For years, I’ve only known TOUCH OF EVIL as the film where Charlton Heston plays a Mexican. The idea is every bit as silly as you’d expect, and only the black and white photography saves it from becoming completely comic. Such mis-casting can sink a film, especially as years turn into decades. Somehow though, TOUCH OF EVIL endures the silliness of “El Moses”, and actually flourishes despite the decision. All of this from a film the director (allegedly) wasn’t nuts about making in the first place.

Funny the way that happens, ain’t it?

TOUCH OF EVIL begins with a killing. At the Mexican border, a bomb is placed in the trunk of an American car, going off when the car crosses back into The States. The violence of the killing, and the implications it has for Americans in this border town gets the case a great deal of interest. Part of the interest comes from a police captain named Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles); likewise interested is a Mexican drug enforcement agent named Vargas (Charlton Heston). Quinlan leads an investigation that os quick to point out a suspect, but Vargas isn’t quite so sure they have their man. One thing he is sure of, is that he needs to keep his wife Susie (Janet Leigh) out of the fray.

As I expected, the film is stellar. The film is so stellar in fact that I’ve been having trouble coming up with what I wanted to say about it (which, by the way, is a challenge that looms over this whole series of posts).

The best I can offer is to recap some of the places my brain went to over the runtime of this noir classic.

For starters, I couldn’t help but wonder why noir is such a tough sell to certain circles. I’ve heard complaints about pace and about style, and yet the stories that the complaints are tied to are ones you’d think would endure. These are stories that involve morally compromised cops, criminal activities of the darkest depths, and enough sexual double-dealings to fill an entire afternoon of daytime talk shows. Shoot these stories in colour, cast Joseph Gordon Levitt, and people eat ’em up. Restore a classic from the fifties, and it’s an uphill battle.

TOUCH OF EVIL specifically has some crazy moments; many of them swirling around Susan as she tries to stay out of trouble. The mind-fuck that is her intimidation at the motel would be bad enough: No one around for miles, and she has an entire gang of Mexicans just closing in around her slowly. One can only assume that she passed out believing that she was about to be gang-raped. When she comes to – somewhere completely different – she’s lashed to a bed with a dead body draped over its headboard!

These are details that would make Eli Roth shudder…and yet, stories like TOUCH OF EVIL get a cold shoulder.

Another thought I found myself lingering on was my conversation with Walter Murch two years ago. Murch was one of the team members who gathered to somewhat restore the film to its original vision. The version of TOUCH OF EVIL they came back with – the version I watched – was the 1998 restoration from Orson Welles’ original notes. After Welles turned in a rough cut of the film to Universal, the studio decided to have their way with it. They cut details out, added music and credits in, and drastically changed the pace of the film. Upon seeing the studio’s edit, Welles wrote a memo detailing what he felt was wrong with this new cut. Going off those points, Murch and company were able to restore some of the lost intent.

While only a handful of working directors get final cut, it’s so hard to fathom this sort of thing happening as often as it seemed to happen to Welles. I mean, the guy was an Oscar winner! Could you imagine a director like Ang Lee, or Danny Boyle, or The Coen Brothers delivering a film to a studio only to have the studio heads then take creative matters into their own hands?

I’ve heard that sometimes, powers that be have trouble realizing that employees they hired at a young age have grown up. Perhaps to circles like those in charge at Universal, Welles was always that 26-year-old kid.

I’ve only read about what the film felt like before Murch and Co. got to work on it, and from what I’ve read, I don’t ever want to see that version.

The final thing that came to mind as the film drew towards its comeuppance of a conclusion, was the cluster of times I’d watched the scene in question before despite this being my first viewing of the film. Indeed, that final scene plays a part in Barry Sonenfeld’s GET SHORTY, when we see John Travolta as Chili Palmer deeply engrossed in a rep screening of it. He leans forward on his seat, calls out lines, and even smack talks Welles during his ultimate fate. Given how many dozens of times I’ve watched GET SHORTY in the last seventeen years, I could almost recite the scene. This of course means I’m quoting Travolta, quoting Dietrich and Mills.

