AuteursDVDFormal qualitiesGreat ArtMovies

We have all got it coming, or, Joseph Losey meets the plausibles: some observations on the finale of "The Prowler" (1951)

By February 3, 2011No Comments

Prowler finale

As you might infer from the title of this post, spoil­ers will fol­low. So  when bet­ter than now to entreat you, if you haven’t yet seen The Prowler, a remark­able film on a num­ber of levels (“the best pic­ture I ever made,” accord­ing to cost­ar Evelyn Keyes, who makes the pro­nounce­ment in a mem­oir titled Scarlett O’Hara’s Younger Sister, so there), you really have little excuse now that VCI has put the superb UCLA res­tor­a­tion of the film on DVD, com­plete with a pack­age of nifty extras includ­ing a com­ment­ary by noir expert Eddie Muller and a doc­u­ment­ary fea­tur­ette on the film fea­tur­ing the enthu­si­asms of author James Ellroy, for whom the film was a huge source of inspir­a­tion. Among oth­er things, The Prowler is one of the great Los Angeles noirs. When Losey was on, one of the key attrac­tions of his films was just how well he got environments—L.A. in this film, and in The Big Night, and yes, even his rethink of M; Venice in Eve; cer­tain sec­tors of London in The Servant; and so on. In any­event, by the finale of The Prowler, we are pretty far from L.A.; we are lit­er­ally, as it hap­pens, in a ghost town, and it’s here that the film’s dis­turbed anti­hero Webb Garwood (Van Heflin) is to meet his fate.

This film being what it is, gen­er­ic­ally, the view­er is pretty cer­tain that the goat is gonna get his throat cut for the end of the song, as it were. But the way Losey stages the whole thing that’s oddly unusu­al, and is kind of the cherry on top of a film that, while in a cer­tain sense highly “real­ist­ic,” brims with touches of irra­tion­al­ity that use­fully bleed out­side of the accep­ted out­lines of genre. Film noir is a very good ena­bler in that respect, one might say. In any event, Webb is cornered; the police have been summoned, they’re here, they’re armed. As he runs, someone shouts, wisely, “You’ll nev­er get away with it.” An odd thing to say, really, as the pres­ence of the police sig­nals that, for all intents and pur­poses, he has­n’t “got­ten away” with any­thing; it’s too late for that. As for actu­ally get­ting away, that, too, seems unlikely. 

With the cops in pur­suit, Webb, rather ridicu­lously when you think about it, opts to go up instead of down. He takes to a hill, what looks to be a man-made one, and scur­ries up the thing furi­ously. “Do as they say, Webb!” shouts a friend at the scene. “You’ll nev­er make it!” As the unhappy Sisyphus approaches the peak of the des­ol­ate grey mound, the ques­tion “Make it where, exactly?” springs to mind. Once Webb gets to the top, there’s…nothing. Not even a gas leak via which he can immol­ate him­self from the “top of the world,” as in White Heat. If Webb makes it to the top, he will lit­er­ally be no place. 

But Webb will not make it to the top. He will be stopped, as he climbs, by a bul­let in the back, fired by a police­man’s rifle, at a sus­pect who was by all vis­ible indic­a­tions not armed. This goes against pro­ced­ure, as they say. Or at least against prop­er pro­ced­ure, at least as I under­stand it. This flout­ing of real­ism and/or plaus­ib­il­ity has a dual func­tion of height­en­ing the film’s irra­tion­al­ity and under­scor­ing a kind of ques­tion­ing of author­ity. Yes, we have our sac­ri­fice, yes, it was good and prop­er, because the goat, as it were, had it com­ing; and yet…is this really how it’s done? The movie’s end title comes up mere seconds after Webb’s final fall, leav­ing that ques­tion, and a few more, hanging.

UPDATE: I for­got to men­tion, ’cause I’m so mod­est and stuff, that I had giv­en this film some amount of con­sid­er­a­tion in a pri­or post, an entry in my series on Manny Farber’s favor­ite films of 1951. Those were fun times, huh?

