Trial By Media, Pt. 1 — Sweet Smell of Success | Next Picture Show

0:00 The Next Picture Show is presented by Regal Unlimited, the all-you-can-watch movie subscription pass that pays for itself in just two visits. See any standard 2D movie anytime with no blackout dates or restrictions. Sign up now on the Regal app or at the link in this episode's description and use code NEXTPIC26 to receive 15% off. That's N-E-X-T-P-I-C-2-6. Hello, Next Picture Show listeners. Here's a friendly reminder that if you enjoy The Next Picture Show, you'll really enjoy getting more Next Picture Show by subscribing to our Patreon. For $ 3 a month, you get the podcast early and ad-free.

0:32 And for $ 5 a month, you get those perks plus bonus episodes on Current TV, movies we don't cover on the podcast, and other topics. For instance, we recently released an episode about my take on this year's Toronto International Film Festival and Natasha's experiences catching up with Ted Lasso. To subscribe to our Patreon, please visit patreon.com slash nextpictureshow.

0:51 That's patreon.com slash nextpictureshow.

0:56 It's very difficult to keep the line between the past.

0:59 And the present.

0:59 Do you believe that someone out of the past can enter and take possession of a living being?

1:06 We may be through with the past, but the past is not.

1:09 Through with us!

1:14 Welcome to The Next Picture Show, a Movie of the Week podcast devoted to a classic film and how it shaped our thoughts on a recent release. I'm Keith Phipps, here with.

1:21 Tasha Robinson.

1:22 Genevieve Kosky.

1:23 And Scott Tobias.

1:24 With the scheduling matters of late summer and early fall behind us, we're all together again for the first time in a while. Hello, everybody.

1:29 Hi.

1:30 It's good to see us all in one place.

1:32 All in one virtual space, yes.

1:34 Exactly. Well, all right. This is actually my favorite time of year. I love early fall. It's also when festival season goes into full swing. And that means if you want to hear about my trip to Toronto, there's a bonus episode on our Patreon page. Check that out. But it also means we're in the thick of prestige movie season.

1:52 In fact, the new half of this pairing will likely be in the awards discussion later this year. But, you know, here's an easy question for everybody. What still unreleased movie are you most looking forward to that's still going to come out in 2026?

2:04 I don't know why this is even a question with the cat in the hat with Bill Hader coming out real soon now. What else could anybody possibly be looking for?

2:14 You say that and you're going to have to host an episode on it, Tasha.

2:16 Oh, man.

2:17 Are we going to have to pair it with a Mike Myers version?

2:22 Yeah, exactly.

2:23 It's going to be great.

2:25 Uh, I, I'm preemptively calling in dead that week. Uh, sorry to derail. I honestly, there's so much from your, um, Toronto bonus episode that I'm looking forward to. And I promptly have not sat down and, uh, looked into which one of the ones of those movies are coming out in the next couple of months. Um, so I'll just say Fjord, um, based almost entirely on your, uh, your pretty rapturous review of it.

2:50 Oh, no, no, I had mixed feelings about Fjord, though.

2:53 They were pretty rapturous mixed feelings, though, right?

2:56 No, well, I think it's a really artistically accomplished film that I have one kind of a big problem with, but I don't want to derail us by talking about that here. But it's definitely a film worth seeing, that's for sure.

3:10 Yeah, I did not participate in the bonus episode, but I edited it, so I got to hear a lot of Keith's TIFF recommendations, and I'm similarly... Looking forward to a lot of the big titles coming out of it. Wild Horse 9 in the debut, kind of chief among them. I'm also just very, I'm less looking forward to seeing them than just curious to see how sort of the years remaining big franchise blockbusters do. You know, we have Avengers Doomsday, we have Dune 3, and there's a new Hunger Games movie coming. which of those three, I actually might be looking forward to the most since I just finished the book it's based on and thought it was quite good. But that kind of scale of movie is, I think, maybe falling out of favor a little bit,

3:58 but maybe not. I don't know. Like I said, I want to see how they play out. And yeah, sure. I'm curious to see what an Avengers team up movie looks like in 2026.

4:09 I believe that Spider-Man Brand New Day is now the highest grossing domestic film of all time. So I don't think we're totally done with that yet.

4:17 And the kind of rapturous reception and big box office for Endgame coming back into theaters does kind of point at the possibility of Doomsday doing something a little more like old Marvel numbers instead of what has become the new normal for Marvel movies.

4:35 Oof, Marvel. I, Marvel is not what I'm looking forward to the most. The answer to this question.

4:41 I said I was curious.

4:42 Curious, fine. But the answer to this question is quite, I mean, it's unavoidable for me. It's you can see everything. As soon as this Nathan Fielder slash Lance Oppenheim film about Elizabeth Holmes surfaced and that it's in crazy long and supposedly quite good. And the trailer is crazy. It's just like this is very exciting for me. I think I have a lot of respect for those filmmakers. And also I am obsessed with the Elizabeth Holmes story. I've read the John Carrey book. I saw the Amanda Seyfried series, The Dropout. I am all over this movie. I cannot wait to see it. It's coming pretty soon, I think.

5:25 We'll finally get a chance. But that is foremost on my mind. But there's tons of things to see. going to be very backloaded this.

5:32 Year i'm looking forward to being like curled into a ball of mortification uh throughout that entire movie just uh between holmes's whole persona and fielder's whole deal uh certainly amplified by appenheim's whole deal it's like it's absolute scott bait and i'm i'm sure it will be good but whether i can physically handle watching it remains to be seen Yeah.

5:58 Scott and my wife, Stevie, are basically amateur Elizabeth Holmes scholars. I kind of want them to go see this in costume or something like this, Rocky Horror.

6:06 Just like a Barb and Hire level of commitment to the whole thing.

6:09 I wonder if she shares my love of cringe comedy, though, because this is going to be that. I'm so excited. So that's foremost on my mind, but there's going to be so much to see this fall for sure.

6:22 Well, we're talking about, you know, coming up in the next few weeks, movies about tech moguls. I will confess a morbid fascination with The Social Reckoning.

6:32 Oh, yeah.

6:33 I was going to say that, too. Because, I mean, I did love The Social Network so much as a movie, and I'm just very curious how this film iterates, you know, just given... everything that's changed in tech moguls and billionaires and AI and technology and Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg since that first movie came out.

