Mildred Pierce – 1945
Mildred Pierce was a film that was trying very hard to be Double Indemnity, but couldn’t quite get there. That being said, I’ll also say that it wasn’t a bad movie. I enjoyed it well enough, and thought that Joan Crawford did a fantastic job. There was supposed to be a big twist in the end that would really shock the audience, but I had it figured out before the film was half over.
Crawford starred as the lead, Mildred Pierce, an obviously wealthy woman in an expensive fur coat, who is shown driving away from a house after a murder has been committed. Naturally, we are supposed to think that she is the murderess. When she is pulled into the police station for questioning, the police apologize for bringing her in, and tell her she is free to go, making us think she would get away with the murder. They also tell her that her ex-husband was the guilty party, murdering her lover out of jealousy.
But then the meat of the story begins as Mildred tells her story to explain how the accused man is innocent. The rest of the film is, in a somewhat noir style, told in flashback with voice-over narration. Mildred and her husband Bert, played by Bruce Bennett, are poor and struggling with two daughters. The eldest daughter is Veda, played by Ann Blyth. She is more concerned with money than with honesty. The younger daughter Kay, played by Jo Ann Marlow, is a tomboy.
Bert’s business associate Wally Fay, played by Jack Carson, who has an attraction to Mildred, is happy when he finds that Bert and Mildred are splitting up. He wastes no time in hitting on her in a way that is so ridiculous it’s comical. Apparently, to Wally, ‘no’ means ‘let’s go to my bedroom and have sex.’ Mildred literally has to push him out the door.
Anyway, that’s the set-up, with the exception of Monte Beragon, played by Zachary Scott, the man who we already know will be murdered in the end. As a drama/suspense film, it had very few overly dramatic or suspenseful scenes. Most of the movie seemed to be the story of Mildred and her struggles to make insane amounts of money, all to make Veda happy. But with Veda, too much wealth is never enough. She even starts trying to steal Mildred’s lover, Monte.
Three guesses as to who the actual murderess is. It was too easy to figure out, making it a bit of a weak story. The problem is that I’m not sure how I would have changed things to make it better. Maybe make it less obvious that Veda was an evil young girl. Maybe hide the fact that she was after Monte. Possibly confuse the audience by giving Mildred a more incriminating reason for wanting Monte dead. Or maybe give Bert a darker character, capable of murder. I don’t know.
Crawford was the best part of the film, far outshining the rest of the cast. She handled the full range of emotions that the role demanded with what appeared to be a practiced and steady hand. Not only that, but the character was well-written and believable. Mildred had her flaws which made her more human. She was smart, but didn’t always make wise decisions, and she allowed her evil daughter to manipulate her at every turn. Crawford’s sharp acting helped to build the film’s otherwise weak tension.
On the down side, the character of Veda was a little one-note. It was clear very early on that we were not supposed to like her, and she never showed a humanizing, likable side. Unfortunately, because of how the character was written, her guilt was all too obvious.
One peripheral character that I enjoyed was Mildred’s co-worker and friend, Ida, played by Eve Arden. She was almost like the comic relief, except she wasn’t written as comedic, just very cynical. She was intelligent and cared for Mildred, as any good friend should. Sometimes her sarcastic humor would come close to truth, which was clever.
As far as Mildred Pierce being a film noir, I would say that it missed one crucial element. My research tells me that a film noir should be told from the point of view of the murderer. This film didn’t do that. The story was told from Mildred’s perspective. Not only that, but the actual murder was not a planned act at all, but a crime of passion. There was no tension in following the motives and thoughts of the criminal.
It’s not that I didn’t like this movie – I just felt that it was trying too hard to be something it wasn’t. I think it would have been better if it had been treated as a simple murder mystery by giving more characters believable motives to want the victim’s demise. Maybe then, Crawford could have been the lead suspect among a cast of characters who all wanted Monte Beragon dead. Maybe. Or to make it a true film noir, the entire cast could have been in on an elaborate plan to kill Monte. Now that would have been an interesting movie.