Movies: 18454 | TV Series: 3282 | Added today: 0 | Storage: 65882 GB
- Forgot password?
- | Register
- | Support
- | FAQ
- | Help
Download, Watch online The Postman Always Rings Twice Movie.
| Genres: | CrimeThrillerDr |
| Starring: | Hume Cronyn, Alan Reed, Cecil Kellaway, Leon Ames, Lana Turner, Audrey Totter, John Garfield |
| Director(s): | Tay Garnett |
| Country: | USA |
| Year: | 1946 |
| IMDB Rating: | 7.6 |
Nick Smith, the middle-aged proprietor of a roadside restaurant, hires drifter Frank Chambers as a handyman. Frank eventually begins an affair with Nicks beautiful wife Cora, who talks Frank into helping her kill Nick, by accident. But the best laid plans......
 |
The Postman Always Rings Twice (iPod) | Resolution: 480x352 px | Total Size: 358 Mb |
|
|
 |
The Postman Always Rings Twice (DivX) | Resolution: 624x464 px | Total Size: 1400 Mb |
|
Movie Photos: We have taken some photos of "The Postman Always Rings Twice". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitor Reviews: (20)
planktonrules 18 May 2012
I love Film Noir,...but wasn't thrilled with this film
This is one of those films that I just don't see what others see. WhileI would agree it's a decent film with some great moments, it also isvery uneven and I can think of many Noir films I like a lot more. Nowbefore I go on there are a couple important things to mention. First,Noir is perhaps my favorite type of film and I have a genuine love forthe genre--and having seen so many Film Noir movies I think I have arather informed opinion. Second, I just saw this film for the secondtime because I thought perhaps my original assessment for the film wasunduly harsh. While I liked it a little more the second time, myopinion didn't change dramatically.As far as why I didn't love the film, I think much of the problem isthat casting Cecil Kellaway as the husband of Lana Turner goes WAYbeyond just suspending your disbelief to enjoy the film. He was old,drank too much and wasn't particularly rich or interesting. So, WHYwould a lady that looks like Lana Turner marry him in the first place?!And, if she did, of course she'd want to get out of the marriage!!Additionally, the first half of the movie was much weaker than thesecond. The dialog was pretty sappy and unbelievable between Turner andGarfield until after Kellway returned from the hospital. It just didn'tring true and didn't sound like Noir--it needed to be punched upsomehow.For me, the movie improved a lot when the couple were brought to trialfor the murder of Kellaway, as Hume Cronin stole the show as thecynical and manipulative defense attorney. He WAS a great Film Noirattorney! And, following his appearance the film just seemed to get alot smarter. Garfield and Turner's dialog also improved greatly. WhileI could not believe they were in love (almost instantly) in the firsthalf of the film, their hatred and contempt was a wonderful antidote totheir earlier sappy personalities. And, when they began turning on eachother it really took off as a film.While not a bad film at all, you could certainly do a lot better with afilm such as THE KILLERS, DOA or DOUBLE INDEMNITY. Plus, a somewhatsimilar but underrated film that came out a year later (THEY DON'TBELIEVE ME), is definitely a better take on the adultery and spousalmurder theme.
17 May 2012
This film did it right
In this movie FRank is far younger than Nick (unlike the '81 Jack NIcholson version) partially right away explaining Cora's attraction to Frank. Also, this version left out the sex and actually gave these characters more depth and character to their characters for falling in love with each other. The '81 Frank and Cora are just ruthless sex machines to each other.
bengreenb 17 May 2012
Great film noir
I highly recommend this film. The acting is excellent, the direction issuperb, and the writing is good. The only thing I disliked about it wasthe soundtrack-- they should have opted for some soulful jazz ratherthan whatever bland instrumentation they opted for.The cinematography was simple, and yet that made it all the moreeffective. Today's movies almost never hold a single shot for more thana minute. The "still frame" used in so many scenes of The PostmanAlways Rings Twice allows for the actors to really rise to the top oftheir game-- which they do, and enjoyably so.I won't spoil the ending, but I must admit I didn't like it so much.Watch this movie and decide for yourself.Regardless, this movie is worth repeat watching when you have friendsover on a rainy day.
JohnRouseMerriottChard 16 May 2012
Torrid Romance.