6:54 I'm a little worried about that one, I've got to admit, but we'll see.

6:57 Keith, I feel like it's maybe one of the few question marks you still kind of have following TIFF. What haven't you seen that you are?

7:05 Oh, there's tons of stuff. I want to see Elsinore at TIFF. I didn't get to it. Everyone loved I Play Rocky, so I'm looking forward to that one. I think on the big movie front, I'm most excited about dune part three and on the sort of the awards front i think the one i'm weirdly not weirdly i guess but paper tiger uh the the james gray movie like james gray is always a filmmaker whose films i always like i keep thinking he's gonna make one i just really love and it's gonna be like one of my all-time favorites maybe this is the one who knows uh but no matter what i think i think it's probably gonna be pretty good uh but yeah there's unfortunately i mean well fortunately in terms of like you know,

7:44 interesting movies. Unfortunately, in terms of our workload coming up for the next few months, there's a lot of stuff that remains unseen in any way by me or Scott or the rest of us. But, you know, there's one new movie we have seen that's inspired, you know, made us think of an older film. And so we decided to do a whole podcast about both of them. Shannon, can you tell us about our current pairing?

8:04 Sure.

8:04 Based on a 2007 Esquire article called Tonight on Dateline, This Man Will Die, Lance Oppenheim's Primetime revisits the mid-aughts TV phenomenon To Catch a Predator, in which journalist Chris Hansen, played in the film by Robert Pattinson, performed stings on would-be online sex predators who targeted children. It was, to say the least, a problematic program, depicted in Primetime as an enterprise fueled by Hansen's ambition, desire for the spotlight, and amorality. Those qualities put us in mind of Sidney Falco, the protagonist of the 1957 film Sweet Smell of Success.

8:36 Tony Curtis plays Falco, a struggling press agent whose success or failure depends on his ability to get his clients mentioned by the influential columnist J.J. Hunsaker, played by Burt Lancaster. Over the course of the film, we discover with Falco just how far he's willing to go to get ahead in a dirty business whose influence can be felt in every corner of New York.

8:55 So in this episode, we'll discuss the razor-sharp dialogue and twisted loyalties of Sweet Spell's success. Then in the next, we'll bring in primetime and explore what they have in common.

9:05 Burt Lancaster as J.J. Hunsaker, world-famed columnist whose gossip is gospel to 60 million readers. Tony Curtis as Sidney Falco, the kid who had ideas about taking over.

9:20 But we happen to know I'm your star pupil because I reflect back to you, your own talent.

9:26 I'd hate to take a bite of you. You're a cookie full of arsenic.

9:32 Don't turn your back on him. You might find a knife in it. This is their story and that of the big shots and big names who worship the sweet smell of success.

9:44 Were it not for its final shot, in which one of the few characters to survive with their soul intact walks away from the sordid world in which it's set, Sweet Smell of Success would be a film of despairing cynicism. Directed by Alexander McKendrick, an American-born filmmaker raised in Scotland who'd found success directing comedies for England's Ealing Studios, and co-written by Ernest Lehman, author of the short novel in which it's based, and playwright-turned-screenwriter Clifford Odets, the film peels back the bright surface of New York glamour and finds nothing but rot underneath it. From the Broadway stage to jazz-filled nightclubs, nothing thrives without the approval of powerful columnists

10:18 who treat their favorable words and condemnations as part of a network of transactions in which nothing comes for free. None are more powerful than J.J. Hunsucker, played by Burt Lancaster as a hulking, humorous figure who lives to bend others to his will. Hunsucker exists at the pinnacle of his world. Somewhere near the bottom is Sidney Falco, played by Tony Curtis, a press agent who finds himself treading water in spite of his tireless smoothing and scheming. Sidney lives in an office that doubles both his apartment and occasional love nest for those he's trying to manipulate. But the few clients he has aren't happy with his results or his lies. And even his supportive secretary, Sally, played

10:56 by Jeff Donnell, seems to be losing patience. Sidney's future depends on Romanian Hunsaker's good graces. And that future doesn't look too bright. Still, as the film opens, Sidney has maintained a tattered moral code. There are lines he won't cross, or so he believes. But desperation has a way of making those lines disappear. Even the idea of truth gets put to the test in Sweet Smell of Success. While taking a sneak peek at Hunsecker's next column, Sidney happens on some words of praise for Herbie Temple, an aging comic played by Joe Frisco. It is, Hunsecker's secretary tells him, a rare instance of the writer saying something nice because he wants to. Sensing an opportunity, Sidney rushes to trick

11:37 Herbie and his agent into thinking he's responsible for the mention. He's successful, but the move just underscores the hollowness of the whole enterprise. Hunsecker claims that Temple is so funny that he had the columnist screaming. But Lancaster plays Hunsecker as a man incapable of mirth, much less hysteria. Even when he writes something without an ulterior motive, Hunsecker's a man for whom words have power, but no real meaning.

12:00 Even his love for his younger sister Susan, played by Susan Harrison, has been twisted into an exercise of control, divorced from what that emotion is supposed to be. Sidney spends much of the film in service of Hunsecker's desire to crush Susan's relationship with Steve Dallas, played by Martin Milner.

12:15 a jazz guitarist whose only apparent objectionable quality is his interest in Susan. Hunsaker wants to snuff it out while keeping his hands clean. To this end, Sydney might be useful, provided Hunsaker can push him to go further than he wants to go. Sweet Spell's success takes place in an almost oppressively dark world, in which wit gets weaponized, good will exploited, and even art and entertainment are just tools to be wielded by those seeking leverage. It's also not far removed from the real world that inspired it. Lehman had worked as both a freelance writer and publicist and drew on those experiences when writing the film. It wasn't hard to connect some of the dots. The powerful columnist

12:51 and radio personality Walter Winchell shared Hunzecker's pro-style, opportunistic patriotism, and red-baiting. He also fiercely controlled his daughter's love life, down to attempting to destroy one suitor's career. Sweetsmug's success was right in portraying an approximation of Winchell as a phony. Maybe he was right about everything else, too. It's also a world in which a striver like Sidney, no matter how far he's willing to go, ultimately doesn't stand a chance.

