To Have and Have Not

Well, was you? That's Eddie's (Walter Brennan) inexorable question all throughout "To Have and Have Not" to anyone within earshot. And it's only the 3rd or 4th best line in the movie. Seems there's this one line where one person tries to teach another person how to whistle. And another one after a passionate kiss when a gal tells a guy that it's even better when he helps. Duh! But I like what happens after yet another passionate smooch between Bogie and Bacall. She pulls away and says to him, "You need a shave," after which she immediately love-slaps his unshaven face. It's her way of telling him without words that she's attracted to him and she really doesn't give a good hoot whether he shaves or not. By now, just about everyone knows that this movie is all about "Steve" (Humphrey Bogart) and "Slim" (Lauren Bacall). In their first movie together, the two exhibit an explosive chemistry rarely seen from any other actor-actress combo. As one watches the movie, with the great Howard Hawks putting the two thru their various paces, one simultaneously imagines the two of them falling in love offscreen -- which they did! -- just as they do in this movie. For more on this, I highly recommend Lauren's autobiography -- "By Myself." In that book, she talks about the two of them sneaking around to see each other like a couple of teenagers -- which she was! As I recall, Bogie was still married at the time -- though estranged from Mayo Methot. As for "T H a H N," there are many other fine elements that make it well worth one's time. A pretty good storyline revolving around the Free French contesting the Vichy French (Nazi collaborators) in Martinique during the early days of World War II. A strong supporting cast much reminiscent of the one in "Casablanca." Great dialogue by novelist William Faulkner and Jules Furthman. Also, a strong musical score ("Am I Blue?" -- "How Little We Know" -- "Hong Kong Blues") by Hoagy Carmichael with a strong assist from Johnny Mercer. In a very good Humphrey Bogart movie, which this certainly is, one would never suspect that a young ingenue actress, with little training or experience, could scene-steal from a polished veteran like Bogie. And I won't say that she does such in this movie. I do know that she did not want to and was not trying to (her autobiography). The fact is, however, that it took a star actor of Bogie's magnitude to keep Betty from dominating the screen with her earthy sex appeal and pure luminescence. Her sashay out of the bar in the last scene here is enough to make any man weak in the knees. No wonder Bogie tumbled! Both onscreen and off! So ..... tell me, now ..... WAS you ever bit by a dead bee?

Popular but rather dreary film-adaptation of Ernest Hemingway's novel was worked on by a handful of writers (as well as by director Howard Hawks and the actors, though only Jules Furthman and William Faulkner are credited), but still it's a somewhat rusty semi-noir without much plot to hang its personalities on (which Hawks acknowledged at the time). Hard-boiled American boat captain in France circa 1940 becomes involved in the Wartime Resistance. Fans of Humphrey Bogart have given the picture a sterling reputation over the years--and he's typically good in it--yet all the drama adds up to very little. Bogie met future-wife Lauren Bacall on this film, her movie debut, but we never learn her place in all this (and her 'singing' is barely passable, to be charitable). Highlights: the gorgeous, glossy black-and-white cinematography by Sid Hickox, Franz Waxman and William Lava's romantic score...plus the added pleasure of Bacall asking Bogie if he knows how to whistle. ** from ****

Contains as much that is enjoyable as the much longer, more tedious "The Big Sleep" and It also follows the dramatic arc of Casablanca almost completely. Oddly enough, it mirrors Casablanca's plot almost completely also. It's here you see that the Bogart vehicle had interchangeable elements; a plot-laden locale (hotel), a politically-neutral tough guy protag, a secondary character who is deeply in love with her freedom fighter husband, writs of travel, yadda yadda yadda. The movie ends quite abruptly in a place I wouldn't and didn't anticipate. Harry's father-figure sidekick (Walter Brennan) is the grand-daddy of all blathering idiot buddy roles. You just want to strangle him. Brenann adopted a bizarre walk for the role which resembles a syphilitic weirdo with a lobster in his underwear. The Lt Coyo role (a Victor Buono lookalike) is played very badly. The french characters here have a distracting range of only-in-Hollywwod accents. They should have picked a single approach to the accent and used it for all the french roles. Hoagy Carmichael does not exactly light up the screen in his part as the hotel piano player. He is homely and has no presence. The movie features a handful of his atrocious tunes. Really... just horrible. His band has approximately a hundred and thirty people in it. Marcel Dalio from Rules of the Game has a supporting role. Bogdanovich lifted a few of Bacall's bits here for Streisand in What's up Doc?