Frank Chambers (John Garfield) stops at a rural diner for a bite toeat, and after noticing the "Man Wanted" sign-ends up working there.The diner is run by beautiful Cora Smith (Lana Turner), and her mucholder husband, Nick (Cecil Kellaway). The animal attraction is evidentfrom the off and the pair soon enter into an affair. It's an affairthat will have far reaching consequences for all three parties.Forget any remake and go straight to this, the best adaptation of JamesM. Cain's hard hitting novel. Out of MGM, it's nice to say that thestudio, in spite of 1940s censors, let director Tay Garnett putvitality into Cain's novel and more crucially,! let Turner fan theflames of smouldering passion. From the moment the camera pans from hershapely foot to the silky blonde mop that sits above her beautifulface, we know that Frank Chambers, and us the audience, are about to betaken in hook line and sinker.Much has been made of the over-use of lighting with Turner in the film,that complaint is something I just can't truck with in any shape orform. It's not for nothing that Turner's Cora is virginal white for 98%of the picture, surely a sign that Cora is in need of some dark tolighten her dark existence. Sounds weird I'm sure, but there it is, andthe lighting only emphasises that virginal quality about to be steereddown a troubled road. It should also be noted that the only time she'sout of white is for the particularly dark moments in her life. It's aconfliction with the Noir ethic to utilise whiteness, but this is avery different femme fatale, more vulnerable and searching for love,even if ultimately it's car crash love. John Garfield matches Turner inperformance. A performance that gathers momentum at every quarter. Soit's no surprise to find that both actors got a positive response fromcritics and public alike. But the support is also very strong,particularly Hume Cronyn & Leon Ames. While Kellaway absolutely nailsthat good old harmless old boy seriously in denial-out of his depthcharacter-with some aplomb.I personally was delighted with a different sort of film-noir viewinghere. And I have to say that I avoided this film on account of havingwatched the Jack Nicholson remake first, years ago; and found itimmeasurably dull. This is a different animal, much like the femaleprotagonist funnily enough. Perhaps the final word should come fromJames M. Cain himself? Who after seeing what Turner did with the roleof Cora gave her a gift of a leather bound first edition of the book,the inscription said "For my dear Lana, thank you for giving aperformance that was finer than I expected." Tis true that, lighting be damned! 8/10
07 May 2012
Fatal Attraction
"The Postman Always Rings Twice" 1946 filmFrank is hitchhiking from San Francisco; he doesn't worry about his future. He knows how to fix cars. The restaurant owner hires him, and Frank sees Cora in her sun bathing outfit. Cora wants to make something of the restaurant. Frank admires her. The hot Santa Anna wind is blowing in from the desert [this affects people's emotions]. Frank and Cora dance to the music in the jukebox. [What was Nick thinking?] Frank and Cora go swimming in the ocean, they become friendlier. Nick is worried about being cheated by the laundry service, the butcher, and what else? Frank and Cora try to run away, but Cora has second thoughts. She wants something more.Nick's driving causes a near accident. [This tells about their traffic laws.] What if something really bad happened? There is a near miss when Nick returns and finds the suitcases. Cora explains how things would be much better for them if Nick wasn't around. Cora gets an idea from a magazine, but fate throws a detour into their plans. [How many others read that same article?] Curiosity kills another cat. Frank leaves for Los Angeles, but later Nick finds him and brings him back, a surprise for Cora. [Note the old two-button light switches.] Nick will sell "Twin Oaks" and retire to his sister's place so Cora can nurse his sister. This is a great shock to Cora, she does not want to retire. So now they will take steps to plan their future. But the best-laid plans of mice and men still go awry. Accidents are always investigated. The police know what to look for, like Cora's handbag.Frank is surprised to hear about the insurance policy on Nick. District Attorney Sackett tries to turn Frank against Cora. Now the courts will decide. There is a shocking surprise at the arraignment, and again when Cora meets Frank. [This is the high point of the film.] Cora's lawyer, Arthur Keats, shows his skills, and we see how a plea bargain works. Keats explains his strategy; it works. Could a restaurant get a lot of business because of the notoriety of the owner? There is a new twist in this story for Cora and Frank. [But they don't want us to tell the ironic ending.] "What's the use?"The book is better than the film in explaining the insurance settlement.
