Sweet Smell of Success

I rented this because I like old black & white movies & this has high ratings. I kept watching this but not understanding so I would stop and start over from the beginning to rewatch it several times until I gave up. The dialog is 100mph and terribly hard to follow because they talk in little quips. The characters all seem to be evil people who talk to each other in fast little incomplete sentences constantly cutting each other down. Everyone is miserable in this movie and they all try to out do each other by being the best at saying the most degrading thing to the other and as fast as possible. But it was impossible for me to figure out why everyone hated each other and their jobs. It was like watching a movie on fast forward. Terribly depressing movie about angry people running around avoiding conversation and spouting out quick cut throat insults at each other. That's all I could figure out before I gave up.

From director Alexander Mackendrick (The Ladykillers), I thought this might be a really good satirical drama since the critics give it five stars. Basically Sidney Falco (BAFTA nominated Tony Curtis) is the hustling New York publicist who is consumed by desperate ambition and hates himself because of it, and he will do anything to gain the admiration of powerful newspaper columnist J.J. Hunsecker (Burt Lancaster). J.J. hires Sidney to break up the love between J.J.'s young sister Susan (introducing Susan Harrison) and Steve Dallas (Martin Milner) by any means possible. What makes J.J. such a terrible brother to Susan, and the villain of the film, is because of his incestuous relation with his sister, not just calling her "dear", but stroking and kissing her, and she obviously is too afraid to do anything. Towards the end, Susan attempts suicide after finding out Steve was killed in an accident, and J.J. catches Sidney in her place, accusing him of doing something to his sister, and slapping him constantly. In the end, Susan finally plucks up the courage to leave his brother, and tell him what she really thinks of him and all he's done to her. Also starring Sam Levene as Frank D' Angelo, Barbara Nichols as Rita, Jeff Donnell as Sally, Joseph Leon as Joe Robard, Edith Atwater as Mary, Emile Meyer as Lt. Harry Kello and Joe Frisco as Herbie Temple. It wasn't quite the film I had in mind, because it was a bit too chatty, and it didn't seem like there was a lot of point, but it was certainly worth watching. J.J. Hunsecker was number 35 on 100 Years, 100 Heroes & Villains, Tony Curtis was number 86 on The 100 Greatest Sex Symbols, and Burt Lancaster was number 19 on 100 Years, 100 Stars - Men, and he was number 48 on The World's Greatest Actor. Good!

(*Memorable movie-quote*) - "I'd rather be dead than living with you!" Contrary to the uplifting ring of this film's title - I definitely think that a more appropriate name for this callously-minded picture would've been the "Sour Stink of Being a Slime". Like - Is this film's wretched story actually supposed to be a realistic depiction of how most big-city news-reporters operate? It certainly didn't take me very long to get completely tired of the oppressively daunting tone of this picture's cut-throat story about the seething, back-stabbing nastiness of newspaper politics. Nope. This rotten-to-the-core movie is certainly not my idea of enjoyable entertainment. No way, Jose.

BURT LANCASTER was at the height of his illustrious film career when he played J.J. Hunsecker, the Broadway gossip columnist who dipped his pen in poison to destroy careers. TONY CURTIS was a long way from the days when he was ridiculed for saying "Yonda is the castle of my fadder" in films like SON OF ALI BABA and THE BLACK SHIELD OF FALWORTH. Here, Curtis is every bit up to the chore of playing the slavishly obedient but hateful publicity man who seems to be fawning over Lancaster, but really despises him. Two towering performances in a film with some of the sharpest exchanges of dialog ever heard. The cruel side of show biz gets full and rich observation from screenwriter Clifford Odets from a novel by Ernest Lehman. The bright lights of Broadway play against the rainswept streets of Broadway and Times Square, a shadowy sort of film noir background for the brutal story being told. The story abounds in quotable moments, such as when Lancaster tells Curtis, "You're a cookie full of arsenic." The jazz score background sets the appropriate mood for a story as cynical as this, and the twists and turns of the plot will keep you hooked until the uncertain ending. The main plot line has Lancaster opposed to his sister's suitor, a jazz musician (MARTIN MILNER) and his efforts to get this man out of his sister's life with the help of his obedient slave. But mainly, this is a film worth savoring to watch the intense performances of Lancaster and Curtis. I doubt whether either of them has ever done better work. For Lancaster, it only cemented his reputation as a man already judged to be a fine actor in the right role. For Curtis, it made film critics take this "pretty boy from Brooklyn" seriously for the first time and was the first big milestone in his budding film career.