13:16 Those at the top have put in safeguards to keep the Sidneys of the world in their place. In the end, he's crushed by his eagerness to please and serve. Until then cast in dreamboat parts, Curtis was eager to prove he could do more, which seems to bleed into his performance. His own ambition allows him to craft a vision of how ugly ambition could look. Sidney's never sympathetic, but at least in the film's early scenes, he's pitiable. By the end, however, he's become a pimp, an extortionist. He's framed an innocent man and exploited Susan's goodness. And he's lied to everyone because he travels in circles where every word might be a lie. In the end, he's crushed, but even Hunsecker is laid low by Susan's willingness to walk away. He

13:56 still has the world at his feet, but the one person that matters has left him behind for somewhere better. Because any place has to be better than this one. We'll be back to discuss the film after the break. That's good.

14:17 Now that louse is at it, Susie's here for good. I want that boy taken apart. J.J., why do something that's going to drive them right back into each other's arms? I know how to handle Susie. You just....

14:40 You just handle the boy. Preferably tonight. What's tomorrow, a holiday? Your fat cop friend. I think I'm going home. Maybe I left my sense of humor in my other suit.

14:59 You've got a God-given brain, Sidney. Use it. I think this is a personal thing with me. Are you telling me I think of this in terms of personal pique? Don't you see that today that boy wiped his feet on the choice and the predilections of 60 million men and women in the greatest country in the world? If you had any morals yourself, you'd understand the immorality of that boy's stand today. It wasn't me he criticized. It was my readers.

15:26 So with this film, I feel like we could almost just approach this piece by piece with all the many great things that contribute to this film. I want to start with James Wong Howe's cinematography. He started the silent era, worked through the 70s, tried on all kinds of different looks. Like this doesn't necessarily look like body and soul, doesn't necessarily look like seconds. What is he doing in this film in terms of the photography?

15:49 Well, I mean, I think if I can speak, I guess, to the overall look of the film, to which he contributes quite a bit. I mean, you have this film that's in black and white that takes the shape of a film noir, which it doesn't have to be. I think that's kind of a crucial point, and I think it's something that will come up next week when we talk about primetime, is the form in which it takes, the stylization of this movie is such an important part of it. So it has the noir form, it has the stylized dialogue, of noir, but it is kind of fact-based or illusory and is also committed to evoking a scene in a, in a quite realistic way. I mean, you know, this is a film that, that really gets a great deal out of real locations, out of its

16:33 particular bustling corner of New York. And then also the, uh, seedy, you know, back rooms and clubs, uh, where, where deals get made. And, uh, you know, all the, all the drama takes, uh, happens. And, and, um, and, Howe, I think, is just one of, you know, a truly extraordinary group of, you know, behind-the-scenes artisans who contributed to this movie, contributed to the look of the film. Then you have the music, of course, by Albert Bernstein. And, you know, it just has this kind of vivid sort of noir pop to it, which it doesn't have to have, but which, you know, is part of what makes it great.

17:07 I think also, kind of in addition to what we think of as noir, the opening shot and some of the street scenes almost have like this sort of docu-realistic feel to them, where it's the lights are bright and you kind of see all the details, but it still has like this kind of, I don't know, like Ouija, you know, news photography kind of look to it.

17:27 It's an interesting, like splitting of the difference between like grit and glam, you know, both that matches up very nicely with the subject matter. And there's a lot of really striking compositions, but it's also not a static film. Like it's very, there's a lot of movement in the camera, you know, that, frankly, I don't like always associate with noir photography, which I tend to feel as a little more like static image based. Not always, of course, there are exceptions, but it stuck out to me here sort of that, you know, the way this lives in an interesting tonal middle ground that translates to that's visual approach.

18:09 And I think that is maybe what ties it most strongly in my mind to the other film in this pairing. We'll get to that next week. But maybe that's why it stuck out to me on this viewing so much.

18:22 I want to bring up a shot that has really stuck with me and that also kind of had me rethinking what I felt I was doing with the cinematography here. There's a point mid-film where Hunsaker kind of like pauses in an evening of wheeling and dealing and browbeating and abusing people and scheming and particularly abusing Sidney. He goes home and he looks out over the city from his balcony.

18:50 And the city is kind of muddy. You know, it's this... Out of focus blur of blobs of light. And it's pretty obviously a rear projection. It had me wondering, is this just what the shot looked like in rear projection and, you know, how it would have made it a lot sharper if he could have? Or is this meant to be illustrative? Because so much of the movie is so sharp.

19:19 It's interesting to me in a movie that's just constantly about moral grays and the lack of black and white. in a lot of the things that these folks are doing, except when they descend into, you know, arguably pure evil, that everything is so, you know, sharp lined. So this one shot where he looks out on the city and it just sort of feels dim and out of focus and unclear. I mean, there's not a whole lot of reason narratively for him to do this. unless he is kind of like pondering the city, pondering his city and his place in understanding it or communicating it to other people or, you know, exploiting it, taking charge of it.

20:01 Kind of wish there was a little more focus in that scene in terms of what he's feeling in that moment, because there are so many options. But I'm curious if that shot stood out for anybody. And if you have any, any theories about whether the city is so out of focus or, you know, as an artistic choice or just as a technological limit.

20:19 I mean, I think it works. If it works for you artistically, then sure. It's quite, it's an artistic choice. You know, I didn't feel like it was like the technology was wanting or any way, but, but it just, I love that shot. It just, it just feels like we don't really have access to his inner life in any way there, but we kind of get a sense of him looming over the city, seeing it as, as his, it reminds me of a similar shot in, in, in the Abel Friar movie, King of New York, where, Christopher Walken kind of stares down at the city. The city's kind of at his feet because that's how he feels.

20:51 And I think maybe Hunsaker's feeling is similar.