07 May 2012
Film Noir Circa 1946
Director Tay Garnett's adaptation of James M. Cain's THE POSTMAN ALWAYS PLAYS TWICE holds up well after sixty years. In spite of the restraints the director had to work with during that period, Lana Turner as Cora Smith and John Garfield as Frank, the couple who plot the murder of Cora's husband Nick, still manage to heat up the screen. The sexual chemistry is there and all that late-night frolicking they do at the beach gets right erotic. The film though interesting is less than perfect. It takes a little effort on the part of the viewer to believe that Cora prances around her husband's diner that is hardly more than a greasy spoon-- in the middle of the Depression-- dressed all in white, in a turbin, short shorts, heels and showing her midriff. And only a Hollywood star of the calibre of Ms. Turner would return from a swim perfectly coiffed in a dry swimsuit. Additionally, in the ending minutes of the film Garfield hits the viewer over the head in a wordy explanation, just before he is to be executed, of what the title of the movie really means.That a sixty-year-old movie is still watched and enjoyed, however, for more reasons than just its camp effect speaks volumes for it. This is not a bad way to spend two hours of your evening.
05 May 2012
Noir Lite
"The Postman Always Rings Twice" is without doubt film noir lite. Film noir, one of the most intriguing, stylish, and creative movements in cinematic history, can be divided along certain lines such as pre- and post- war noir, American and international noir, and, most relevant here, Hollywood and independent or B-grade noir. The distinction of `Hollywood noir' is a bit of a misnomer as most noirs, whether they be mainstream or otherwise, came from the Hollywood system, but more generally applied the term refers to the larger budget, star-powered A-pictures of the mainstream. These films took the same themes of crime, violence, and insanity the genre is known for but presented them in a far more toned-down and easily palatable manner, using the soft aesthetics and wooden dialogue often typical to Hollywood. "Postman" is an example of Hollywood noir. Released in 1946 by MGM and featuring contemporary stars John Garfield and Lana Turner, "The Postman Always Rings Twice" is an often absorbing and exciting movie that for all its successes never manages to exhibit the dark and shadowy menace that makes for great noir.Certainly some of the most famous noir films were mainstream affairs. Films such as "Double Indemnity", "The Maltese Falcon", and "The Big Sleep" are without doubt Hollywood noirs and are yet still some of the finest of the genre. Nevertheless, there is still something about these films, and about "Postman" also, that prevents them from becoming the disturbing little works of art that many of the lower budgeted noirs managed. "Postman," for one thing, is too slick, and in the wrong sort of way for a noir. Its stars are still softly lit in the manner typical for the time, and its sets and locations, and they way they are filmed, are all far too plain. Even the typical noir lighting that casts shadows of deceit and alienation over its outcast protagonists is not used to any notable success here. Inventive direction is also one of the joys of noir, but barring one fabulous shot of a dropped lipstick and a sexy pair of legs, the camerawork here is decidedly standard. Even the story is toned-down and ineffective, using bland dialogue and occasionally hokey plot turns to tell a story that was cliché even for its time. The first half dealing with the affair between Garfield and Turner and the plot to murder Turner's husband is quite good, but beyond that the story becomes too complicated for its own good. Add to that one tacked-on moral high ground ending and you have an example of film noir that is unequivocally sub-par.I hate to be too disparaging, as the film is entertaining enough, to be sure, and well worth watching, but given the vast array of superior noir fare that surrounds it, one cannot help but be slightly disappointed. Turner and Garfield are often excellent, as are many of the supporting actors, notably Hume Cronyn as a wily lawyer, but the film still lacks the grit and style of the classic noirs. For film noir, style is ultimately the substance, and without it all noirs would be as discouraging as this one. The film is slick, but not the overblown, inventive slick of so many of the genre's greatest examples. It is instead a safer sort of slick, of a style designed more for highlighting the stars then their depraved characters; a style more easily attributed to the Hollywood elite than the great talents below them trying to explore and compromise their slick veneer. "The Postman Always Rings Twice" is of this upper echelon of Hollywood and because of this lacks the depravity and hard knock moxie that bred the best of the great genre.
