Crack-Up (1946) watch online HD

The title of Irving Reis' Crack-Up sums up two elements of its plot: the wreck of a train carrying Pat O'Brien and the psychotic episode he throws in its aftermath. He gives lectures at a New York museum, demystifying art for the masses, who obligingly moan reverently at Monet but hoot derisively at Dali. When a phone call (sick mother) summons him upstate, he boards a train on which he freezes like a deer in the headlamp of a renegade engine hurtling straight at him. Oddly, he survives, but upon his return hurls a fire extinguisher through the gallery doors, assaults a policeman, and babbles incoherently about the accident. Trouble is, Mom's in fine fettle, and there was no crash.

The movie joins him in sorting out the dramatic turns his life has taken. Helping him is Claire Trevor, a fixture in Manhattan art-snob circles. Herbert Marshall purports to help, too, but he keeps his cards close to his vest. Quite candidly not much help are the museum's board and its snooty benefactors, among them Ray Collins, who were never keen about the democratic spirit O'Brien breathed into their mausoleum and use his erratic behavior to halt his series of light-hearted talks. The police, too, have a stake; O'Brien did, after all, throw that punch....

One of the felicities of Crack-Up is that it takes its canvases seriously, putting them at the core of the story. (A similar respect for art, music and theater, and for audiences assumed to have some acquaintance with them, routinely elevated films of the 1940s; times, plainly, have changed.) Of course monetary rather than esthetic value drives the villains here, as O'Brien slowly uncovers an international art scam, which is why he was derailed in the first place.

The train crash itself – a very scary sequence, brilliantly handled by Reis – emerges, in the final wrapping-up, as the weakest point of the movie, a baroque twist too far-fetched to convince. Because of this contrivance, the movie cleaves to the over-plotted mysteries of the 1930s and early 1940s rather than to the emergent noir cycle that, in its look and many of its devices, it otherwise resembles. But then there's the always toothsome Claire Trevor, whose ensembles take inspiration from the uniforms of the just-won war; festooned in military braid and berets, she tilts the scales towards noir. Either way, Crack-Up offers some suspenseful fun spiked with a surprising note of sophistication.

Art critic O'Brien is menaced by unseen forces and must find out who and why.

No doubt about it, that train wreck scene is brilliantly conceived and edited. In fact, the whole train sequence amounts to an atmospheric triumph. Catch the passenger car interior when O'Brien opens the door—it fairly oozes closed-in flesh, along with that shrewish wife scolding her hubby on the evils of drink. Few films manage a truly memorable sequence, but this one does.

Otherwise, it's a decent noir, though I agree it's also over-plotted and under-explained. Plus, many of those many narrow escapes are simply too contrived to stick. The movie's more one of compelling parts than a successful whole. Nonetheless, O'Brien handles his part in suitably restrained fashion, besides few actors were better at "drop dead" brush-offs, of which he gets to do several. Looks like the normally fast-talking Irishman was refashioning his image to align with the post-war crime drama craze.

But my money's on the great Ray Collins. Was there ever a smoother actor, from Citizen Kane (1941) to TV's Perry Mason of the 50's and 60's. Here, he delivers in sinister spades. Then there's poor Mary Ware as the loyally devious secretary. I'm sure she was cast for her totally innocent demeanor and looks, the better to hook the audience. But then, oh my gosh, she has to speak her lines.

The movie's subtext is in line with the war's common effort and everyman spirit. The villains act as properly outspoken elitists, first cousins presumably of the recently defeated Nazi's. At the same time, I thought art critic O'Brien's little lecture on the role of "art is what I like" made good sense.

All in all, it's a strongly visual, if somewhat turgid, noir that probably did train travel no favors.

This film was made relatively late in Pat O'Brien's career and the film is a nice little departure from the standard Warner Brothers roles that he was known for--you know, the "niceguy" characters like priests and football coaches. Instead, this film starts with O'Brien running amok and attacking a police officer--now that's a departure!! From this intense initial scene, it seems that everyone at the museum where he works now thinks that he is crazy and dangerous. However, the film's heart is that Pat has been set up to be discredited. Exactly why isn't super hard to guess once the film gets going, however the details and everything fits so nicely together to make this such an excellent film. You see, Pat behaves rather foolishly at times--blundering into things and acting like he must unravel the mystery alone. However, fortunately, this sort of 'lone wolf' mentality is NOT rewarded in the film. Instead, some logical and intelligent writing is involved that make the story seem believable and interesting. So, instead of the film being one cliché after another, when the clichés look like they are coming, the film takes some unexpected twists that keep the viewer guessing. Now I could tell you more about the film and ruin it for you, so I'll quit yammering. Instead, I'll just conclude by strongly recommending you see this wonderful film yourself.

There is a scarifying nightmare undercurrent to this postwar thriller that makes it a cut or two above the average. Pat O'Brien is an art curator who gets involved with some unsavory highbrow types, and suffers what may be either a mental breakdown, a train wreck, or both. It was directed by the very able Irving Reis, though Eddie Dmytryk or Robert Siodmak might have handled the suspense scenes somewhat better. John Paxton, who often worked with Dmytryk, co-authored the script. There are a couple of Orson Welles-Mercury alumni in the cast (Ray Collins, Erskine Sanford). O'Brien is oddly cast, and very good in his emotional scenes, though I might have liked this better had Dick Powell played the lead. Claire Trevor is solid as the romantic love interest, yet Gloria Grahame would have done just as nicely. Herbert Marshall plays what had become by this time a Walter Slezak part. The movie is in other words good but could have used a little more fine-tuning and slight adjustments in casting. As it stands it's okay. The payoff isn't nearly as good as the build-up, unfortunately, but there are two lengthy scenes involving O'Brien on a late night train that would have done Lang or Hitchcock proud.

