Suddenly

in fact some rather too well with unnecessary plot descriptions. My reactions were mixed, but SUDDENLY is worth seeing for three reasons:

1) Early Sinatra, of course. This is the kind of role he would not, to the best of my knowledge,repeat. My mother has long had a crush on him, an infatuation undimmed when she saw the film with me on P.B.S.

2) This movie is a study of the ideals and point of view of mid-1950s America. SUDDENLY was made after the Hollywood investigations of the later 1940s and whilst the McCarthy Paranoia was still going on. None of the other commentators have noted that item, but one should take note that the studio big-wigs had had the bejaysus scared out of them. American film was not only to refrain from social criticism, but was going to be a cheerleader for the essential rightness of the American Way of Life and character. SUDDENLY oozes this point of view, and I note with amused contempt the very last scene and what the two protagonists say to one another.

3) The film is a foreshadowing of what is to come in a country so sure of its social and political stability, quite accidental to be sure. Yes, the head bad guy is a nutter, but he is not the comfortable one-lone-nutter. This plot is highly organised and obviously well-financed. The unspoken They have turned to a pool of violence that is highly American -- organised crime -- to do the deed. Baron and his plotters are not ill-shaven Marxists or slanty-eyed types. They are as American as the Colt 45, and they are willing to do the unthinkable for enough money, and in the leader's case, the simple thrill of bagging someone.

I do not know whether SUDDENLY "rises" to the level of Film Noir, but it had some disturbing things for postWar Americans. Perhaps that is why it is not well known in the Sinatra gallery, and indeed I had never heard of it until about six years ago.

The movie kicked up something of a fuss at the time (1954). After all, Ike Eisenhower was not only a popular president but a war hero as well. It's probably no stretch to say that, yes indeed, everybody liked Ike. So this was a pretty nervy production for the conformist 1950's. Then too, it's likely no accident that the movie was produced independently of the Hollywood studios. I doubt any studio, big or little, would have okay'ed such touchy subject matter as killing a president. But the 70 minutes does amount to an effective little suspenser, as assassins and hostages crowd into a living room perch awaiting the president's sitting-duck arrival, while the tension mounts.

The movie came along during a low point of Sinatra's career before his 1954 Oscar reversed the slump. That's probably one reason he would take on such a risky role as the thoroughly dis-likable assassin. And visually, especially, Sinatra's's quite good. As a result, when Baron says he would be nothing without his gun, Sinatra's scrawny non-Hollywood appearance confirms the fact. Just as importantly, he gives the would-be assassin the right kind of nervous edge.

There's a fairly obvious theme working through the screenplay— namely that despite pacifist wishes, violence does have a moral place in life. As events in the movie turn out, the only way to stop Baron's immoral use of violence is with morally sanctioned counter-violence. The screenplay makes the point by showing us that had Pidge gone along with Mom's anti-gun wishes, the assassination plot would have succeeded. So fortunately-- the movie implies-- when push comes to shove, Pidge follows the men in his life and the plot fails.

For Cold War audiences of the day, the political lesson is pretty clear—only guns and muscle will stop Soviet plans to destroy "The American Way". Of course, the film never identifies the authors of the plot, but I'm sure audiences came to the obvious political conclusion. It's probably also telling that guns are identified with manly men and only a frightened woman, the mother, opposes them. Mom's doubts may be understandable given her husband's violent death. However, by ignoring Mom's wishes, no matter how understandable, Pidge comes to represent a future in which gun violence and armed national defense will continue to be morally necessary. Beneath the surface, it appears, lies some pretty heavy symbolism.

Subtexts aside, Suddenly remains a gripping film even this many years later. That's pretty darn good for a cheap production using basically one set for most of the action. But, I expect it's really the touchy subject matter that continues to excite viewers and separate the film from more routine suspensers of the day.

This tense, relatively well-crafted little thriller dispenses with frills or padding, and tells its story in a straightforward way that works pretty well. Once it sets up the story, it maintains the tension carefully enough to make up for some plot holes and one-dimensional characters.

The focus remains almost entirely on the story, and the characters are never developed very deeply. The three main roles are rather well-cast, though, and Frank Sinatra, Sterling Hayden, and James Gleason each deliver what their roles call for.

Although implausible at some points, the story is otherwise well-constructed, and it moves at a good pace. Many film-makers are tempted to inject superfluous material into this kind of story, and this is an example showing that it usually works better to keep it simple. While nothing extraordinary, it works more than well enough to be worth watching.

Frank Sinatra was certainly one of the greatest singers of our time. He was also a fine actor as well, he won an Academy Award for From Here To Eternity. This was the first film he was in after he won his Oscar and he proves it was not a fluke. He is absolutely chilling as a crazed cold blooded assassin who is out to kill the President. The only other actor who did a better job in this type of role is John Malkovich in In The Line Of Fire. This is a little known classic that really showcases Sinatra's acting talents. I think that this film and The Manchurian Candidate are the best films he ever made.

The movie focuses US President protected by Secret Service (Willis Bouchey as Chief agent) who passes through a small and peaceable town called Suddenly where only the sheriff (Sterling Hayden) executes the law . One house inhabited by a grandfather (James Gleason) , a widow (Nancy Gates) and son is ideal place for a criminal scheme by means of an ambush , designed and pulled off by ominous murderers commanded by a ruthless psycho assassin (Frank Sinatra).

The film has got emotion , strain , suspense , thriller and although is mostly developed on interior scenarios , it doesn't make boring neither tiring . Release was withdrawn from circulation for the Dallas assassination (1963) because of the events are pretty similar . Frank Sinatra (JFK's friend) as producer ordered the retaining copies and the movie was forgotten , however long time later was issued in video market and obtained a lot of success . Frank Sinatra's interpretation is top-notch as the cruel and brutal killer , his acting is magnificent , he's the best . Attractive Nancy Gates is the pacifist widow who hates the guns and embittered for her husband's death during WWII . Sterling Hayden interprets properly a kind and valiant police believer of the ¨American way of life¨ . James Gleason as stiff and rigid veteran is very fine . Atmospheric cinematography and agreeable musical score by David Raksin (author of Laura's score) . The motion picture was well directed by Lewis Allen (he directed some noir classic films). Rating : Interesting , worthwhile seeing and it will appeal to Frank Sinatra fans.