04 May 2012
Bad casting, bad sets, bad costumes
So disappointing. Hardly a dark/noir film, in my opinion. Just a proper Hollywood murder mystery. And there's no sex, except brief kissing which Lana always cuts short! I'm a James M Cain fan, and this doesn't even try to be faithful to his great noir novel. Everyone's too decent. Cora (Lana) doesn't have a treacherous or naughty bone in her body, and she's always costumed like a perfect fashion model, fingernail polish and all. Frank (Garfield)is never lustful, never mean, never desperate. Always polite and decent. Not a gas station (except for one pump that looks planted) not a single oil can or wrench. Not a greasy spoon or diner, Twin Oaks looks like a tidy clean beach cottage or B&B, fit for Donna Reed & family. The 80's Nicholson/Mammet version is much better in all these areas and actually dark. Much more faithful to Cain.
vincentlynch-moonoi 02 May 2012
Odd man out
So, does it make sense that old Cecil Kellway would be married tobombshell Lana Turner to begin with. No, of course it doesn't, butthings like that do happen.The problem with this film is that there is no "good guy". This is oneof those modern movies (despite being made in 1946) where neither ofthe main characters -- Lana Turner or John Garfield -- is at alllikable. She's trash, he wants trash. Both low class.I guess I'm the odd man out on this film. Critics at the time werefairly positive, and today on Rotten Tomatoes this gets very highmarks. I disagree. At first the plot is predictable, but once they getinto the murder there are too many plot twists...particularly once theyget to court.On the other hand, I have to admit the acting here is quite good. LanaTurner is fine, so is John Garfield. There are interesting performancesby Hume Cronyn (quite off base casting, here) and Leon Ames (whom I'musually less impressed by).So, high grades for the acting. Low grades for the plot.
02 May 2012
Frank & Cora's Double Indemnity!
This review is from: The Postman Always Rings Twice (DVD) The Postman Always Rings TwiceFrank & Cora & MurderThis was a fun story - full of suspense, some romantic moments, and conflicts in this love triangle - a drifter, a woman who married an older man, and that older man, Nick, not suspecting that Cora wants more in life than living in a nothing café.The idea of an affair with Frank is exciting for Cora, but as the movie progresses, we see an on and off relationship that builds in tension when Cora decides to get rid of her husband when Nick decides to sell the store and take care of his invalid sister in Canada.OK, kill the guy or live a life taking care of his invalid sister. Which would you choose?Frank is not hot on the idea. Their last attempt ends in a screaming, smoking cat and all the lights out. And a suspicious DA who comes by and asks too many questions.The film wraps up with a court scene that would have made Perry Mason proud. A deal is drawn, she gets her freedom. A blackmail ring comes around and is quickly squelched. That was not even needed in the story and could have been dropped. anyway, tragedy and triumph end the film and makes you wonder about the fairness of justice and how fickle love actually is.Bottom Line: Lana Turner is stunning in her entrance when she meets Frank. Lovely legs, 40's style make-up and a come-hither stare gets the ball rolling for Frank. Frank is a cool character, with itchy feet and doesn't really know what he wants out of life; and the clueless Nick, who has no idea what's going on. Based on a best seller and remade in the 80s with Jack Nicholson, the original is still best. Great piece of entertainment, but could be considered a slow-goer for the modern viewing audience.Cast & Crew:Directed by Tay GarnettProduced by Carey WilsonWritten by Story:James M. CainScreenplay:Harry RuskinNiven BuschStarring Lana TurnerJohn GarfieldCecil KellawayHume CronynLeon AmesAudrey Totter
Pongsakorn Phuaree 01 May 2012
The Postman Rings Twice
There is the narrator's voice of the main actor to help tell the story,so it is first-person narration, and the movie emphasises the mainactor because it is story about him. However, I think the main actressis more dominant than the actor in the role of performance. Inaddition, there are many background musics that performed almost everyscene of the movie; it makes the story is going on smoothly. Moreover,in the scene that after the main actor made the new sign forrestaurant, they celebrated by playing music and dancing. While themain actor and actress were dancing, it was interesting to see thelight from the sign that opened and closed between dancing. This makesthe dancing more classic. The climax of movie is the point which themain actor and actress would want to kill the own restaurant, so Isuddenly knew the end of the movie would not be happy, but how ? As aresult of, they could become free from accusation.
