Strong and Moving!

Fantastic!

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

On the whole, this cheap little production is better than it ought to be. Sexy Claire (Brooks) is a spider woman, par excellance. She seduces up-scale men, marries them, then kills them. Not exactly the motherly type. Yet the relatively unknown Brooks plays the part in interesting fashion. You can almost see her brain calculating behind an icy exterior. Too bad her career was so brief, confined for whatever reason to the 40's. Paige does well enough as her sometime 'true love'. I'm just wondering if this heart tug was to soften her image for censorship purposes, without it, she's a pretty ruthless case. Also, thin-faced, big-eyed James Griffith excelled at eccentric parts. Here, he sort of mugs it up in semi-humorous fashion, as though he's not taking any of this too seriously. Worse, by implying that he (Al) was ever a romantic interest of Claire's produces a real stretch. The direction by Jack Bernhard is smooth enough, if uninspired. Too bad the production didn't reach for noir lighting since the material is perfect for creepy shadows. Instead, staging and lighting remain conventional, perhaps because of budget constraints. However, I do wish the script had dispensed with the omniscient psychiatrist (Leonard). A lot of films of that period included 'head doctors' and I'm not sure why. I guess he's supposed to bring Claire's behavior within science's grasp. To me, however, it's more intriguing to place some behaviors beyond science.Anyhow, this cheapo remains an interesting little feature. Too bad that with a little more daring and imagination, it could have produced memorable results.

From the director of DECOY (1946) comes another obscure noir revolving around a femme fatale; however, it emerges to be less interesting stylistically and also proves quite predictable as drama! Mind you, one is sufficiently entertained throughout by the unscrupulous machinations of its ambitious but unbalanced heroine/villainess – ensuring ample hard-boiled dialogue and melodramatic situations; still, it all feels rather stilted this time around – perhaps because the casting here doesn’t work nearly as well as in DECOY.The title aptly describes Leslie Brooks’s conniving protagonist (incidentally, I ended up watching this film on the actress’ birthday by pure coincidence!): still, she commits a surprising amount of gaffes during the course of the picture which is incongruous to her genre prototype – for instance, she plans to have her husband’s murder passed off as a suicide, yet never thinks of getting his fingerprints on the weapon!; to do so she asks a pilot to take her from L.A. to Frisco and back again – but doesn’t figure on his wanting to cash in on the fortune she’d inherit once the husband’s death becomes public!; to say nothing of the number of times she’s caught in the company of, or writing to, her true love (sports columnist Robert Paige – best-known for playing the hero in the Universal minor horror classic SON OF Dracula [1943], with which this film shares also cinematographer George Robinson) soon after having committed herself to someone else i.e. a wealthy big shot of some kind!; but my favorite is the climax – finally exposed for what she truly is by an elderly psychiatrist, Brooks impulsively still attempts to violently shut him up despite the fact that there are at least three other people in the room! Incidentally, the latter constitute some of the most important men in Brooks’ life; apart from Paige (justly bewildered at the sight of his loved one blowing her cool), they are James Griffith (making a good impression as a smarmy colleague of Paige’s and who also carries a torch for Brooks – by the way, the latter had her own spot on the paper…which is then amusingly but cruelly put down by none other than Paige himself in the film’s closing line!) and Walter Sande (as their long-suffering editor, who’s often reduced to acting as referee between Paige and Griffith over their common affection for Brooks!). Also making a significant contribution is Michael Whalen as an ageing politician – having already married into money, Brooks had next intended to acquire standing in the U.S. capital! Quality-wise, the VCI “Special Edition” DVD leaves a lot to be desired – but, I guess, it was to be expected from a film which had long been considered lost! There’s a surprising amount of bonus features to be found here – I by-passed Jay Fenton’s Audio Commentary but did get to watch his fairly interesting interview which, rather than focus specifically on BLONDE ICE, drew also on other subjects (particularly on Film Restoration techniques and closer to home, being itself a VCI release, his own involvement in the ‘rediscovery’ of Mario Bava’s THE WHIP AND THE BODY [1963]). Two more supplements in the form of a musical short subject and an episode from a virtually unheard of made-for-TV detective series are treated on their own elsewhere.RAY BARBER SINGS "SATAN WEARS A SATIN GOWN" (N/A, 19??; **): Included as a supplement on VCI’s BLONDE ICE (1948), this was the kind of short made specifically to showcase a new song: in this case, it’s a number advising men to be wary of femme fatales – which is how it ties up with that noir picture. It’s nothing special as both record and film but, I guess, it served its purpose at the time (incidentally, I couldn’t determine when the short came out or who directed it).INTO THE NIGHT (TV) (N/A, 19??; **1/2): As with the short about the “Satan Wears A Satin Gown” number (see above), this also accompanied the main feature on the VCI DVD of BLONDE ICE (1948), an above-average film noir; likewise, too, I found little to no information on the INTO THE NIGHT TV series on the Internet – not even the title of this this particular episode! Thanks to the DVD medium, I’ve watched a handful of 1950s TV programs; all of them were fairly crude technically but also reasonably entertaining in themselves. This one, then, was no exception – being a mildly engaging detective story featuring veteran Hollywood character actor Wallace Ford: the plot, again, revolves around a femme fatale as she schemes to come out on top at all costs. She’s involved in a diamond robbery, contrives to kill her two partners, and even tries to make a dupe out of Ford – but he’s too experienced to fall for her type! While the proceedings are entirely predictable, what makes the show palatable is its constant flurry of hard-boiled dialogue; though this was an intrinsic element of the genre, the overall easy-going approach here results in an agreeable mix of thrills and chuckles throughout.

