Nightmare Alley (2021)

[BetterButter]

 

[auburn-waves]

I saw the original Tyrone Power and Joan Blondell film on tv a couple weeks ago. Looking forward to this!

[Tom Holmberg]

On 9/22/2021 at 3:30 PM, auburn-waves said:

I saw the original Tyrone Power and Joan Blondell film on tv a couple weeks ago. Looking forward to this!

I read the original book back in the 1980s.  It was very noir.

[Tom Holmberg]

On 9/23/2021 at 4:14 PM, Tom Holmberg said:

I read the original book back in the 1980s.  It was very noir.

The author's life was rather noir also.

[BetterButter]

 

[PaulaO]

The original movie was so creepy that I could only watch it once. 

[AngieBee1]

The cinematography and set design are the stars of the film - although Cate Blanchett and Richard Jenkins are fantastic. I was expecting it to be more macabre than it was. 

[StatisticalOutlier]

Can anyone tell me what Stan leaned down and whispered to the man in the bed, in a scene near the end?  It was about four syllables--not enough context for me to make it out, and the damn caption machine didn't work for this movie.

 

[AngieBee1]

Quote

Can anyone tell me what Stan leaned down and whispered to the man in the bed, in a scene near the end?  

He said,  "I've always hated you."

[StatisticalOutlier]

On 12/18/2021 at 3:56 AM, AngieBee1 said:

He said,  "I've always hated you."

Harsh!

I'm not a fan of cruelty at all so at the beginning, with the guy and the chicken, I was wondering why in the world I'd decided to see it, especially because carnies give me the creeps in all situations.  But it got much more tolerable, and I'm glad I stuck it out.

[hypnotoad]

I saw this last night and I absolutely loved it. I've never seen the original but I plan to watch it.

[lasu]

I thought this movie was like a lot I've been seeing recently - it kept me thoroughly entertained while I was watching it despite some (IMO) plot holes, but then I promptly forgot about it the second I left the theater.  When I just saw this thread, I was like, Oh yeah!  I just watched that last week, lol.

[Simon Boccanegra]

On 12/28/2021 at 9:34 AM, lasu said:

it kept me thoroughly entertained while I was watching it despite some (IMO) plot holes, but then I promptly forgot about it the second I left the theater. 

I didn't exactly forget it, but I know what you mean. It's engrossing, beautifully designed, well acted, but there's a pulpy hollowness at the center that keeps it from being a great film. It's a very deluxe B-movie. I've seen the 1947 version, and I don't think either is better or worse. 1947 moves at a brisker clip and is a bit warmer (in that the era's production code kept a few characters from going as dark as they go in 2021, and an optimistic ending was imposed). 2021 is more lavish and more faithful to the source.

[hypnotoad]

Quote

It's a very deluxe B-movie. I've seen the 1947 version, and I don't think either is better or worse. 1947 moves at a brisker clip and is a bit warmer (in that the era's production code kept a few characters from going as dark as they go in 2021, and an optimistic ending was imposed). 2021 is more lavish and more faithful to the source.

The original was played on TCM Noir Alley this past weekend and so I watched it. I generally prefer original movies to remakes but not in this case. I much prefer the remake. The original was certainly brisker but I appreciated the remake for the attention to detail, for the foreshadowing done in regards to drinking and other things. I felt like the original just jumped from Stanton meeting rich guy to having Molly pretend to be a ghost. There wasn't much build up to it at all. Although to be fair maybe I feel this way because I saw the remake first!

And though I certainly know the filmmakers had no choice, I still hated the lighter, 'happier' ending to the original.

[StatisticalOutlier]

21 hours ago, hypnotoad said:

The original was played on TCM Noir Alley this past weekend and so I watched it.

I did, too, and agree with everything you said.

The only thing I liked better in the original was the portrayal of the geek.  When I was watching those early scenes with the geek in the remake, I actually asked myself, "Why did I think I wanted to see this?" and even considered leaving, but decided to stick it out, and the cruelty abated, thank heavens.

Anyway, in the original, you don't even see him, and just barely see any chickens being thrown, and I was happy not to see such a wretched situation graphically portrayed.  But to be honest, I'm not sure I would have grokked to exactly what was going on if I hadn't seen the remake first.

And in that respect, I'm actually glad the remake was explicit because I'm almost never ahead of any plot, and when the new circus guy was being nice to Stan and then said, "It's a temporary job" I about jumped out of my seat.  The original didn't seem to have anywhere near that impact.

