On U List of Movie Reviews
(For optimum viewing, adjust the zoom level of your browser to 125%.)
Undercurrent (1946)
Rate:
5
Viewed:
2/24
2/24:
Undercurrent is a terrible film noir but is a good remake candidate.
The story concepts are fine, but the script is awful with tons of words. The first hour was so boring that I zoned out. Then,
the second came which partially saved the movie. It's still talky and keeps reminding me of
Gaslight and
Rebecca. However, I like Karl Freund's cinematography in certain points.
The other problem, which is actually the biggest, is Katharine Hepburn. She's the worst and is more of a lesbian than anything.
Ugly and not attractive to begin with, she dominates the first half and then tones it down when Robert Taylor saw his chance
to take the show away from her. The film becomes tolerable for a while by getting to the bottom of the mystery. Finally, Robert
Mitchum shows up for what's been the longest time and shows why he's a better actor than Katharine Hepburn.
If given the chance to redo Undercurrent, Katharine Hepburn should be replaced with Ingrid Bergman. She would've been
perfect and on equal ground with Robert Taylor and Robert Mitchum, two fine-looking guys. Absurd and stupid to begin with,
the script needs to be redone with less words while letting the initial relationship go longer like a month before
marrying. It'll clean up the logic problems.
A longtime mediocre actor, Robert Taylor surprises me the most. I've never seen him act like this; it's a fine performance.
A film noir legend who's at home here, Robert Mitchum is too good but ends up wasted. Ha! Katharine Hepburn thought he
couldn't act. Look who's talking; she's the one who ruined the movie. Mitchum later said what Hepburn said about him was false.
By the way, Jayne Meadows makes her screen debut but is rather memorable for turning
Lady in the Lake, which was
made during the same year, into the most convoluted movie ever.
All in all, Undercurrent doesn't work although it has plenty of untapped potential.