Close Search Close

 

  • Comics
  • Theatre
  • Site News

Year of the Month

Touch of Evil

We've seen this all before, and we'll see it all again.

It fascinates me how, for a guy who is widely known as a trailblazer, so much of Orson Welles’s work riffs on the past. As he himself pointed out, almost everything that Citizen Kane does is lifted from one silent film or another; meanwhile, Touch of Evil is, as I understand it, a straightforward parody of film noir. His cop character, Hank, merely pulls the longstanding subtext of police corruption into text; Susie (Janet Leigh) is forced, horrifically, to take on the role of a damsel-in-distress who appears, to the public, to be a femme fatale at the end. Movies and TV shows of the past two decades have been accused of leaning on the fourth wall and on satirizing viewer expectations far beyond whatever they used to; it’s amazing how much of this actually goes back far further than I’d anticipate.

With Welles in particular, his ability to juggle a whole system of techniques, ideas, and images in his head and put them on the film is remarkable; in this case, he’s deliberately turning the image a little bit to convey a particular point. This goes down to his acting; gestures, line deliveries, angles of turning his head even. This movie is incredibly coherent for something that was mangled; I watched the original version (because that’s what was available on Plex*) and this is still a very good movie.

(I have as much affection for Plex as our own Dave Shutton has for Tubi, and for similar reasons – there are so many classic movies, not just old American ones but Japanese and French, that I’ve always wanted to see on it. Fascinating how it’s the free-with-ads streaming services that I feel best serviced by.)

It’s hard to cut out the gorgeous construction of a frame. There are two shots I particularly like; one of Hank talking in the foreground while we see two of the characters arguing in the background, and one of Uncle Joe (Akim Tamiroff), standing menacingly while a light goes in and out over his face. Both are driven by the principle that motion on the screen keeps things visually interesting, and this is a principle that drives much of the imagery we see onscreen (this is also something Kurosawa understood very well).

Contemporary reviews dismissed it at the time for being ugly and formless; the sort of stupid comment you get when only one visual style is considered acceptable. Floating back to Welles’s sense of style, I get the impression that much of his ‘style’ comes down not to replicating certain images or ways of generating them, but from asking ‘what is the idea I am trying to convey here?’ and finding the cheapest, easiest, even bluntest way of doing that. That lets him find images that are as haunting as they are beautiful; sad, formless, pathetic images of people in a shitty situation.

The people of Touch of Evil have been trapped in their situation for a long time. Vargas (Charlton Heston) and Susie mostly exist outside this, pulled into it by being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but Hank has been deep in the garbage for so long it’s hard to tell if he’s been corrupted by it or was always like this. The various crooks see no other way of operating beyond what they do; if there’s a line between them and Hank, it’s Hank’s self-awareness, not nearly enough to save him. 

Want to support more great writing like this? Get exclusive member benefits like access to our Discord, early access to Media Magpies content, and more by joining our Patreon!