Grann-Bach 30 April 2012
Stealing a man's car, that's larceny
I haven't read the novel(or watched other versions of this, though Iunderstand that this is the one to go with, and I would agree), but itseems like they did do a lot to work as much as they could into this;and some of it, in the latter half of this, does not have the effect orweight to it that it ought to(and probably did in the book). Other thanthat, there's not an awful lot of negative that I can say about this,and it definitely contains unforgettable moments. A good place to startis Turner's introduction; the woman was(R.I.P., and that goes foranyone else who worked on this) utterly stunning, beautiful andhot(look at those legs!), and made for a wonderful femme fatale. Herperformance is spot-on, and in fact, all of the acting in this isexcellent. Everyone is well-cast, as well. The editing andcinematography have their share of masterful instances. This hasamazing reveals, and the lighting(always soft on Lana) is marvelous.The tension and suspense in this are impeccable. This moves at a nice,fast pace, not wasting any time(pay close attention and don't miss anylines). The dialog is well-written and treated to great delivery. Whilethe score can be bombastic here and there, it's usually good. The plotis smart and the twists and turns are well-thought out. I don't know ifthe similarity to Macbeth is intentional or not. This has largely agedwell, if it does show when it's from, mainly in the sexism, which is,at times, rampant. There is a little mild violence(not graphic),disturbing content and "strong language"(it is by our standards, Idon't think it was by theirs, back then). The DVD comes with a58-minute featurette(that I will review on its own page here on thesite), a cool 6 minutes of behind-the-scenes image gallery, a 5 minuteintro by a film historian(very interesting, if it does spoil through abit of its footage), and a theatrical trailer. I recommend this to anyfan of noir. Perhaps not the best; however, a classic nonetheless. 8/10
30 April 2012
Well, it has its moments.
I may be old fashioned but I still find this movie a little shocking. And while the end is a dissapointment, it was probably made necessary by the censors. Its also an element of Film Noir that everything ISN'T going to be ok. It all works because of Lana Turner. Ms. Turner takes a simple--and hopfully, implausible--story and makes it cheap, tawdry and hotter than hell.Man, this must have been something in 1946! I'll bet a lot of couples gave each other a long look as they left the theatre....
Lechuguilla 29 April 2012
A Glamorous Spider And Her Tangled Web
A rebellious drifter named Frank (John Garfield) happens onto a ruralhamburger joint, managed by a jovial old man named Nick (CecilKellaway). Nick wants to hire Frank. And in Frank's mind, an addedincentive would be Nick's beautiful wife Cora (Lana Turner). Thusbegins the story.I have two big problems with this film: the script and the casting. Thesetup starts slow and lasts too long. In the middle Act interest picksup a little, despite some improbable coincidences. But later we'reintroduced to confusing legalities, compounded by contrived twists. Andthe ending contradicts the darker tone of earlier sequences.Much of the plot is a tangled web of this and that, held togetherentirely by the three lead characters. It's like the writers sortedthrough dozens of script drafts, couldn't decide; then in frustration,hurriedly wrote a final draft that was a compromise of the previousversions.John Garfield is well cast and does a fine job. But someone other thanKellaway would have been better in the role of Nick. Much, much worsethan the casting of Kellaway, however, was the casting of glamorousLana Turner, as Cora. Turner, with her blonde hair and glossy facade,is not at all convincing either as Nick's wife, or as a young, spiderybeauty stuck in a two-bit hamburger joint. Further, her acting isawful. She doesn't act so much as she ... poses for the camera, in abid to show off her glamour for future starring roles. Her presenceseriously detracts from the story.I think Audrey Totter, who plays a minor role, would have been fine asCora. So too would have been Ida Lupino. Indeed, almost anyone wouldhave been better than Turner, even Broderick Crawford in a wig.Critics regard this film highly. I'm not sure why. About the only thingto recommend it is the performance of John Garfield.
Itchload 25 April 2012
Very oddly structured movie
I was not expecting a classic film noir along the lines of "DoubleIndemnity" or "Out of the Past" when I put this movie in, and for awhile,Ithought I might have been wrong. Maybe the cover was too cheesy, I'm notsure, but I didn't have extra high hopes for this movie. Then my moodbrightened when it actually started to become very entertaining. I wasn'tbeing blown away, but I did start to enjoy the film noir 101 plot. Thereviewer who noted MGM's dramatic lighting of Turner is right, it'sridiculous, 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 thepace was slow, it moved speedily. Something was always happening, andtherewas plenty of suspense/overblown MGM music blaring out of the speakers atany given moment. But the plot was way too top-heavy. They get caughtdoing the murder. Okay, time for trial, some final irony, then themovie'sover. But it's not! It just kept going. New subplots turned up, bribes,plot twists, double crosses, it just kept happening and happening. It wastoo much. I was literally standing up sweating by the final scene,wantingit to end so much. The problem was, nothing of any substance was given tothe 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 asmall 2 minute scene including it in the movie" and suddenly the movie isfull of these large occurrences given very brief sketched out screen time.Garfield runs off for a weekend in Tijuana with some random women? Whatjust happened? Things just grew too implausible. I realize thatcomplainingthe movie went on too long and claiming that not enough screen time wasgiven to all the events in the second half is hypocritical, but there musthave been ways to flesh things out. I haven't read the book, but Isuspectit'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 tothepriest (hey, I thought film noirs where supposed to be existential!), Ihappened to look at the video case and glance at the title. Realizing ithadn't been referenced in the movie yet I stared at the screen andmuttered"out with it" and in return got some over-reaching ramblings concerninghow"he always rings twice, always rings twice" ext. Yikes.I have to say though, the movie had some very good irony and employed aloadof classic film noir tricks (the final outcome must have influenced theCoenBrothers with "The Man Who Wasn't There"), but I can't help believing thebook must have been a lot better. I'd chalk this one up for noircompletists and Golden Age MGM enthusiasts only.