No Comments

  • warren oates says:

    Not read­ing the post yet, as I just got the disc yes­ter­day. Can’t wait to watch it. Seems exactly like the kind of half-forgotten dirty little noir I’ve been in love with dis­cov­er­ing lately – MURDER BY CONTRACT, PUSHOVER. The writer and dir­ect­or would be enough to get me excited, but THE PROWLER also has so many dis­tin­guished and inter­est­ing fans like Eddie Muller, James Ellroy and now you too GK.

  • C. Jerry says:

    A police­man who shoots an unarmed flee­ing sus­pect would be a “bad cop,” but here the sus­pect is a “bad cop,” so there’s a cer­tain irony there.

  • Graig says:

    You real­ize that there is a 1981 THE PROWLER dir­ec­ted by Joseph Zito that I just came this­close to adding to my queue, right?

  • bill says:

    This sort of off-procedural shoot­ing is very com­mon in film noir, as I’m sure every­body who watches those movies knows. Not to rain on the parade – I truly like your take, Glenn – but remem­ber Robert Ryan’s death in CROSSFIRE? Not just against pro­ced­ure, but one frickin’ hell of a shot!
    My favor­ite clean, jus­ti­fied shot in film noir is at the end of HE WALKS BY NIGHT, which is pretty much a per­fect film anyway.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    No rain­ing inferred, Bill; your point is well-taken. I believe what makes this par­tic­u­lar fall stand out more than usu­al is, again, the rather ridicu­lous scramble to the top of the man-made hill, as if that’s gonna accom­plish any­thing, and the airy sun­lit open­ness of the whole thing.

  • jbryant says:

    SPOILERS
    Saw this late last year when TCM ran the UCLA print (also saw it many years ago, but did­n’t remem­ber many details). Excellent film; fas­cin­at­ing in many ways. Until the cor­on­er­’s inquest scene, it seems to take place in a Los Angeles with a pop­u­la­tion of about four. Unlike the usu­al noir set-up, the cent­ral couple isn’t plot­ting togeth­er – though Keyes con­stantly seems to be fight­ing sus­pi­cions, Heflin plays her like a viol­in. Unfortunately, this releg­ates Keyes to a rather unvar­ied vic­tim role, and she’s too dim, gull­ible and weak to root for. But Losey keeps the screws turn­ing, and the film sur­vives an unusu­al change in tone and set­ting to reach a tense cli­max. Films of this era did­n’t typ­ic­ally focus on the mor­al bank­ruptcy of a seem­ing “reg­u­lar Joe,” but Heflin nails the cop’s every con­tra­dic­tion. One of his best roles, for sure.

  • otherbill says:

    @ Graig- depend­ing on your threshold for 80s slash­ers, THE PROWLER (1981) is not half bad. Some of Savini’s best work. And Lawrence Tierney!
    Of course, it’s not a patch on the film under dis­cus­sion. A couple of friends and I treated the TCM premi­er as appoint­ment view­ing and we were floored. I’d always enjoyed Heflin, but I gained a whole new respect for him with this film. He’s just amaz­ing in every single scene.

  • Unkle Rusty says:

    The answer to the ques­tion “Make it where, exactly?” is, meta­phor­ic­ally and as far as The Prowler is con­cerned, prob­ably “to the top of the Class Ladder, Ma.” For The Prowler (and Garwood) seethes with class jeal­ousy throughout.

  • Asher says:

    Well, I don’t think CROSSFIRE’s killing ques­tions the police’s author­ity, like this one does. But then, I don’t think CROSSFIRE has any­thing to say oth­er than that anti-Semitism is really lousy. Mitchum’s really wasted in that movie.

  • jbryant says:

    Mitchum may be wasted in CROSSFIRE (and you do mean as in “under­u­til­ized,” not “smashed” or “stoned,” right?), but one can­’t say the same of Paul Kelly’s deli­ciously creepy/funny per­form­ance as Gloria Grahame’s boyfriend/husband/stalker/pimp or some com­bin­a­tion there­of. He has a weirdly calm, apo­lo­get­ic man­ner that seems liable to explode at any moment. Quite compelling.

  • brian p says:

    what unkle rusty said. Webb is oh so close to the next social strata, meta­phor­ic­ally, but no. his dream of ascen­sion is also blun­ted a few scenes earli­er by the recor­ded, dis­em­bod­ied voice of the man he murdered. fant­ast­ic film, a noir where the schlub is the woman and the schem­ing con­niver is the man