NOTE IMDb
6,5/10
6,6 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThe female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.The female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.The female editor of a crime magazine hires Phillip Marlowe to find the wife of her boss. The private detective soon finds himself involved in murder.
Eddie Acuff
- Ed - Coroner
- (non crédité)
Charles Bradstreet
- Party Guest
- (non crédité)
David Cavendish
- Party Guest
- (non crédité)
Wheaton Chambers
- Property Clerk
- (non crédité)
Roger Cole
- Party Guest
- (non crédité)
Frank Dae
- Party Guest
- (non crédité)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesLloyd Nolan was almost blinded when the glass splinters from a bullet that smashed a window hit him in the face. He was rushed to the hospital and a doctor carefully removed a shard of glass from the edge of his cornea.
- GaffesWhen Adrienne is taking care of Marlowe after the car crash, she hands him a mirror so he can see his injuries. As he's putting the mirror down, the face of a stage hand is reflected in the mirror.
- Citations
Adrienne Fromsett: [to Marlowe] Perhaps you'd better go home and play with your fingerprint collection.
- Crédits fousSPOILER! In the opening credits Chrystal Kingsby is written as being played by Ellay Mort, the phonetic spelling for 'elle est morte', French for 'she is dead.'
- Versions alternativesThere is an Italian edition of this film on DVD, distributed by DNA srl, "UNA DONNA NEL LAGO (1947) + L'UOMO NELL'OMBRA (1952)" (2 Films on a single DVD), re-edited with the contribution of film historian Riccardo Cusin. This version is also available for streaming on some platforms.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Best of Film Noir (1999)
- Bandes originalesJingle Bells
(uncredited)
Written by James Pierpont
Played during the opening credits
Also sung at the office Christmas party
Commentaire à la une
Robert Montgomery was a pretty savvy guy. As I recall, President Eisenhower tapped him to be the first presidential adviser on TV appearances at a time when the tube was still a new- fangled technology. No doubt, his being a well known Republican also helped.
Too bad this experiment in the subjective camera fails as clearly as it does. I'm sure it took guts for Montgomery to pitch the idea to the notoriously conservative MGM. But he did get the opportunity. My feeling is that he took on too much for this, his first feature as a director.
First, he's not only directing but starring as well. That might be okay if he weren't also refashioning his image from lounge-lizard playboy to tough-talking private eye. After all, Dick Powell had managed a similar transition the year before in the highly effective Murder, My Sweet (1944). The trouble here is that we seldom see Marlowe (Montgomery), thanks to the subjective camera. Instead we hear him all the time in a pinched unnatural voice more annoying than compelling. Nor, for that matter, does the tough-guy tone match Marlowe's or narrator Montgomery's dapper appearance. Despite some clever cracks from scripter Fisher, the transition just doesn't work.
Just as troublesome is the complex Chandler novel that Fisher adapts without simplifying. The resulting narrative is almost impossible to unravel, which compounds a slow-moving camera whose subjective pov has to avoid the kind of quick-moving pans that might disorient or upset the viewer. Together, they produce a labored result, both visually and narratively. A simpler story-line would have demanded less from sometimes over-burdened viewers.
This is not to say the experiment doesn't occasionally produce interesting effects, especially the hazy, claustrophobic climb out of the wrecked car. Then there's the blonde receptionist's come-hither look while exiting the room that almost had me leaving my chair to follow. Note, however, how the the subjective eye of the camera alters traditional assumptions about movie acting . When Marlowe grills Adrienne Fromsett (Totter), the camera doesn't cut back and forth in routine conversational style. Rather the camera stays on Totter the entire time Marlowe eyeballs her. Thus, Totter has to perform uninterrupted for an extended period in which any false note or exaggeration gets magnified; at the same time, flaws cannot be finessed in the editing process. Rather, the whole scene has to be re-shot. Though the players do well enough, I suspect the novel technique was not popular.
If the movie fails, it's at least an honorable failure. Then again, the talented Montgomery bounced back in his next dual effort Ride the Pink Horse (1948), a gripping noir expertly acted and directed. Apparently, appropriate lessons were learned from this disappointing initial effort.
Too bad this experiment in the subjective camera fails as clearly as it does. I'm sure it took guts for Montgomery to pitch the idea to the notoriously conservative MGM. But he did get the opportunity. My feeling is that he took on too much for this, his first feature as a director.
First, he's not only directing but starring as well. That might be okay if he weren't also refashioning his image from lounge-lizard playboy to tough-talking private eye. After all, Dick Powell had managed a similar transition the year before in the highly effective Murder, My Sweet (1944). The trouble here is that we seldom see Marlowe (Montgomery), thanks to the subjective camera. Instead we hear him all the time in a pinched unnatural voice more annoying than compelling. Nor, for that matter, does the tough-guy tone match Marlowe's or narrator Montgomery's dapper appearance. Despite some clever cracks from scripter Fisher, the transition just doesn't work.
Just as troublesome is the complex Chandler novel that Fisher adapts without simplifying. The resulting narrative is almost impossible to unravel, which compounds a slow-moving camera whose subjective pov has to avoid the kind of quick-moving pans that might disorient or upset the viewer. Together, they produce a labored result, both visually and narratively. A simpler story-line would have demanded less from sometimes over-burdened viewers.
This is not to say the experiment doesn't occasionally produce interesting effects, especially the hazy, claustrophobic climb out of the wrecked car. Then there's the blonde receptionist's come-hither look while exiting the room that almost had me leaving my chair to follow. Note, however, how the the subjective eye of the camera alters traditional assumptions about movie acting . When Marlowe grills Adrienne Fromsett (Totter), the camera doesn't cut back and forth in routine conversational style. Rather the camera stays on Totter the entire time Marlowe eyeballs her. Thus, Totter has to perform uninterrupted for an extended period in which any false note or exaggeration gets magnified; at the same time, flaws cannot be finessed in the editing process. Rather, the whole scene has to be re-shot. Though the players do well enough, I suspect the novel technique was not popular.
If the movie fails, it's at least an honorable failure. Then again, the talented Montgomery bounced back in his next dual effort Ride the Pink Horse (1948), a gripping noir expertly acted and directed. Apparently, appropriate lessons were learned from this disappointing initial effort.
- dougdoepke
- 26 mai 2009
- Permalien
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Lady in the Lake?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 026 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 45 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was La dame du lac (1946) officially released in India in English?
Répondre