The great thing about this is that it doesn’t affect the film’s overall effect…which is curious. Had Chili Palmer been watching THE USUAL SUSPECTS, the film would never play the same (I know SHORTY and suspects came out the same year, just work with me). What I couldn’t have known is that TOUCH OF EVIL was never actually about “whodunnit”…it was never about who lived and who died. Like GET SHORTY, it’s a film about a collection of crooked characters, and letting them argue themselves in circles over which one is least crooked.

With only three titles to go in the series for this year, it’s interesting to me that this is the film I’m most anxious to revisit. Not only did I put it off within the scope of this watchlist, but it’s a film that has long been there for the watching for me, but never actually queued up. I can clearly remember being given a VHS copy of it by my brother years ago, and leaving unwatched on my entertainment unit for months. There was never a good reason why – the same as how I have no good reason for leaving it so late in this posting series.

Guess it just goes to show that sometimes we should just force ourselves to sit down and watch. For all we know, we’ve been denying ourselves a new favorite.

I intend to post my entries on the final Tuesday of every month. If you are participating, drop me an email (ryanatthematineedotca) when your post is up and I’ll make sure to link to your entry.

Here’s the round-up for September…

Sean Kelly watched A SERIOUS MAN

Courtney Small watched THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS

Dan Heaton watched BARRY LYNDON

Steve Honeywell watched BONNIE AND CLYDE

Bob “I Forgot to Wind My Calendar” Turnbull watched AMADEUS and MARTY

Andreas watched DR. MABUSE THE GAMBLER

Jake Cole watched DON’T LOOK NOW

Max Covill watched BLACK NARCISSUS

26 Replies to “Blindsided by TOUCH OF EVIL”

    1. Quite the write-up sir, thanks for the link! Made me feel a bit self-concious about what I’d cobbled together here.

      One other thing – I don’t think that blu-ray is available on this side of the Atlantic, but I’d really like to get my mitts on it based on the beautiful cover art alone!

  2. Nice. It might be heresy, but I’d argue this is better Welles than Citizen Kane in a lot of respects. The opening is so good. The best part is that the rest of the film lives up to the first five minutes.

    1. I’d be tempted to agree – I think it’s as least as good as it. Kane is brilliant and nigh on perfectly made, but I think Touch of Evil works better as a complete experience if you know what I mean and is much more entertaining. I said as much in my review linked above.

    2. Those opening five minutes are glorious, and the film is climbing higher and higher in my regard the more I think back on it (I love films that do that).

      KANE is a top twenty film for me, so it’ll take a little while before I can really pit one against the other.

  3. I covered TOUCH OF EVIL as my first Classic Columb! Great film but its interesting how you say its strange that people don’t seem to be interested in Film Noir, despite the fact that you yourself had the film on a shelf for years befor watching it. TOUCH OF EVIL, I watched, is deemed one of the Top 3 Film Noir’s out there … maybe a little introspection as to why you weren’t drawn to this sooner…

    1. We all have this happen to us: Every once in a while, we get our hands on a film that we have bought (or borrowed indefinitely), and we lose any sense of urgency to actually queue it up. For instance, I’ve had THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS sitting on my PVR since february – think I’ve ever actually watched it yet?

      What throws off your introspective thesis, is that in the time in between that VHS collecting dust on my shelf and watching TOUCH OF EVIL on Saturday, I’ve watched at least a dozen noir titles.

      My point was more towards the nature of true noir as a genre people reach for, as opposed to this specific noir.

      Loved it by the way – but where noir is concerned, I prefer THE THIRD MAN.

  4. Touch Of Evil, this brings back memories. I remember watching this in a Film Studies Class a long time ago, and it’s definitely an eye opener. My professor basically spend the entire lecture telling stories/rumors about the making of this film. Just fascinating stuff.

    I think it’s the best ‘B’ movie ever made, one that got Orson Welles banished from directing any movies for a Hollywood studio. It’s perfectly shot and photographed (perfect use of shadows), the opening scene is such an impressive landmark that many directors still reference today.

    Sad that Orson Welles never get his dues until way too late.

    1. My friend Titania just told me that her film studies classes will involve a twelve-class examination of this film. If I ever win the lotto, I’m going back to school just to take courses like that.

