wrestler – not an actor. And the fact that his performance is as good as the trained and noted members of the cast is no small feat. Not only does he dominate his scenes physically, he more than holds his own when it comes to conveying emotion and feeling. It's truly an awesome performance.

But as good as Night and the City is, it is not without faults. Two that standout are Gene Tierney and the film's runtime. Notice I wrote that the acting was good "for the most part". The exception is Tierney. She does absolutely nothing to distinguish herself. She's merely adequate. But, it's not like she had much to work with. I wonder why the money was spent to hire a "name" like Tierney and then so underutilize her talents? As for the runtime, the movie feels a little long. A tighter script that eliminated some of the extraneous "stuff" would have made the film even better to me. But then again, who am I to criticize the editing decisions made on a classic like Night and the City?

8/10