Valerie

After the Civil War, Union Major John Garth (Sterling Hayden) marries immigrant Valerie Horvat (Anita Ekberg). Somehow it ends in murder. John is surprised that Valerie is still alive, barely. Most see that she got what she deserves. He goes to trial as different people testify.

I like the idea of the Rashomon structure although different witnesses describe different incidents. It can be a bit of a grind with the differing accounts. I do question a few things. I would think that her injuries would be very obvious and that the sheriff would figure it out before going to trial. He should have questioned the doctor who would know the situation. It was probably done to be absolutely clear to the audience of its time. As for the acting, Ekberg's shortcomings can be attributed to her injured character's limitations. I like this movie challenging a 50's audience although it may not be completely successful.

"Valerie" is a movie that only gets better the more you watch of the film. Up until the last 15 minutes or so, I wasn't that impressed with the story (or Miss Ekberg's acting) but it all got very exciting towars teh end...making it well worth seeing.

The story begins with a mass murder. John Garth (Sterling Hayden) leaves a home after a shooting which left three people dead and his wife shot and close to death. The film shows both his account and hers of the events leading up to the shooting...a shooting he claims was in self defense. What really happened?

In some ways, this story is like the classic Japanese film "Rashomon", though instead of three viewpoints you have two...and teasing apart what REALLY happened is a bit easier in "Valerie". It's a simpler story...but still well done. As I mentioned above, my only quibble was some of Ekberg's acting....it often wasn't great and her accent was a bit thick, so, if possible, watch with captions.

Sterling Hayden is the biggest rancher around. He's also on trial for killing his in-laws and critically wounding his wife, Anita Ekberg. On the witness stand he tells a tale of betrayal by Miss Ekberg with handsome pastor Anthony Steel and unremitting carping by the older people. But when his wife gives testimony on her sickbed, a different version may emerge.

There's a bit of RASHOMON impulse her,e an attempt to use a subjective camera from several several viewpoints. It ultimately gives way to the objective standard; there can be only one truth. It is, however, the playing around with that uncertainty that lends this movie its initial interest. In the end, alas, it becomes a peculiarly squeamish piece of brutality, with scars from burns neatly blackened circles of smooth skin. It was the odd screen persona that Hayden cultivated in the 1950s: low-affect anger that Huston used so effectively in THE ASPHALT JUNGLE became his stock in trade, a character who couldn't feel like a human being. Unfortunately it hangs too apparently over this movie, removing all ambiguity.

This film is a film noir Western. It opens with a murder and then unfolds as a courtroom drama with flashbacks. A marriage is described from three different perspectives. I thought Anita Eckberg and Sterling Hayden's performances were very good in rather unlikable roles. Miss Eckberg was effective in portraying her character from two opposite points of view. It was a movie featuring sadistic behavior and was unsettling to watch.

I've seen another movie entitled "Valerie" but it was a bit different from movie I saw last with same actors, and actress! The story was similar in that the husband thought his wife was cheating on him with his brother and with their church pastor. I remember events being different how Sterling Hayden told Valerie that he paid her parents for her hand, not they paid him. Her parents didn't have a lot of money. True that she didn't love him cause she was courting both his brother outright, and the pastor on the sneak. I'm NOT understanding why if he had lots of valuable land then why would he accept money from her parents selling Valerie to him?!? He wasn't a poor man! I know this is weird but I know I watched two different versions of this movie at different times. The first time I watched movie I DIDN'T catch it from the beginning but saw enough to remember movie. The second one I saw last night was a bit different. The same storyline and characters but the details were a but different.😒🤔