This film is barely passable. While Bogart is one of my favourites; this film is just a knock-off of "Casablanca": it is set during WWII, in a an area controlled by the Vichy French, involving a couple who Bogart helps move around against the wishes of the police, one of the characters plays a piano, much of it is set in a bar, after a shooting the bar is closed by the cops, Bogart helps out the resistance reluctantly, Bogart tries to send the girl away. It even has a Sidney Greenstreet and a Peter Lorre impersonator. And as for the ending--what a load of old toss. While modern Hollywood films suffer from the never-ending ending; this film does the opposite. It feels as if they all had another film to get to. It is a disgrace that this film is now scoring 8.1 here. Just having Bogart and Bacall does not make a film good--and here is the proof.

Another in the series of Bogie and Bacall films that others rave about, but which left me cold. I don't even remember the plot of this film, but you're not supposed to watch these films for the plots anyway. Like "The Big Sleep" two years later, the point of Bogie and Bacall films are Bogie and Bacall. If their hard-boiled style of playing off one another works for you, then you're going to love this movie and any of their other films. But if not, then there's not much else here to keep your interest. This is the first time I'd ever seen Lauren Bacall as a young actress, and I was astounded at how deep her voice was. There's a scene in which a large group of men and Bacall are gathered around a piano, and this deep voice begins a song. I kept looking around the frame, trying to find the man who was singing, only to realize that it was Bacall. My goodness, that woman ate her spinach! Grade: B-

overwrought, cheesy acting, horrible dialogue....i sense old Hollywood marketing at work in the reputation of these two 'actors.' Caricatures, and just about every other character is a prop for Bogart's ridiculous character--granted this practice is alive and well in most of Hollywood's blockbuster action movies, but it is particularly unsubtle in this laughable film. Is it nostalgia that creates such uncritical devotion to this silliness? Truly do not understand it. I am not a hater of old films either, some truly great films made before this film, but this is decidedly NOT one of the greats. This seems to be one of those cultural products that continues to circulate and to somehow gain a reputation of quality simply because it circulates...

You know, it sure seemed to me that with every woman Bogart's character encountered in this film, he snidely reduced them all to being (and I quote) "just another screwy dame". Not only that - But, I'd also say this film banked way-way too heavily on the wisecracking, sexual chemistry that was supposed to transpire between the likes of Bogart's and Bacall's characters. Yet, I found, time and again, that their contrived meetings and demented dialogue ("You know how to whistle, don't you?") fizzled out into total absurdity about 90% of the time. Clearly a product of its time (1945) - This decidedly flimsy-scripted picture may have delighted movie-goers of yesteryear to pieces - But, now, 60 years later, it repeatedly fell short of its apparent potential. And, speaking about actress, Lauren Bacall - Not only was she completely unconvincing in her part (just wait till you catch the scene where her character breaks out into tears) - But her repeated use of a sly smirk got real tiresome, real fast. (Hey! I won't even get into the ridiculously over-sized shoulder pads on her outfits which put those of a pro-football player's to shame)

Harry Morgan owns a fishing boat for hire on the small island of Martinique. France has fallen and tensions are high, although Harry is happy to stay out of it and just earn his money. However an offer to carry some revolutionaries off the island sees him caught up in police suspicions when the deal comes to light. This, combined with his attraction to fellow American "Slim" Browning forces Harry to re-evaluate his "out for himself" values. Although the continued success of this film owes a lot to the pairing of Bogart and Bacall, there is enough going for the rest of the film to make it stand up down the years. The plot is very interesting in Hawks look at a man who tries to take a distanced approach to the problem of others before standing up to be counted; I don't know enough about the period to really know what context he was putting this forward in but it is still interesting enough and does make the character of Steve/Harry a lot more complex. The plot goes down a standard road of wartime thriller but it is still very engaging and well told. The direction is top notch and has a real sense of atmosphere despite the production being limited to soundstages. Of course a major reason the film works is the cast. Bogart does "downbeat but ultimately heroic" better than many others and he does it well here – tough, smart and morally challenged. Bacall has less of a character to speak of but she makes up for that by sheer force of personality; personally I don't find her that attractive but she fair sparks across the screen and her delivery is very sexual throughout. The two fell in love during the film and it does show on screen, with a great chemistry and real sexual tension between them – a heavy amount of classic scenes and hot moments also helps. Support is good from Brennan and Seymour but the "Free French" are not that well developed and are not as interesting as they should have been. Overall this is a classic film with an interesting plot, interesting characters, a tough and heavy atmosphere, good performances and a central duo that really spark off each other. It may be a standard wartime thriller on the surface but everything seems to come together really well and produce a film that is memorable for a collection of reasons.