[hypnotoad]

Quote

I'm almost never ahead of any plot, and when the new circus guy was being nice to Stan and then said, "It's a temporary job" I about jumped out of my seat.  The original didn't seem to have anywhere near that impact.

I rarely figure out a plot or twist in a movie. I watch to watch not to try and figure stuff like that out. However, after about the 3rd or 4th time Stanton said he never drinks - I turned to my friend and guessed the end! And I agree the ending in the original did not impact me the way the remake did.

Quote

even considered leaving, but decided to stick it out, and the cruelty abated, thank heavens.

Yeah that was difficult to watch. Yikes.

[ZoqFotPik]

I thought it was well made, well acted, but extremely predictable movie. I thought it was incredibly obvious that Lilith was conning Stan.

I am annoyed that I saw this movie after I watched Bradley Cooper on Colbert. During the interview, they show a clip that is the last scene in the movie, so once the scene between Clem and Stan talking about geeks occurs, I knew how Stan would end up. 

[hypnotoad]

Quote

I thought it was incredibly obvious that Lilith was conning Stan.

I will say that it's far more obvious in the remake than the original. The character isn't nicer in the original by any means but I felt like the actress was a bit more subtle about what was going on.

[Simon Boccanegra]

11 hours ago, hypnotoad said:

I will say that it's far more obvious in the remake than the original. The character isn't nicer in the original by any means but I felt like the actress was a bit more subtle about what was going on.

Agreed. Although I'd give the nod to the 2021 film for the overall quality of acting, in that it has a present-day murderers' row of awards contenders while 1947 had a postwar B-list in support of Tyrone Power, Helen Walker's Lilith was a standout in 1947. She's not the italicized femme fatale that Blanchett is. Walker's IMDb bio describes her as "a beautiful and bright actress whose career never reached its full potential, in spite of her evident talent." I can see it.   

Coleen Gray, who played the "Rooney Mara role" in 1947, was later the love interest in The Killing, generally considered Stanley Kubrick's first great film.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Simon Boccanegra

[StatisticalOutlier]

I was scanning my local listings and saw something called NIGHTMARE ALLEY: VISION IN DARKNESS AND LIGHT (2022) at a couple of theaters and checked into it, and it's a black and white version.  Parasite also had a black and white version, and I don't know about the particulars behind that but Nightmare Alley seems like possibly a particularly good fit, and del Toro says he lit it with black and white in mind.

I found an interview about it:

https://deadline.com/2022/01/nightmare-alley-bradley-cooper-guillermo-del-toro-j-miles-dale-black-and-white-version-expansion-1234913743/

The article says the black and white release started in NY and LA, but is expanding this week to Austin, Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco, and will eventually be expanding to 50-75 markets in the U.S.

Edited January 19, 2022 by StatisticalOutlier

[snickers]

Visually this movie was great, really liked the first half with the carnival/circus scenes, but I wasn't that wowed by the story.  Did like the geek ending though.  It does make me want to see the original.  And I was really, really impressed with Bradley Cooper in this role. 

[StatisticalOutlier]

I assumed the black and white version of Nightmare Alley would be going mainly to art theaters when it expands, but in the Chicago suburbs, anyway, it's going to "regular" theaters, like Cinemark and AMC, and kind of a lot of them.

 

[SlovakPrincess]

This movie looked great, I'll give it that!  And the acting was good, although I'm not sure Bradley Cooper has much to work with until the very end (he's basically a smooth talking jerk for 2+ hours, though Cooper adds some nice little nuances to give the role more depth).   In terms of plot, it was extremely predictable, which can be fine, if all the other elements of the movie work well, and here they mostly do.  But it was pretty clear upfront who was shady and who wasn't, even Cooper's character, which made everyone a bit ... flat.  

Still, I'm on the fence as to whether I buy that Stan would really end up the way he ends up.  

Spoiler

First of all -- why would he trust the femme fatale psychologist to hold onto all the money?   Did his brain fall out of his head at some point?  The entire appeal of her to him was the fact that he knew they were both conniving ... and even if he thought she didn't care that much about money, he should've known not to give her control over his share of their ill-gotten gains.  

Even after all of that happened ... I almost felt like he was too much of a sociopath / survivor to not have come up with some low level hustle rather than end up agreeing to become a geek.  Although I suppose the point was that he was genetically predisposed to become an alcoholic like his father, so his fall was hard and fast.