tamimarie228 25 April 2012
Itchy feet
Frank is this drifter who cannot stay in one place for very long. Hehas very "itchy" feet and very itchy eyes (that comes later). So Frankends up working at this road side diner and that's when he meets Cora.He falls in love with her but the only problem is that she's married.This movie was very shocking back then but not now. I think that it's agreat story of forbidden love and forbidden passion. The scenes are aspassionate and full of lust as they could be for the time. "The PostmanAlways Rings Twice" also has many twists and turns in it. Just when youthink that something is going to happen, something else happens thatthrows the story in a different direction. A story of forbidden lovethat stands the test of time.
mariposa-9 19 April 2012
ONE OF THE ALL-TIME BEST!
The Dynamic John Garfield and Lana Turner, sizzle in this adaptation ofJames M. Cain's bristling novel of love, betrayal, andmurder.Garfield plays Frank Chambers (a role he was born to play), a drifter, whose"feet are just achin to go places," he spots a sign at a cafe that says "ManWanted," and that's where the fun begins.He meets Cora Smith, a beautiful blonde, silhouetted in the doorway, bathedin white. Chambers is breathless (as we are). This initial sighting of eachother is one of the all-time greats in the history of cinema; it's boilingover with sexual heat, and right from the start, Chambers knows she's hisfor the takingExcept there's one problem: she's married to Nick Smith, an older, jovialman, who seems unaware of his wife's affect on other men.This is the set-up, and to reveal more would be sacralegious. So just holdonto your seats, because TPART is a great ride.
SimonJack 19 April 2012
Crime, Mystery, Morality, Love, Justice  the Drama of life
Most viewers who comment on this film see it as a noir mystery withmuch sensuality between the two leads. That adds up to considerableentertainment for many. I enjoy good mysteries as well, but there ismuch more in this film than that. And the more is what makes "ThePostman Always Rings Twice" a very good movie. I won't rehash the plotor the outstanding acting that Lana Turner and John Garfield give totheir roles  or that of Cecil Kellaway, for that matter. Some find ithard to accept the "dupe" of the older husband. But who can say thatsuch a marriage is implausible  especially when the author of the bookcreated the character? Some of us have known just such types ofmarriage that existed in our family pasts  or have read about them inreal-life stories.So, what are some of the "more" that the Postman has to offer? To beginwith, the fear, worry, angst and paranoia the leads show after theirfirst botched attempt. Can we not imagine  most of us who are notcold- blooded killers  that we would be like Frank and Cora? Wouldn'tour consciences bother us as it did them on and off? Both characterswere very conflicted about committing murder. First, they think it'stheir only way out, and then they have regrets and second thoughts?Would that not be the way most people  most humans would be and reactin such circumstances? Modern movies with all their mayhem havecharacters who emote about as much as robots after mowing downcountless opponents  good or bad. But the Postman gives us a much morereal portrayal of human nature and our understanding of right and wrongand knowing that killing is wrong.Of course, most of us would probably not get to such a circumstance inthe first place. But the story is about two people who do. They beginan adulterous affair. The male character, Frank, truly is a drifter whochases after women. Cora is tempted when he comes on the scene. Bothknow they should be apart, and both try to leave to end therelationship. There is morality at work here. Adultery always involves deceit. Can true love come of such, or last?The film shows so realistically the distrust that arises between Frankand Cora. Finally, when Cora leaves to be with her dying mother andthen returns pregnant, she has a resolve to start again, with love forher man. Only, justice has not yet been served. So the drama plays outwith an unusual twist that confirms the age-old adage that crime doesnot pay. The very final scene may seem a little hokey, but for Frank'scharacter  who actually was NOT very bright or smart, a glimmer ofhope in love lost seems to be a fair deal in return for payment for hiscrimes. All-in-all a very good film, very entertaining, and very satisfyingwith its conclusion. This film was so well done by all, that the viewerdoesn't root for the stars to triumph in their illicit love affair.