To Have and Have Not (1944) Is this the first post-modern film? Or the first total rip-off? Even the writer William Faulkner is in on recasting (and making almost invisible) Ernest Hemingway's novel. But this says "Casablanca" all over it, from the opening shot of a map on. Then throw in Humphrey Bogart and a Sidney Greenstreet wannabe, have an engaging piano player at the center of the popular nightclub, and set it in an exotic part of the French Empire where the war is raging but you can hardly tell. Director Howard Hawks seems to be winking all the way to the box office and no one else seems to know it. Not that people aren't trying hard. Certainly the romance has gone from some archetypal, dreamy impossibility (with Ingrid Bergman in "Casablanca") to a very earthy and valid (and real) romance with Lauren Bacall. That's actually a big reason this movie has such fame, because the Bogart/Bacall chemistry is right there for us to watch, and I mean the people, not the characters. Another reason is Walter Brennan, who is so odd and so convincing at the same time you have to wonder. I think Hoagy Carmichael has to be appreciated, too, more than he usually is. He has a major secondary role, and is in the movie more than almost anyone, playing the piano in all kinds of moods...and really playing it, and singing, too (along with Bacall, a little). But all this stuff never actually gels the way it should. It's almost like it knows it's imitative and so it doesn't try for actual high stakes drama or romance. If you think otherwise, give "Casablanca" another look, and besides much better screen writing, and much better photography, you'll see some basic emotional wires attached that are only superficial here--the War itself, for one thing, and patriotism, and love lost (rather than just love found), and sacrifice of all kinds. And some character actors to beat the band--there is no one here to match Peter Lorre, or Sidney Greenstreet. These are fair comparisons because Hawks invites them. But since it is all knowing, does that make this a commercial one-off, the director and his buddy Bogart winking, at least, at each other? Maybe. Or maybe it's the first dip into an irony about movies, and about the reality and artificiality that goes with that, that is deliberate and yet can't show its hand too clearly because the audience is frankly not as jaded and cold as the people making the movies. It's a really fun movie, but it'll keep you on the surfaces, and if you want depth, don't be disappointed.

Or "Marlowe At Sea". Yet another ridiculously overrated old film with Bogey. Quite talky, too. Bogey basically plays the same character as in the Marlow films; always in control of a situation, never nervous - no matter how dangerous a situation, calls women "slim" and "dames" and other such nonsense, is the only "real male" i.e. alpha male in the movie (the only other alpha male male being the head of Gestapo - but he is only a fat alpha male male), and - naturally - every attractive young woman who comes his way cannot resist his charms and wants his * within hours of their initial introduction. The character clichés are all here. Bogey is supposed to be the same type of cynic-about-to-reform as in "Casablanca", and naturally he often refuses money or other valuables when being offered them - but how does that fit in with the tough cynic in him? It doesn't, so he can't be a cynic; Hawks wanted it both ways: a character who is both the "cool lone cynic" and yet a well-meaning humanitarian. I don't think so... Bacall does her non-chalant "cool babe" routine for the first time, and there are plenty of overrated, not all-too interesting so-called "sexual innuendo" exchanges between her and Bogey; these dialogues sound silly by today's standards. "Just purse your lips and whistle...". A load of crap... She was 19 when this was made but looks a lot older, and is far less attractive than the female stars of the day. Her bony face, with its sharp features, is nowhere even close to radiating the kind of feminine beauty of a de Havilland, the cuteness of a Myrna Loy, let alone the likability of an Irene Dunne. Bacall was more suited for playing vampires, not femme-fatales. (In real life she is very much like her face: a Hollywood bitch.) There is a scene in which Bacall breaks into tears; very unsuitable for her character. There are two or three bad musical numbers - but my fast-forward button was ready. If you're interested in reading my "biographies" of Bogart, Bacall, Huston, and other Hollywood personalities, contact me by e-mail.