20:54 Keith, you weren't reminded of this shot in Wall Street where Charlie Sheen walks outside and looks over the balcony and says, who am I? Like literally says it. I mean, you know, my thing about Hunsaker in a scene like that and whenever we get him alone, which is not very often, is the fact that, I mean, here is a profoundly powerful man who's also profoundly lonely and who is clinging to this one relationship that he has that he is in the process of destroying. And so I think whenever he is on his own, that sense of loneliness is enforced and that feeling of the empire over which he presides is kind of empty. So I feel like a shot like that sort of emphasizes that. The other thing about Hunsaker, and I don't know if you

21:38 all thought this or not, is like I could not help but think about all of the awards bloggers, basically, that we have to deal with. I mean, just these horrible people. I won't name them on this podcast, but you know who they are. This is like the petty little fiefdom that they lord over in ways that are just incredibly nasty, and yet the things that are being reported upon are not that significant. And it feels like we're in the sad, petty internet version of something that was much larger in the 50s.

22:11 Yeah, I feel like this world has just changed form over the decades, has never really gone away. That's right.

22:15 That just makes me wonder about the economy or maybe the biosphere of press agents today in terms of, you know, there aren't necessarily news columnists in the same way who wield this kind of power, but there certainly are people online. And I think of, you know, today's influencers as having like an entire sub economy of, of people who are just desperately trying to get them to mention this product or use this product or recommend this product. I have gotten press emails that, that rapturously announce that, that so-and-so semi-famous person was seen using such-and-such. And it's always like a lip balm or, you know, something, some makeup or something.

23:02 And it's like, they're using this lip gloss today. Like, I'm going to drop everything and write a new story about it. It's crazy. But when it comes to, you know, mentioning a business or a person or giving a film or a show or a book or a review or whatever, like. There's got to be a whole economy of people trying to get super popular book talkers to talk about some specific book, right?

23:29 Oh, for sure. Undoubtedly.

23:31 I hope that none of them are committing murder by cop, but I wonder how dirty or how favor-based that world is.

23:40 Well, that just makes me think of the stuff with the comic that Hunsaker mentions in the column that Sidney gets an early look at and kind of capitalizes on in a really amusing way to get that comic to sign on with him. And it works. But in the interaction with Hunsucker's secretary, you know, she indicates that he just really enjoyed like that was a genuine review. That wasn't like a favor, you know. So I found it interesting, the implication that there is still an element of actual tastemaking to what JJ is doing. And it's not just like a mosaic of favors passed back and forth in the form of a column.

24:23 You've got to figure in some ways, at least when someone like Hans Ecker started out, he maybe actually liked this stuff.

24:30 Yeah.

24:31 You know?

24:31 That's a beautiful plot point because it illustrates that he's not just a favor broker anymore. He really does still take pleasure in things. He still does use his power to boost talent that he wants to see more people see. But at the same time, it's an illustration that even where there's, I guess, virtue in journalism, there's still bottom feeders coming along to take advantage of it. And then, of course, the payoff of that tiny little subplot about Sidney hustling to get that comic on the payroll is just a little chef's kiss moment at the end, kind of illustrating how much his life has changed in an hour of film time.

25:15 But as far as we know, it's a pure gesture on Hunsucker's part. Now- you know, now this comic owes him a favor, whether he asked for a favor or not.

25:23 Well, sort of. I mean, I guess you could say he's potentially in Hunsaker's debt, but at the same time, if nothing was agreed on beforehand, you know, if Hunsaker is the type to come after a random, seemingly fairly low-level comic and say, now you owe me one, I don't know. I mean, he certainly seems like the type to have built a network and kept track It is possible that, you know, Herbie Temple's career will get a little boost from this. And then if Hunsaker ever happens to need anything, he can certainly come back to and say, not so much, hey, I did you a solid, now you owe me. But hey, you had a little taste of what happens when I feed your name to people.

26:08 Would you like more? If so, I guess I would not argue that he owes him yet. But there's always that possibility for anybody that benefits from what he does. from atop his bully pulpit.

26:19 I think maybe I was being more cynical than the sweet smell of success. Which is difficult. But I guess that kind of brings us to a bigger question. I found a quote from Winchell, about Winchell, from Ernest Lehman in a long article on Vanity Fair, which we can link to in the notes. Of course, at this point, we haven't really talked about Walter Winchell, but I mentioned before that he's one of the bases, the primary basis for J.J. Hunzucker. Levin says this. I knew Winchell. I was the guy on the other end of the phone.

26:50 He'd go into 30 minute into a 30 minute tirade about Ed Sullivan that he'd say, who is this? And this is the part that stuck with me. He goes on. The nicest thing you could do was to keep someone out of that world. So is this film a work of like near absolute cynicism or do you see as a morality tale as a kind of a warning to what could happen to people when they get into this world?

27:12 I guess this is just my personal bent, but I felt like it was a warning about, you know, trusting newspaper columns like these these kind of personality driven, celebrity driven columns at the point where Sidney sets up his. friend question mark friend with benefits question mark certainly friend with favors Rita with the columnist Otis Elwell who plays the entire scene with Rita kind of like a predator and kind of like somebody who has been given a new toy it just feels like what this movie is saying is these columns are tainted you know fundamentally tainted by terrible people The whole conversation in front of the senator between Hunsecker and Sidney just seems to be kind of like setting up an expectation that, you know, everything

28:09 that these columnists are printing is probably being fed to them by press agents. So they're not really doing news. But at the same time, they don't want to be beholden to press agents. but they're all doing favors and not a whole lot of work. You see a lot of them just sitting around bars with random people coming up to them and giving them tips. It just really is just a constant slight on the profession. And I came out of it feeling like I had basically been told, don't trust anything anyone in this position says. Anybody doing it around the town column is probably a sleazeball at best and a fraud at worst.

28:48 See, I didn't come away with that at all. Maybe because this world is so kind of distant from our own. To me, I think the film is a little bit broader in terms of the way power and influence work. I mean, that kind of, to me, kind of connects it more to... the themes of film noir and kind of the cynicism and darkness of that world. And I think, you know, once you get into this realm of power and influence and people, you know, desperate to wield it and willing to do all of these assorted things to get what they want, you know, I... Then you get to a place where I think the lessons of the film or the themes of the film apply much more broadly to politics as well. Any place where power is wielded,

29:37 rather than thinking about this film strictly as kind of like a, this is how the sausage is made journalistically. I think that's kind of, to me, that's not to be offensive or anything, but to say it feels like a narrow reading of what this film is trying to do.