This is a film which thinks it is more daring and clever than it actually is. Wow, columnists have power, they can bring down politicians and keep agents dancing to their tune. I doubt that this was such a great insight even in the late 1950s. Curtis and Lancaster do their best - both were fine actors - but the dialogue they are given has dated really badly, and their roles are dully predictable. This being the late '50s, there is nothing to be expected from the female roles - adoring secretary, bruised good time girl, virtuous sister - which are there just to make the plot work. The cinematography is very good - McKendrick was an excellent director, but much of what goes on is obscure, the lines are mumbled, the proceedings are supposed to be gripping but in fact are just melodramatic. Judging from the reviews, the movie has its fans but for me, it is just another example of how quickly films setting out to be challenging and contemporary can become ... faded. Compare it with The Leopard, which Lancaster starred in just a few years later, and which remains an astonishing masterpiece in part because it is historical.

"Sweet smell of success" is a good film, with an interesting and rather unusual story, a steady pace, but somehow damaged by a melodramatic script. A main credit to the movie lies in the cinematography, with plenty of beautiful shots of a nocturnal New York. The screenplay is not wholly convincing, since it seems more suited to the stage than to cinema. I mean, all the characters are so ready and brilliant in their dialogs, exactly like in a stage-play. We may expect a sharp wit from Hunsecker (Burt Lancaster), since to be witty is his job. But what about, say, the cigarette-girl? Or the straightforward wife of the non-corrupt journalist? Some lines, the like of "I love this dirty city", are dated, to say the least. Hunsecker's morbid, psychotic love toward his sister is the crux of the film, but it remains somehow unexplained. My guess is that he is eager to preserve her virginity as the unique pure thing in a corrupt world... But who knows? Sometimes he seems to love his own power more than his sister. An interesting character, no doubt. Tony Curtis shines in his trade-mark role of the good-looking cheater, sleazy and greedy womanizer. Here we have the drama-version of the character, and I liked it, although I prefer Tony's comedy-version in masterpieces like "Some like it hot" or "Operation petticoat". Actually, Sidney Falco is the most hateful character ever played by Curtis. Burt Lancaster is very good, although slightly over-the-top. All the cast makes a fine job. Such an overwhelming power of the gossip columnist Hunsecker as shown in the movie seems unlikely, not only today but even in the late 1950s. The movie presents some more or less subtle political messages which, honestly, I didn't appreciate. And I was even more displeased discovering that Hunsecker's character was based on a real person (allegedly, at a time when he had already lost his power). Not very elegant stuff out of authors devoted to condemn in the movie writers stabbing people in the back... I am not sure to like much "Sweet smell of success" (in fact, I don't like the title, either). However it is certainly an exciting and interesting movie, worth to be viewed.

Tony Curtis learns the hard way about the "Sweet Smell of Success" in this 1957 film that stars Burt Lancaster, Sam Levene, Susan Harrison, and Barbara Nichols. In the pre-Internet days when the newspaper was king, the columnists ruled - Winchell, Ed Sullivan, Cholly Knickerbocker, Radie Harris, and let's not forget Hedda and Louella! But the King was Winchell, and while I don't think the Burt Lancaster character of J.J. Hunsecker is modeled on him, the power and control the man wielded certainly is. Tony Curtis plays one of his best roles as Sidney Falco, a low-ranking press agent who is dependent on people like Hunsecker to mention his clients in their daily columns. But Sidney is on the outs with Hunsecker, a very bad place to be. Hunsecker has ordered Sidney to break up his sister Susan's relationship with a jazz musician, Steve (Martin Milner), and Susan is still seeing him. Sidney comes up with a plan to tear the two apart which probably would have worked, but when Steve stands up to J.J., Hunsecker is out for blood. He demands the plan be taken one step further and dangles an attractive carrot in front of Sidney to make it happen. Done in black and white with most of the action taking place at night and often on the streets of Times Square, "The Sweet Smell of Success" has an atmosphere of slime and grit. The handsome Lancaster and Curtis are not particularly well photographed - it's not meant to be a glamorous picture. The dialogue is fast, to the point, and witty and the performances are breathtaking. Lancaster underplays the twisted Hunsecker so that his contempt for the people he writes about - and his sick attraction to his sister - can be clearly shown. He could have played it more along the lines of Curtis' Sidney - an obvious, manipulative rat - but it wouldn't have been as right as Lancaster's tightly-controlled J.J. Curtis was born to play Sidney - an attractive, fast-talking man with no morals who plays both ends against the middle. He's a New York character, ideal for a New York guy like Curtis who grew up on the streets. Sidney is totally outrageous - he invites a cigarette girl to his apartment and then pimps her out to a columnist so he can get an item in his column; he tries blackmailing another columnist, but that backfires. It doesn't stop him from trying again. The two victims of these piranhas are Susan and Steve, a young couple deeply in love who want to be married. Their simple story is told against a backdrop of scandal, revenge, manipulation and blackmail. Their situation makes the actions of J.J. and Sidney even seedier and more cruel than they already are. "Sweet Smell of Success" has become a cult classic and was actually mounted at one point as a Broadway musical. Like "Nightmare Alley," it probably was too grim for audiences back then. Is anything too grim for audiences of today? Doubtful.