But come on.  Stan knows from what Clem told him that the geeks are basically tricked into enslavement.  On some level, does he feel he deserves this?  But nothing else in the movie indicated Stan had that much self-reflection, as even his guilt over his father and Pete wasn't particularly deep or convincing.  

 

So did Molly go back to the carnival?  I'm picturing her wandering around with fake blood on her hands and that ridiculous dress, trying to get back into their hotel suite to get her suitcase and a change of clothes -- hope that worked out for her!    

And did everyone know Clem was basically enslaving the men he turned into geeks (Pete certainly seemed to know what "breaking in a geek" meant, and obviously the guy was being kept in a cage, not joining them in the cafeteria tent between shows, etc.)?  And, like, they just went along with it?  WTF, people??  W   T    F.  

And of course we keep the poisonous alcohol right next to the good alcohol.  Of course we do that.  🙄

I had to LOL at the end credits, with the close-ups on the pickled mutant baby.  You can stop being gross, now, movie!  We get it!  

Edited February 3, 2022 by SlovakPrincess

[SlovakPrincess]

This line, from a review critical of the film, cracked me up:  "An oddly literal melodrama about bad people doing very bad things, very slowly."

[FoundTime]

On 1/15/2022 at 7:18 PM, ZoqFotPik said:

I thought it was incredibly obvious that Lilith was conning Stan.

Well, her name was Lilith.

Wikipedia

Although maybe we should give Stan a pass, as Frasier hadn't aired yet.

😈

[Schweedie]

I did like the ending with Stan ending up a geek, even though you could see it coming - after Willem Defoe's character described the process it was like, yeah, that's gonna end up being a plot point. Like the alcohol. They weren't exactly subtle with the foreshadowing. But Stan ending up a geek was kind of poetic in a way; not that *anyone* deserves that, but at least he walked into it with eyes open.

But I didn't think they were all that clear about why Lilith did what she did. Was she just a psychopath who did what she did because she enjoyed it, was she one of the girls Grindle hurt and used Stan for payback, or was it all to get back at Stan because he embarrassed her when they first met by besting her? Or a combination?

[Hanahope]

Just watched this last night.  The acting was really good, i'll give it that.  I too thought the plot between Stan and Lilith a bit too contrived, particularly Stan's actions.  i mean, how did Lilith become "that convincing" that she was able to con a conman?  it did seem that her voice was very soothing and perhaps that helped a lot, maybe Stan put a stop to that.  

agreed that i thought Stan could have restarted somewhere else, changed his name and such,  but i guess the point is once he started drinking, he was now unable to stop.

 

 

[hypnotoad]

Quote

was she one of the girls Grindle hurt

I personally thought that was it but it sure seemed like a convoluted way to get revenge on him!

[StatisticalOutlier]

9 hours ago, hypnotoad said:

I personally thought that was it but it sure seemed like a convoluted way to get revenge on him!

I assume her scar came from Grindle, but now that I think about it, when would have inflicted it--after she provided psychological services?  Surely not before.  So maybe not.

Also @Schweedie, you didn't mention her getting all the money among your possible motives. 

Edited February 27, 2022 by StatisticalOutlier

[Simon Boccanegra]

Lilith says she doesn't care about the money, "but it means everything to you, doesn't it?" 

The revenge motive is the one that makes the most sense. She prides herself on being able to read people, figure them out, and Stanton is someone beneath her in class ("nothing but an Okie with straight teeth") who does a version of that for entertainment and profit. She tries to humiliate him in the nightclub scene and he turns the tables, even taunting her: "Madam, you are not powerful. Not powerful enough." The line comes back in their final confrontation: "Am I powerful enough for you, Stan?"

I'm unsure whether Grindle hurt her. She does say he's dangerous and unpredictable, she has the unexplained scar, and he claims to have "hurt" women. But it isn't clear whether she's suffered at Grindle's hands herself or he's simply confided things he's done to others. 

In any case, things in Lilith's background have made her a very dark character, capable of cruelty.

[Madding crowd]

Just watched this tonight. I liked the scenes in the carnival but the rest wasn’t as interesting. I don’t think the movie did a good job of showing the motive of Lilith. She wouldn’t have known what exactly would happen with Grindle yet she seemed ready for things to play out as it did. The geek ending was obvious from the start. Bradley Cooper was very good in this.