29:54 But I do think Tasha is or I agree with Tasha calling out that scene with Rita and Otis in Sydney's apartment is like the nadir of this very cynical film, films cynicism, at least for me, and not just because of like, what Sydney pushes Rita into. But what really drove it home for me is the sort of the runner of Otis knowing Rita from somewhere and trying to guess where he knows her from and her you know denying it denying it denying it and then at the end when sydney leaves she's it's like i forget where it was like tampa or something palm springs yeah yeah she's like palm springs and then sort of like confirming that she has done this before with him specifically and therefore how many times with other men has she been

30:46 put in this position And it just kind of like gives a glimpse into this vicious cycle that she is a woman in this world, a single woman with a child to support the position she has been put in again and again by men with more power than her, even if they don't have much power of their own, like Sydney, you know. So just like the confirmation that this is not a horrible one-off event, but just one of the many in her life was just kind of devastating.

31:18 I didn't necessarily take it as she's been in this situation before specifically. I would think if that was the case, he would maybe remember a little more specifically. Given that she's a cigarette girl, I thought, you know, he's naming a lot of, you know, resort towns, party towns. And, you know, it seems like she's possibly worked in a bunch of these joints in a bunch of these places.

31:44 I took it to mean, you know, maybe she was a showgirl at some point. or trying to become a showgirl. Like, he recognizes her from somewhere, and the fact that she doesn't want Sidney to know about it indicates that there is maybe something a little salacious or a little embarrassing there. But I don't know that I felt the very specific, I am being used to provide sexual favors for barter that I was not consulted about beforehand is necessarily... what is being communicated here. Interesting.

32:16 I guess maybe I have that reading because of earlier in the film, like kind of her, she's introduced as having put in a situation with Leo, who the guy that Sidney initially tries to blackmail that leads to this whole thing. And as an insinuation that the men she has worked for continually put her in this position of being a favor. I think your reading is also very possible, but I guess kind of to what Keith joked earlier about, I'm being, maybe I'm being more cynical than this movie is like, I think it just kind of invites like the darkest possible reading of the human soul that you can come up with.

32:57 Whichever the case though, Cindy's journey from someone who is, is, is trying to exploit this one, one columnist for taking advantage of his position by, by, you know, exploiting the cigarette girls. to someone who actually exploits cigarette girls over the course of several hours, it's really telling.

33:16 And at the same time, I mean, I don't know, Rita just does not come across as somebody who is necessarily used to or at least okay with this kind of thing. The whole thing that she comes to Sydney with in the first place is she was naive enough to believe somebody who said he wanted to interview her and lured her up to his apartment. And her recounting of that story, I don't know. The details are a little fuzzy in terms of how far it went and at what point she was able to get out and how she feels about it all. But she is definitely smart enough to know when she's being used and to not appreciate it. She is not She is a lovely woman who is badly used by a lot of men, but she has not come to a point of doing

34:12 that herself, of selling herself to get ahead. She is wounded and upset about it every time it happens.

34:19 Oh, I want to be clear. I don't think that she was in any of these situations doing it of her own volition. I think she is basically... you know, has a history of being more or less pimped out by her bosses in this way. And that can include a spectrum of encounters, I guess. But I don't want to imply that Rita is in any way like willingly prostituting herself.

34:45 And it seems to me that this experience, this moment is incredibly wounding to her. You know, I mean, however, however she however many experiences like it, she may have had in the past. it is nonetheless, it stings. And it's one of the toughest scenes in the movie for sure.

35:02 And, you know, we started this whole point talking about the cynicism of this movie. A lot of very sad and very, you know, wounding and frustrating things happen in this movie. But to me, The most painful part of it is just the look on Rita's face when Sydney shows up for what she thinks is going to be a liaison and he's brought somebody with him. And it's very clear what his intent is. And she's just immediately having none of it. And then by the end of it, she sort of wearily backs down. And then the piece runs, so one assumes that she went through with it. And you can see that compromise wearing itself into her over the course of that scene, which, ugh, this movie makes me want to smack so many people. It's very, very

35:55 effective while being very low-key in a lot of ways. It's kind of like emotional beats. I think it's very, very good at pulling people's emotional strings.

36:05 It's also a case where Nichols, who was also in Where the Boys Are, another film we covered, played a lot of brassy dames. And I think I really like her performance here where she's playing like sort of the sad side of that character as well. Tony Curtis is, and so, I mean, he's a naturally charming performer who at this point had mostly done kind of cute guy roles.

36:30 And I think he really kind of turns that inside out with his performance. It's kind of like when Hugh Grant started playing CADS. He made everything that worked for him as a charming, romantic lead work for him as a bad guy. And I think, you know, Burt Lancaster's casting is really, it seems not intuitive. Sort of like this handsome, leading man type playing this sort of brooding brute behind spectacles, which are actually his glasses, by the way.

36:59 There's an interesting story there to give him that kind of disconnected look. McKendrick would put a little bit of Vaseline over the glasses so he couldn't really focus his eyes. I was laying a lot of trivia on you. We need to take a quick break, but we'll be right back to talk about some of these performances and more after the break. The next picture show is presented by Regal Unlimited, the all-you-can-watch movie subscription pass that pays for itself in just two visits. It's October now, so we're deep into spooky season. If you're a horror fan like me, you're eager to see some scary movies old and new on the big screen. On the new front, there's Other Mommy starring the terrifying Jessica Chastain. Okay, she's not usually terrifying,

37:43 but she seems pretty scary in that trailer. and the DC Universe set Clayface. On the classic front, great Bela Lugosi's Ghost Do You Have options. By the time this episode premieres, it'll be too late to see a 25th anniversary screening of Donnie Darko, but not too late to catch re-releases of both versions of Candyman, A Nightmare on Elm Street 3, Dream Warriors, Midsommar, and more. There's also the restored re-release of Ken Russell's Bonkers the Devils that you really should see on a big screen. And if you're the type of person who listens to this podcast, you probably want to see as many movies as possible in a premium theater. On a great big screen with flawless audio surrounded by other fans. And if you're like me,

38:18 you want to do this while spending as little as possible. With Regal Unlimited, you can do just that. It's a great way to see a lot of movies while also saving a lot of money. With Regal Unlimited, you pay one monthly fee to see as many standard 2D movies as you want. with no blackout dates and no restrictions.

38:34 And we have a discount code to make the cost of watching all the movies you want to see even cheaper. When you sign up for Regal Unlimited using the Next Picture Show code NEXTPIC26, that's N-E-X-T-P-I-C-2-6, you'll get 15% off an all-you-can-watch movie pass with no blackout dates or restrictions, plus 10% off all non-alcoholic concessions. Just open the Regal app or follow the link in this episode's description and use NEXTPICK26 to receive your discount.

39:03 Well, son, it looks like we may have to call this game on account of darkness. If looks could kill, I'd be dead.

39:12 No, I don't care about you.

39:15 My whole interest, if it's not too late, is in Susie and how to undo what you've done to her. And what have I done to her except not buy her a new fur coat lately? You were right, Sidney. This boy is a dilly.

39:29 Why? Because I don't like the way you toy with people? Your contempt and malice?

39:34 I'm sorry, Frank.

39:35 You think about yourself and about your column. To you, you're some kind of a national glory. But to me, and a lot of people like me, your slimy scandal and your phony patriotics, to.

39:47 Me, Mr. Hunsecker, you're a national disgrace. Son, I don't relish shooting mosquitoes with elephant guns. Suppose you just shuffle along and call it a day.

40:02 And we're back from the break. And, you know, I left off talking about performances. We should probably stick with that because the performances are so memorable. What about Tony Curtis? What do you think of what he's doing here? Because I never, I won't speak for everyone. I never like Sidney, but I at least kind of feel bad for him in the beginning of this film. What is your experience with the character?

40:26 I feel like one of the most important small scenes of this movie is where Sidney sits down with Leo Bartha, yet another columnist, to try to blackmail him and meets his wife, who appears to be an older woman, very no-nonsense, meets her for the first time. She loves to play the horses. Yeah, she just immediately starts asking him for horse tips. And chatting him up, she seems like a very pleasant woman to have at a party, just a practiced socialite who's used to making people feel at home and feel warm. But she also responds to him as though he's a handsome, charming man. I guess when he sits down with the senator and the woman that the senator is having an affair with and her agent, she responds to him in the same sort of way. Just, oh,

41:18 you must be an actor because you're so terribly pretty. You know, we spend a lot more time with men and men clashing with each other and maneuvering around each other in this movie. But we, you know, come to think of it, we see the same thing with Mary, who, you know, Hunsaker's secretary, I suppose, or admin assistant, whatever you would call it, treats Sidney as a glib charmer.

41:48 who she's happy to be in the warm sunlight beam of his attention, but she also doesn't take it seriously. She kind of laughs him off. She's willing to give him what he wants, but she doesn't feel that she's anyone special or that the weight of his regard is anything particularly meaningful. And the way all of these women respond to him is just, so telling in terms of his particular charm. You know, none of them fall over him exactly. But when he drifts into people's orbits, women in particular kind of have this, oh, he's so handsome and he's so charismatic. And surely that says something about him. And, you know, his response in all of these cases is kind of to look for advantage or to shrug them

42:42 off a little bit. because he's too busy looking for advantage with somebody else. So I feel like we get the most sense of him from how the women who don't know him well, or maybe know him a little too well respond to him.

42:56 I think it's kind of amplified by the the contrast of his clear lack of success, you know, despite the those looks and apparent charm and charisma that he is still seems like probably fairly green in this business, or maybe not if he and JJ go, go back so far, but, but he, he's clearly like struggling to get slash maintain a foothold in as, as a press agent. And it gives him just sort of a sweaty, you know, demeanor, uh, if not like actually moisture wise, just kind of vibe wise, you know, he is very desperate, you know? So he's a man who all of those kind of inherent, uh, pluses he has based on how he looks haven't really helped him for whatever reason. And I think that just makes the sense of desperation come off of him a

43:48 lot more.

43:49 I've become a little attuned to like noir era movies that introduce you to a male protagonist as he changes clothing. I just think it's kind of hilarious given, you know, what a heartthrob he's meant to be and how people responded to him at the time. that we're introduced to him taking off his clothes. And it's not, you don't get a ton of skin, just like a little peak here and there. Though I do think it's interesting when he's buttoning up his button up, he's not wearing an undershirt.

44:19 So you're just seeing his chest and like little flashes of calves as he takes off his pants. It's kind of hilarious as strip teases go. But it's this combination of like little teases of his body with him just being like brutally eviscerating to his his poor secretary who seems to have a crush on him. You know, Sally, his relationship with we don't spend a ton of time on this in this film. But it's just so clear to me, I guess, that we're combining that. These little strips of skin for the audience with just him being an awful man as soon as possible in the movie.

44:59 I thought you were going to talk about him not wanting to take his overcoat with him so he wouldn't have to tip the hat check girls.

45:06 That's a great, great beat.

45:07 I mean, I see I kind of I guess my take on him is that he's actually pretty good at his job. It's just it's just the nature of his job involves him having to hustle and scrape. and scheme and do everything possible to get attention for the people he's taken on as a client and also get attention to attract clients and bring clients on board by devious means at times. I think it just is the nature of what he does. He's kind of this termite in this business, and I think he does his job the way he's supposed to do it. It feels to me like his name, though, in his office is not etched on, actually.

45:52 Isn't it like a crude sign?

45:53 No, it's just taped to the door. Yeah, exactly.

45:56 There is a sense of impermanence there. And again, someone who is hanging on to this business by his fingernails. But then again, I think about people who work in public relations and what it must be like from their end to try to promote, say, a film that or an actor coming through town and the number of emails and queries they send out, the number of followups that they get and get no reply to. I mean, just like it, it just comes with the terrain in my, in my opinion. And then, you know, he's just has this one incredibly important person that he needs, he really needs to curry favor with. And that's Hunsaker.

46:31 I think regardless of whether Sidney is good at his job and what good at his job even entails in this, this cutthroat world, he, he, just comes across as screamingly ambitious, you know, and willing to do anything to get ahead. And whether he is getting ahead from like a starting point in this industry, or he's just maintained this mentality throughout years in it, it ultimately, I don't think really matters because the characterization is there and is of what matters to this particular story.

47:01 Scott referred to him as a termite. And the kind of like rat race that he's involved in has come up a couple of times. I just wanted to call out something early in the script. Like I'm actually pulling up copies of the script online and they don't have this exchange at all, which means it was probably a late edition. Just not surprising given how much of this movie was apparently written like on the same days that the scene was being filmed. But when he's berating Sally at the beginning, he talks about how, you know, he doesn't want people saying to him, you know, hey, mouse, go get me a paper or hey, there's another animal.

47:43 I forget what, you know, go go get me a cup of water. In the course of about ten lines, he references six different animals. He talks about not wanting to scrape at the kitty, not wanting to be given money out of the kitty anymore, and wanting to be top dog, and just on and on and on. And the Pile up of animal metaphors over just a very short period of time when he's introducing himself makes me think, you know, we're meant to be seeing this all as a rat race or a dog eat dog world. Like he thinks of himself as kind of living in a jungle in a space full of animals, even if he doesn't call it out specifically as a metaphor. So I think the fact that he is living so hand to mouth that he cares that much about leaving tips with

48:35 with hat check girls all over town suggests that he's not doing great. But that doesn't mean he's bad at his job. It just means that he's in a jungle environment where everybody is, you know, is predator or prey. And he wants to make sure he's a predator and not, you know, these various other smaller animals that he's mentioning.

48:54 So then where does JJ fall in the food chain? King of the Jungle?

48:59 I think so.

49:00 He has kind of a lamb-like quality to him, doesn't he? Apex Predator from Mean Girls.

49:05 And Burt Lancaster carries himself that way. That's another critical thing about this movie and those two actors, because you have Tony Curtis, who is hustling and sweating and is desperate at all times, moving like an animal or whatever metaphor you want to apply to him, Hunsaker does not have that kind of panic. He is not completely unflappable because we do have moments of vulnerability and ultimately things turn sour for him. But there is that calm assertion of authority, of a sense that nothing has to be done that he doesn't want to have done, and that ultimately even Sidney, who is as clever as he is, as crafty as he is, is never going to really get won over on J.J. Hunsaker because he is the

50:00 king of the jungle and he carries himself that way.

50:03 The introductions of the two men, the respective introductions is so notable in this movie. Like we don't even meet JJ Hunsaker until maybe like 20 minutes in when we're, you know, we spend the first part of this movie following Sidney around as he's kind of just like dashing all around in this frenzied panic. And he is the one who comes to JJ when we finally see Hunsaker, who we've heard so much about. He is sitting still like holding court at this table. And it's Sydney who has to come to him like first via an attempt at a phone call. And then when he's denied to actually kind of like just come up behind him and insert himself into this conversation, because JJ is just at a level where he does not come to anyone, people

50:49 come to him. And he just like radiates that authority and the stillness of The almost like monolithic presence that Lancaster brings to that scene at the table just underscores the extreme power differential between these two men.

51:06 Do you think there's any point where Sidney actually has the upper hand or is actually on his way to getting what he wants from Hunsaker?

51:14 I thought the whole business with Otis was going to fall out in a different way. I felt like if Sidney had not been just doing this to try desperately to get back to Hunsicker's good graces, what he was doing there could have set up a situation where he could have illustrated, you know, I can do what you want, but I don't need you to do it. Kind of trying to establish a slightly better position on the pecking order than he had he could have certainly swung that situation in a different direction. And, you know, instead, it all just turns out to be a setup. There was also certainly a point with Susie at the end, you know, where he could have come clean and thrown Hunsaker under the bus if he hadn't believed that Hunsaker was about

52:05 to give him everything that he wanted. You know, there are, I guess there are a lot of inflection points in this movie. It feels like where he has to make a choice and he just keeps making the wrong choice over and over and over again, kind of to emphasize, you know, he does have options here. He just, he's made his bed and he keeps lying down in it.

52:25 Interesting thing to me really about the ending though, is how it kind of underlines the fact that the straighter characters here are not playing the game that they are playing. They are being manipulated for sure, but it is possible for them to prevail simply by leaving as, as, uh, his sister does at the end. I mean, obviously it's not a, not a triumphant ending or anything like that, but it is, it is a thing where like they have, uh, you know, as powerless as they seem to the machinations of, of people like Hunsecker and Sidney, you know, they, they do have the power of their own integrity and they have the morality and And she specifically has the power to simply walk away and destroy J.J. in her own way.

53:11 So this incredibly powerful man, this lion of Broadway, is felled really in the end by that.

53:18 We haven't really talked at all about poor Steve, Susie's would-be fiancé who gets caught up in all this and ends the film, I believe, just like beaten up and in the hospital, right?

53:32 Yeah.

53:33 That's the last we hear of him. Like, I guess to kind of go back to just the overall cynicism of this film, did any of you walk away from this movie thinking there's a chance that Susie and Steve find their way back to each other?

53:46 You know, as I said in the keynote, I think her walking away is the one bit of optimism. And I know she claims to be heading to him. I don't know. But I think part of the... I think if there's a... a sort of a weak spot in this movie. I don't think Martin Mildner is the most compelling performance in it, or you get this really great sense that they have to be together. I think, you know, it might have worked just a tad better. I mean, this isn't your perfect movie, but I think it might work just a tad more if you really felt like this was a love for the ages.

54:14 He's a bit stiff, especially for someone with that much weed. But it's almost an unfortunate role that he has to have in the movie because he's not the beneficiary of the sparkling dialogue and the juicy moral corruption that he's just a straight guy who is reacting to JJ and Sydney as I think a normal moral person might with indignance and disgust and anger. You know, those are qualities that are, you know, noble in real life, but maybe boring in a movie. And I don't know how much of that to blame on the actor or just like, you know, that it just that being the nature of his role.

54:58 Yeah, I mean, I think it helps or that character maybe needs to be as boring and straight laced as possible so that JJ's vendetta against him is as irrational as it is. Because his reasoning for not wanting Susan to be with Steve doesn't really seem to have anything to do with Steve. It seems to have to do with him just like not wanting to lose Susan, you know, and that is amplified by the fact that Steve is like, he's a successful, nice young man, you know, weed habit aside.

55:32 I'm curious how what y'all's read on this one is. Is Hunsecker's interest in his sister to some degree sexual?

55:45 That framed photo on his desk sure is conspicuous.

55:51 I don't think the film discourages us from thinking that. There's sort of a hint of Scarface in this.

56:01 Yeah.

56:01 It's not, it's not overt, but that picture on his desk was the thing that really gave me pause. It's quite the, uh, the lurid glamor shot. And, uh, it's just, it's so large, uh, and it just looms over his desk where you would expect somebody to have maybe a picture of their family. Uh, I guess it is a picture of his family, but yeah, a little squeaky and, and not something that Feels like it's heavily drawn anywhere else in the movie to me. That said, I mean, my read on Steve and Susie is just, it's pretty common for ingenue couples to be boring. But I just, I wish there was any sort of sense of spark between them. It feels significant to me that kind of her way of agreeing to marry him is like after

56:54 a pause that appears to have at minimum been overnight, she says, I'll try to make a good wife to you. It's not, I love you. It's not, I can't wait for us to be together. It's not, you know, you complete me or any other movie-ism. It's, I'll try to be a good wife to you. And I know where a lot of her hesitance comes from, being kind of the browbeaten little mouse she is and knowing that her brother is going to object and having been under his thumb for so long. But there's still just, you know, even when Steve and Susie kiss, there's almost a passionlessness to it. And the rest of the time, it just sort of feels like there's a six foot brick wall between them. I wish I believed in that relationship a

57:36 little bit more.

57:37 Well, there's so much to talk about here. And there's a lot we haven't even gotten into, like Alexander McKendrick, who I feel like he has a really interesting career, interesting director. But in some ways, he's the hardest person to pin down what his contributions are. But that's a whole other conversation. Maybe it'll come up in Connections. So we're going to close the book on Sweet Small Success for now. And we'll be right back after the break for feedback. Now let's dive for feedback. But first, let's dive into what's happening elsewhere in the extended film spotting cinematic universe. There's so much we have to kind of speed run through it these days. We recently covered The Wait, a Russell Crowe movie that most people like. Over at

58:19 Film Spotting SVU, Matt Singer and Jordan Hoffman talk about Unabomber, a Crowe movie that described as, quote, the worst Law & Order episode ever made. At the movie racket, past guest Mariah Gates joins Michael Phillips to unpack the seemingly simple acting advice of be natural. Adam and Josh on the Mothership podcast talk about Resident Evil. And at Movie Deathmatch, Chris Klemek prepares for a battle of slasher films. Phew, there's a lot going on.

58:44 So much in the FilmSpotting extended universe.

58:46 As always, you can check out the FilmSpotting Family Podcast and catch up on the latest Dick's Picture Show episodes at filmspotting.net. Now it's time for feedback where we address responses we've gotten to recent episodes. Genevieve, could you read the one we recently got about our Sorcerer episode that neither you nor I were on?

59:02 Yeah, Richard writes in, building on some of the trivia that was brought up about the casting in Sorcerer, writing, here's a small correction to something that came up in the discussion regarding the French connection. As I understand the story, it wasn't simply a case of William Friedkin confusing Fernando Rabaul's name with Fernando Rey's. Friedkin specifically wanted Rabaul because he physically resembled the real life figure they were drawing from, but he couldn't remember Rabaul's name. He wanted the actor Louis Bunuel had been using in his recent films. The casting director assumed he meant Fernando Rey and cast him.

59:33 The misunderstanding apparently wasn't discovered until Rey had already been cast and had come to the United States. So the mix-up wasn't really Rabaul versus Rey as names. Friedkin knew the actor he wanted. The problem was that his description of him led the casting director to the wrong Bunuel regular.

59:47 It also makes Rabaul's eventual appearance in Sorcerer a fun bit of Friedkin history, since he was finally working with the actor he had originally wanted for The French Connection in the first place. That's the part that's repeating what you said, Scott.

59:58 Yeah, well, I do apologize for kind of, I guess, bungling that bit of trivia. So I appreciate Richard coming in to clarify what had happened because it is, you know, an absolutely fascinating thing. I mean, I can't imagine like having this one actor in mind, you know, and telling your casting director about it and then this little mix-up happening.

1:00:24 But it is cool that he ended up casting Rabal in Sorcerer, and I think he's terrific in it. So it was good casting there. And Fernando Rey is very good in The French Connection, so it all worked out just fine, even if maybe Fernando Rey doesn't resemble the real-life inspiration for that role.

1:00:43 I read a bunch of different sources about the production of this movie, and this particular wrinkle of the casting never came up. So I'm wondering if whatever source... Richard was using that got deeper into it said anything about whether Friedkin made any effort to get the person that he had actually wanted. You know, because it is somebody, I don't know when it was discovered, but I, as soon as we ran across this trivia, I immediately started thinking, well, as a director who wanted a specific person, when the wrong person shows up, why wouldn't you just say, I'm sorry, there's been a mix-up, here's a pile of money, please go get me the correct person. Like, why do you go through with that mistake? And maybe there's a story

1:01:24 behind that as well that I didn't run across when I was looking into this film.

1:01:28 It's a mystery.

1:01:29 Worth seeing the French Connection and Sorcerer because they're both incredible.

1:01:33 You're going out on a limb here saying that some of these classic Friedkin films are classic films that you should see.

1:01:37 Are they a Sorcerer?

1:01:38 It's the only way you can get a complete collection of Fernandos.

1:01:42 That's right. Complete your Fernando collection.

1:01:44 We'll investigate the Fernandos in upcoming episodes if there's more information out there, if Richard or anyone else has it. And we always appreciate all our feedback from our listeners. To reach us, you can leave a short voicemail at 773-234-9730 or email us at comments at nextpictureshow.net. You can also send a recorded message to our email address if you want to make sure you get the wording just right.

1:02:06 And that's it for this episode of The Next Picture Show. In our next episode, we'll discuss primetime before returning to Sweet Smell of Success. Then we'll probably all want to take showers after two straight episodes of sleaze and nastiness. Look for that episode next Tuesday on your podcatcher of choice for ad-free versions of the podcast and extra content.

1:02:23 Find us on Patreon at patreon.com slash nextpictureshow. You can also find us at nextpictureshow.net and on Blue Sky at The Next Picture Show if you want to keep track of when new episodes drop. Until next time, cookies made of arsenic, you got to pass on those. They're no good for you.

1:02:49 That was a good movie.

1:02:51 Yeah, seen here before once.