For most if its runtime, Blonde Ice is a very entertaining b-noir. Leslie Brooks is about as evil a woman as you'll see in one of these movies. She's beautiful, ambitious, and completely ruthless – it's a deadly combination. She's perfectly capable of chewing-up and spitting-out anyone who gets in her way. And, she's not above committing a little murder if the need should arise. Brooks gives a dynamite performance as far as I'm concerned. The rest of the cast is adequate, but nothing spectacular. The weakest point in the film, unfortunately, comes in the final scene. It's almost as if the screenwriters had no idea how to end Blond Ice. What they came up with is so ridiculous and out of character that it really hurts the overall film.A word on the DVD - from what I've read, the VCI disc is the only way to go. The price is not much more than what you would pay for the Alpha DVD and the VCI disc has a much better transfer and a plethora of features.

"Blonde Ice" (which I just viewed in a nice DVD version with the restorer's commentary, and some nifty extras) is not a classic, nor even a particularly good movie by most standards: it is strictly poverty row rather than Scarlet Street, BUT... I found it easy to watch, and (at times) quite good. The male lead (although obviously a dashing actor on his way down the ladder) brings off his part with some real style, especially in a scene in which he eschews the usual macho man poise expected and almost breaks down in bewilderment over the Woman's actions and seeming imperturbability. And there are a few satisfying (if never quite resplendent) turns by a handful of character actors well-versed in what is expected of them. Although - as commented upon already - there is not quite enough "shadow and darkness" to make it a solid noir presentation, there are - in fact - some rather well-drawn night scenes, and the requisite "venetian blind shadows aslant" scattered here and there. And there is a (limp) stab at analysis of Claire's "problem" by a weakly-sketched German shrink, who also concocts a rather vapid (and seemingly pointless) plan to upend her schemes. The ending is perhaps a bit perfunctory, although the very last line is snappy.The main positives however are the terribly efficient story-telling (often a lost art in B-movies: hell, in ALL movies!) and some truly terrific compositions. These two elements make it worth at least a single viewing, especially if you can see it on the DVD with the commentary, which also delves into the important work of the film restorer. Seen in such a fashion, the movie is rewarding enough, considering its brevity and quick pace.