      I wonder if all of the lore surrounding its production stoke its stature (Lord knows it ain’t hurting it!)

  5. If you are in the mood for Orson Welles noir, take a look at The Lady from Shanghai. Not as good as Touch of Evil but still fantastic.

    On the subject of the different cuts; I still live in hope that one day someone will find a Welles cut of The Magnificent Ambersons.

    1. I’ll add THE LADY FROM SHANGHAI to the neverending to-see list. As for AMBERSONS, I believe (sadly) that ship will never return to port. Apparently that knowledge still saddened Welles many years after the fact.

  6. I love, love, love TOUCH OF EVIL. It’s grimy, gritty, dirty and greasy – especially when Quinlan (Welles) is on screen – and goes unexpectedly to so many different places. It is fittingly always referenced as the “last” Film Noir. I mean where could you go after this?

    I get a bit depressed when I hear people reluctant to try entire genres or styles of film. If someone complains about the pace of Noir, well, they haven’t watched any Noir. The thought of someone only watching a Noir style film if it was filmed in colour gives me hives – these were meant to be seen with their waves of shadows and pitch blacks and single sources of bright white light and thousands of hues of grey. I’ll never understand people calling themselves film fans and avoiding black & white…

    1. I was actually surprised that you said film noir was a hard sell – I always thought film noir was the most popular genre in terms of older black and white cinema? I’ve always been a fan although I’ve not seen nearly enough.

      As for The Third Man, agreed that is amazing and is the one noir I’d probably put above Evil, but there’s not a huge margin between them for me.

    2. “The Last Film Noir”…

      That all depends – do we count CHINATOWN as neo-noir?

      I know what you mean about people discounting entire genres or eras of film. Part of me thinks some people aren’t capable of getting out of their comfort zone, or if they are they certainly don’t want to. Pity too, since I think that leaves them denying themselves hundreds of some of the best stories the medium has to offer.

  7. First of all, don’t worry about “who” or “what” Heston was playing. Heston was always playing Heston. At least that’s how I feel.

    I went through a phase years back where I tore through a great many noirs. I think that bit in a “Touch of Evil” where Marlene Dietrich tells Welles “Your future’s all used up”, that’s just such a fantastic summation of the attitude of the genre. Nobody in noir ever had a future. It was all about trying to survive right now.

    “The Third Man” is brilliant, to be sure, but I would argue “Out of the Past” is the epitome of the genre.

    1. We talked about this a bit on Twitter (which you’d know if you used it), discussing the distastefulness of Heston playing the role in brownface.

      I suggested that one thing that helps make it palatable is that Heston plays Heston (he doesn’t attempt any accent), and that the black and white photography softens the blow. On the whole, it’s still a bad idea…but somehow I was able to absorb it more than Mickey Rooney in BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S.

      Pardon me while I call my local shop and see if they have a copy of OUT OF THE PAST…

    3. I’ll chime in with further lofty praise for OUT OF THE PAST. It’s got one of my fave femme fatales, an awesome Robert Mitchum (yes, I know it’s redundant to state that Mitchum is awesome) and fantastic photography.

      Ryan, I’d be happy to lend it to you if you are salivating. As a matter of fact, I’d be happy to lend you the box set it came in which was the first of the Warner Film Noir boxes and also has ASPHALT JUNGLE, MURDER MY SWEET, GUN CRAZY and THE SET-UP. No rush, no pressure…But I think you would dig every single one of these (Jungle is a heist film, Murder is classic Chandler noir complete with top notch dialogue, Gun Crazy drips with sexual innuendo and Set-Up has its boxing tale play out in real time).

      Just say the word…

      2. Heh, heh, yeah I have that reputation…I have indeed watched the entire set though (as well as all the other Warner Film Noir sets I have), so whenever you want it let me know.

    1. Thanks for the link – feel free to plug away!
      I don’t know why I didn’t get to mentioning that spectacular opening shot in this piece, but you’re right – it’s glorious! I’m actually a tad surprised how much I liked this. Somehow my expectations coming in were that it was going to be a bit more hokey.

      Glad I was wrong!

Comments are closed.