Make no mistake – you will not walk away from Sweet Smell of Success feeling uplifted and carefree. It is a dark, gritty tale of deception and the desperate strive for survival in New York City. It also happens to be one of my all-time favorite films. *Spoilers within* Burt Lancaster plays J.J. Hunsecker, a powerful gossip columnist whose emulation of Walter Winchell was so thinly veiled that Winchell himself tried to stop the film's release. Hunsecker is so powerful that underling press agents like Sidney Falco (Tony Curtis) will push aside any scruples or morals they may have in order to do him favors just to get a favorable mention for their clients in Hunsecker's column. In Falco's case, he must try to break up the relationship between Hunsecker's young sister Susan and up-and-coming jazz musician Steve Dallas, as Dallas is not `worthy' in Hunsecker's eyes. It becomes quickly apparent that due to an almost incestuous fascination with his sister, no one will be worthy of her, something that Susan has to come to terms with and finally resign herself to. In his pursuits, Falco finds himself compromising any moral fiber he may have had left, and no one escapes undamaged. Sweet Smell of Success is indeed a dark film and morally bereft, but it is so compelling and thought-provoking that it is hard to imagine any viewer, love or hate the film, not able to come away from it without at least a few questions in mind: How far would you go for fame? What would you do to survive? The majority of the main characters has the morals of an alley cat, and is as unconcerned with doing anything for survival. Ironically, one of the few people to exhibit any modicum of pride and conviction is the one who ends up getting slandered and unjustly punished. The backdrop for this film is the vibrant, busy and exuberant New York City, usually at night. Every social scene is crowded; every outdoor shot shows bustling streets. Wild, loud jazz music is the soundtrack the compliments the frenetic surroundings. The film is shot in crisp, sharp black and white, and any hint of color would have changed the film drastically for the worse. Lancaster plays Hunsecker as a level, even toned man which belies his hateful personality and only makes him more sinister. Curtis' Falco is like the yipping and bouncing dog in the old cartoons, and delivers his lines with a machine gun-like staccato, but his eyes are dead and bleak, and the only emotion he can convey that approaches regret is nothing more than fleeting until `survival mode' visibly kicks in. Sweet Smell of Success is a certified classic, but it is easy to see why it is not more popular. The good guys don't win because there ARE no good guys. And every time the viewer thinks that something may not be realistic or that something is overblown, with even a second of reflection, one realizes that this IS real life, and it's hard to look at sometimes because it is not always pretty. --Shelly

This film is way over the top in every department, with only a few redeeming features, notably its photography, plus a few good actors in small roles, especially Sam Levene and Emile Meyer. The story concerns a soulless press-agent who seeks to curry favor with a powerful, corrupt Walter Winchell-like gossip columnist. Every twist and turn of the plot is telegraphed well in advance, and the machinations of the various players are out of a Victorian melodrama. What makes the movie wretched is that it, or rather those responsible for it, are so damned pleased with themselves. The atmosphere is fifties-edgy; everyone seems to be either on speed or caffeine overload. Most of the people speak to each other in little arias, expressing either self-interest, a contempt for others, or both, these always underlined by a sense of moral irony inconsistent with the characters in question. The movie is like a tabloid, always ripping the lid off this or that, telling us either what we already know or don't care to find out about various hot topics of the time. As a character study it doesn't work because the bad guy is so amoral that he is a monster pure and simple. We never get to know him because there's only one thing about him that matters, his willingness to destroy and humiliate those who won't do his bidding. If he has friends or a personal life they are not shown. He does not seem like a human being and Burt Lancaster plays him as not like a human being. Tony Curtis, as the toady of the moment, is more credible, but all we learn about him is how ambitious he is and how much he wants to be like his idol and chief torturer. No one else, not even Lancaster's (much) younger sister, really matters. In comparison one can imagine the Nazi high command as vastly more charming and magnanimous than the characters in this picture. The film barrels along at about 200 mph and is certainly never boring, but it isn't moving, either. New York at night never looked more menacing. Nor is it ever, for an instant, attractive, as it is strangely unseductive, and overall disgusting, like a bad piece of corned beef stuck in the back of the throat. In the end the picture itself seems sleazier than those people whose souls, or lack thereof, it is purporting to expose, and it left a bad taste.

As much as I love noir movies, shady moral codes and location photography, after multiple viewings I never really get into this movie. It's hard for me to put my finger on why. I think it never really gets anywhere. The characters are more developed than the events we're supposed to be concerned about. And for me it doesn't deliver on its set-up. We just get similar nasty scenes over and over. Will Lanccaster get nastier? Well yeah, of course, that's all he does. I think putting Hensecker next to that sister (so wholesome it's hard to believe she grew up anywhere within twenty miles of him is improbable, if not grotesque). Ditto for jazz guitarist Martin Milner who is horrified to be associated with marijuana. When the cig girl sells out and puts out, I didn't care. Because her characterization is drawn so broadly. I also really find the quotable lines of this movie to cause serious eye-rolling. "Conjugate me a verb" is just a lousy line.