18 April 2012
Seller needs to state if this DVD will work on a U.S. DVD player
This is the second DVD I've purchased from Moviemars and the second I've had to return because it will not play on a U.S. DVD player. And to have to pay for return shipping twice for the same problem will no longer be a problem for me. I will never purchase from Moviemars again because it is not clear that either film only played on a "regional" player.
17 April 2012
A woman can't live without love
Beautiful woman and handsome drifter find the road to love paved with deception and littered with corpses. Lana Turner plays Cora Smith and John Garfield plays drifter Frank Chambers. Cecil Kellaway plays Nick Smith, Cora's husband and, after they burn the `Man Wanted' sign that stood in front of his roadside diner, Chambers' employer. Kellaway's Nick Smith is, for all intents a eunuch, a pleasant old souse who drinks a bit too much, strums a drunken guitar and insists that Cora and Chambers dance while he stands in the shadows, joyously and obliviously accompanying the music coming out of the juke box while they rumba in the flashing neon night. THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE is indeed, as advertised, about sex and murder. It's also about people making really dumb choices and Fate kicking them down the hill forever after. The primal dumb choice being Cora's marriage to Nick - a marriage, we're told, that rescued her from the wolves who'd been snapping at her heels since she was fourteen. Cora and Nick's marriage-of-convenience may have protected her from the threat out there, but it left her defenseless against the threat in here. You didn't marry him for love, Chamber tells her before the embers of the `Man Wanted' sign had cooled to ash. He told you it would come, and it never did. You can't live without love, Cora smolders later on in the movie. At least a woman can't. Director Tay Garnett and cinematographer Sidney Wagner catch the simmering sizzle between Turner and Garfield - whether following the track of the lipstick to the first shot of Turner, following Garfield's point-of-view and pausing to linger on her legs before tracking up to her face, or those early and breathless conversations. TPART'S frank (not graphic) depiction of sexual relationships was ahead of its time. MGM didn't usually soil the hem of her robes with this type of material, but when pressed it could sling the sexual innuendoes and double entendres with the best of her earthier sister studios, Warner Bros. and RKO, and Poverty Row hash-houses like the seamy and seedy PRC. Anyway, MGM threw good money at this one, and it sure looks good. Cora and Chambers dally, and to satisfy the Code they pay the wages of sin, but the movie paints them both as more victims of fate than corrupt criminals. More than the frank dialogues and the lingering glances, I think, the censors must have been concerned about the sympathetic portrayal of both the Turner and the Garfield character. There's also an ambiguous take on the justice system. Leon Ames plays the Laddie-boy scrupulous district attorney and Hume Cronyn the unscrupulous defense attorney manipulating a legal system that seems more concerned with expediency than with justice. Lana Turner is a dish and quite good as the sensual young wife. I've recently seen Garfield in two films - They Made Me a Criminal and Body and Soul. In those two Garfield reminded me of a young Jimmy Cagney. His performances were brash and extroverted, charged with 1000-watts of energy with personalities that prowled and leapt off his skin. In TPART Garfield cages that energy. Frank Chambers lives below the surface, and Garfield reveals his character with a subtle grace I wasn't prepared for. When Chambers first sees Cora you see that she literally takes his breath away. Later, when he's forced to share a courthouse anteroom with Cora, the haunted and embarrassed glances he quietly steals reveal the lingering pain of their ruptured romance. It's a bravura performance, and my favorite of his - so far. Also on the disk is the enjoyable 60-minute documentary, The John Garfield Story, narrated by Garfield's daughter Julie. It's a pretty fair rundown of his legitimate theater and movie career, his problems with HUAC and his early death. Best of all is when movie actors like Lee Grant, Joanne Woodward, Richard Dreyfuss, and others talk about Garfield's acting technique. Actors talking about acting is always interesting. THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RING TWICE is an excellent movie, one of the best in the genre. Very highly recommended.