232. The Big Carnival (Ace In The Hole) (1951)

Directed by Billy Wilder

Synopsis

This not-most-ethical of all journalists finds himself kicked out of all big city newspapers to the point that he has to get a job in Albuquerque, hoping to get the big scoop that will give him a pass bag to the big leagues. And he gets his scoop in the form of a man buried under a mountain in an Indian burial ground. The reporter milks it for all it's worth, making it last and last, bribing the Sheriff with publicity turning the whole thing into a circus, until the man inside dies. And racked with guilt he throws his career away and ends up dead to.

Review

As I have been saying the films in the 50's have completely come of age, and here you have another, very adult film. The exploration that goes on here of the whole of American media culture is a scathing and vitriolic attack on all it stands for.

Of course in these times of the 1950's this was not the most popular thing to do, and the film was a flop. Thankfully we have it back in all its glory, and it was never more relevant, only now it doesn't apply solely to America, it has been successfully exported through the Western world.

These "human interest" stories that seem to do nothing but drain all the dignity out of the subjects and the reporters are a common occurrence. But they have rarely been treated as insightfully as in this film. If the film got some flak for being unrealistic when it came out, it seems only too real to us now, 56 years later.

This film is angry, about the media, about celebrity worship, about the whole Sado-Masochistic bloodthirst of the public, who feel for the subjects but thrive on the pain and want it to go on and on. But also the capitalist opportunism sorrounding this sado-masochism, selling papers, souvenirs, burgers, tickets etc. Cases like the whole McCann fiasco recently are examples of this circus, or the Diana inquest for example. It is all disgusting and I am glad to see Mr. Wilder agrees. Oh and Kirk Douglas has a great part here.

Final Grade

10/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:


At the time of its release, critics found little to admire. In his review in the New York Times, Bosley Crowther called it "a masterly film" but added, "Mr. Wilder has let imagination so fully take command of his yarn that it presents not only a distortion of journalistic practice but something of a dramatic grotesque . . . [it] is badly weakened by a poorly constructed plot, which depends for its strength upon assumptions that are not only naïve but absurd. There isn't any denying that there are vicious newspaper men and that one might conceivably take advantage of a disaster for his own private gain. But to reckon that one could so tie up and maneuver a story of any size, while other reporters chew their fingers, is simply incredible." The Hollywood Reporter called it "ruthless and cynical . . . a distorted study of corruption and mob psychology that . . . is nothing more than a brazen, uncalled-for slap in the face of two respected and frequently effective American institutions - democratic government and the free press." Variety was more positive, noting "the performances are fine. Douglas enacts the heel reporter ably, giving it color to balance its unsympathetic character. Jan Sterling also is good in a role that has no softening touches, and Benedict's victim portrayal is first-rate. Billy Wilder's direction captures the feel of morbid expectancy that always comes out in the curious that flock to scenes of tragedy."

In more recent years, the film has found new respect among critics. Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times wrote, "Although the film is 56 years old, I found while watching it again that it still has all its power. It hasn't aged because Wilder and his co-writers, Walter Newman and Lesser Samuels, were so lean and mean [with their dialogue] . . . [Kirk Douglas'] focus and energy . . . is almost scary. There is nothing dated about [his] performance. It's as right-now as a sharpened knife."

Dave Kehr of the Chicago Reader calls it "cold, lurid, and fascinating," and Nathan Lee of The Village Voice says, "Here is, half a century out of the past, a movie so acidly au courant it stings."

Time Out London says, "As a diatribe against all that is worst in human nature, it has moments dipped in pure vitriol." TV Guide calls it "a searing example of writer-director Billy Wilder at his most brilliantly misanthropic" and adds, "An uncompromising portrait of human nature at its worst, the film . . . stands as one of the great American films of the 1950s."

Ed Gonzalez of Slant Magazine says, "[it] allowed Wilder to question the very nature of human interest stories and the twisted relationship between the American media and its public. More than 50 years after the film's release, when magazines compete to come up with the cattiest buzz terms and giddily celebrate the demise of celebrity relationships for buffo bucks, Ace in the Hole feels more relevant than ever.

In its review of the DVD release, Slate said, "If film noir illustrates the crackup of the American dream . . . Ace in the Hole is an exemplar of the form."

Kirk gets a job: