Ace in the Hole
These days I actually have to write a lot, and when I am not in a writing mood I run havoc. I fear that it shows in the e-mails I wrote in the recent past, but oh well, such is life. Watching movies is different from writing about them though, so the Hanukkah candles are still in full progression.
All in all, I have mixed feelings about “Ace in the Hole”. On the one hand, this is totally not your typical Wilder movie. It is not as funny but at the same time also less dramatic than “Double Indemnity” or “Sunset Boulevard”. I wouldn’t even say the story is bad, but the whole film just feels less rounded than his others. Obviously every character in the film is questionable, and ultimately the film leaves you with a rather depressed feeling, which is totally not Wilder’s forte. I have to admit I didn’t quite enjoy seeing the film.
At the same time, “Ace in the Hole” also has no reason to hide. Some of the criticism against the film makes me rage and heightens my desire to defend the movie. I have to quote this one: “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”. HAHAHA. I don’t know what I have more disdain for – the “democratic” American government or the “free” press. “Ace in the Hole” is depicting both in a quite a witty manner. I can’t believe somebody has ever gotten the Pulitzer prize for covering the event of some dude being trapped in a cave – how worthless are journalism prizes really? (This might apply to almost everything else, but I feel like in the case of literature/journalism it’s extremely bad.) “Ace in the Hole” mirrors certain rotten aspects of society in a way films rarely do, and I have to give it that.
Normally I’d say this is a film to see if you are a Wilder fan. In this case I don’t think that necessarily applies – this is nothing like “Some like it hot”. But it’s a solid film which turns an acceptable plot into something that is almost educational than just a story.
I wonder if the reason the film feels less rounded is that the characters absolutely don’t care for one another? Excepting of course the trapped-mountain-dude’s parents who are completely helpless and play only that role in the movie.
Somehow, I enjoyed this movie much more than Double Indemnity, and I think it is rather close to Sunset Boulevard, but not as great. The way these rotten aspects of society are treated, I found quite great. I cringed at some of the characters actions and felt myself gathering hatred for them during the buildup of the movie.
I wish the evil guy had won, because that would be the ultimate depiction: if he resumed his sweet New York job that he doesn’t deserve.
I don’t think the evil guy would ever have won because the Hays Code doesn’t allow for bad people to win in a movie. I doubt it happens very much in movies between the 30’s and 60’s.
The poor parents! They were such tearjerkers – another reason why I thought the film was unnecessarily painful.