Maltese Falcon at 8 EST.
High Sierra at 10.

Along with William Wyler's The Letter (released in November, 1940), an argument can be made for Raoul Walsh's High Sierra (released in January, 1941) as the first American film noir. Bogart's Roy Earle is a career criminal but the audience is fully on his side throughout the film, and this is necessary for the development of film noir.

Extending this farther back, director Walsh was responsible for first presenting a criminal as a sympathetic man of action in the form of James Cagney's Eddie Bartlett in The Roaring Twenties (released in October, 1939). It's truly tragic when Bartlett dies at the end of the film.
We can see the development of the sympathetic criminal in Cagney's Rocky Sullivan in Michael Curtiz's Angels with Dirty Faces (released in November, 1938). In that film, Cagney's Sullivan is a career criminal who during the film commits theft, kidnapping and murder. It's hard to root for such a character, even one portrayed by someone as likeable as James Cagney. Cagney's Sullivan redeems himself in the final scene by (probably) doing the right thing as urged by a priest, portrayed by Pat O'Brien. Sentenced to death, Sullivan goes to the electric chair at the end of the film. O'Brien has urged Sullivan to set a good example for the kids who formed Sullivan's gang, by displaying cowardice in his final moments, and whether through actual cowardice or by honoring the priest's wishes, Sullivan begs for his life and cries at the end, thus demonstrating to the kids that Sullivan's path was nothing to emulate. So, working forward from that point, we go from Rocky Sullivan to Eddie Bartlett to Roy Earle, with each criminal character being more sympathetic than the last.

Y'see, in order for the stylistic movment we call film noir to be possible, it was necessary for the audience to be able to identify with and root for men whose characters were less than sterling. I suggest reading Robert Warshow's 1948 essay The Gangster as Tragic Hero.

As for The Maltese Falcon (released in October, 1941), I've said many times before that although this film is widely considered to be the first American film noir, I just don't feel that way about it. I love the film and I can watch it over and over. Many of the stylistic elements of film noir are there- the femme fatale; the effete, corpulent criminal and his oddball henchmen; Hammett's detective Sam Spade. Aside from a miscasting of Mary Astor as Brigid O'Shaughnessy (Astor was an excellent actress, one of the best, but if you read Hammett's novel, she doesn't fit the bill), the casting is superb. The visual iconography of film noir is there with chiaroscuro lighting and ceiling'd sets. Yes, enough of the elements of film noir are present, but, to me, The Maltese Falcon has always felt as if it belongs more to the pre-war Warner Brothers crime film cycle, rather than the film noir movement. You could fill a stadium with film buffs who disagree with me, but that's one of the things which make film noir such an interesting subject- its nebulous nature.

Thank you, excellent review, seen all many times but never went as deep, just enjoyed those movies you mentioned.

I enjoy the cars in the old movies. Bogarts car in High Sierra is a 38 Plymouth. Same car he drove in The Big Sleep. In The Big Sleep, it had a hidden gun compartment under the dash.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: YooperSigs,

When Spade talks his way out of him and Ruth and Joel Cairo from being taken in by the two detectives... that has to be one of the most complicated scenes in a movie... I'm always confused... as confused as Lorre standing there trying to follow it.

I think "Stranger on The Third Floor" 1940 by Boris Ingber with a particularly creepy early Peter Lorre is generally regarded as the first Film Noir.

That's proto-noir. That fim has a happy ending.

Both The Letter and High Sierra are more film noir than that film, both of which have downbeat endings, as does The Maltese Falcon.

Was there a bad Bogart movie? I'm not aware of one.

quote:

Originally posted by fpuhan:
Was there a bad Bogart movie? I'm not aware of one.

Well, depending upon your point of view and your taste, it might be considered bad, or it might be considered campy.

LOL! Just goes to show you that everyone has to pay their dues!

Nice bunny, though