Back in 1946, when this film was released, it got very mixed reviews. The notable Bosley Crowther, in particular, panned it. I find it to be a better than average film-noir with a few twists to make it interesting. First off being the topic -- art forgeries -- not your typical underworld target in films. And, for me, it was enjoyable watching Pat O'Brien in the latter third of his career, after movies became a little more sophisticated.

A test for movie mysteries for me is, is there real suspense, or do clues just inexplicably pop up so that the movie can come to a conclusion. Using reverse on the DVR, I was able to go back several times and see when certain clues came up if it was logical or simply convenient. This film passed that test.

It has a surprisingly strong cast. Claire Trevor is interesting, as is Ray Collins. Herbert Marshall is always good, but one thing to take note of here is his real limp, which in most films is not noticeable (Marshall lost a leg in WWI).

Another thing that made the film interesting was how it portrayed life back in 1946. For example, the very good scene filmed at an arcade was very era-oriented, and certainly more interesting than had the scene just been shot in a restaurant or something of the sort...which most directors would have done. The night dock scene was also nicely done. And, these "location shots", though undoubtedly done at the studio, did look real.

So why do I rate this only a 7? Well, while Pat O'Brien is good, he seems a bit old for the part. For example, in one scene he shimmies down a very long chain that would be rather unlikely for someone nearly 50 years old (and clearly out of shape). And, he's not totally convincing as an art expert. But still, it's a decent performance.

Pat O'Brien is typically known for playing priests, the level-headed foil for James Cagney's explosive gangster. In other words, he's usually the least-interesting character in the film. 'Crack-Up (1946)' marks a welcome change-of-pace for the actor. No longer is O'Brien the calm, collected cleric, but a confused art critic at the end of his rope, doubting his own sanity as he battles murder and conspiracy. He perhaps isn't perfect for the role – the film's lurid moments would have been even more lurid had the lead actor been able to act more deranged – but O'Brien receives good supporting back-up from Claire Trevor, Herbert Marshall and Ray Collins. Director Irving Reis (best known for his "Falcon" series, though he also co-directed the annoyingly manipulative 'Hitler's Children (1943)' with Edward Dmytryk) does well to develop the film's mood, not afraid to dabble in a bit of surrealism to help translate the mental confusion and degradation of his main protagonist. There's also a little Freudian psychoanalysis in there, as was popular at the time, but the distraction it causes to the story is only an afterthought.

The role of WWII in shaping the film noir style should not be underestimated. In 'Crack-Up,' combat veteran George Steele (O'Brien) remarks that his greater fear in the trenches was that his mind might unexpectedly snap "like a tight violin string." These combat-related fears are here transcribed into a society ostensibly recovering from the war, suggesting that the shadow of the twentieth century's most costly campaign was still bearing over America, a sinister spectre of uncertainty and disarray. The film's undisputed centrepiece, though it is never adequately explained, is Steele's recollection of a train crash, a sequence that almost suggests an episode of "The Twilight Zone." As Steele watches the blazing beams of an oncoming train, time appears to stand still. He sits transfixed, calm and emotionless, a deer in the headlights. In classic film noir fashion, both he and the audience know what is about to happen, but all are powerless to stop it. The train barrels towards its predestined fate, a blistering collision of light and flames. Or does it?

Perhaps drawing some inspiration from Lang's 'Scarlet Street (1945),' this film noir concerns itself with the art of art fraud and forgery. The filmmakers' approach to the topic is strictly populist. At the beginning of the film, art critic Steele gives a lecture that openly denigrates the booming popularity of surrealism and "modern art," dismissing the style as being of use only to snobbish social-climbers {an unfair view, since Hitchcock had employed the services of Salvador Dali just one year earlier for 'Spellbound (1945)'}. It is these very same snobs who have planned an elaborate scheme to replace masterpiece canvasses (titled "Gainsborough" and "The Adoration of the Kings," respectively) with worthless replicas, before destroying the copies – not for monetary gain, but because they're snobs, and would like to have the classic works of art all to themselves. If all of 'Crack-Up' was as lurid as the opening sequence and train-wreck flashback, then Irving Reis would have had a masterpiece on his hands. As it is, we are left with an entertaining if occasionally stodgy thriller.

Pat O'Brien was wonderful supporting actor. Having him as your lead was kind of unusual -- not to mention having him play an expert in art. He does a great job, though, as does the whole cast. Claire Trevor, in a way, is the only major name actor. Ray Collins is good but maybe not up to the pivotal role he plays. In a small part, Mary Ware is very effective.

Charlie Chan movies occasionally involved art thefts or forgeries. Of course, there is the black bird in "The Maltese Falcon." But generally, this is an unusual setting for a film noir, which this definitely is.

It's tense but maybe not so tense as it might be. I like Hitchcock but do not worship at his feet. Whoever, had he directed this, it could have been a tight, thrilling picture. He'd have story-boarded it all before filming and we'd have been on the edge of our seats as ti played out.

He didn't, of course, and it's still a really good movie. It's noir with a highbrow twist, just as "Red Light" -- which I haven't seen in 15 years and wish would turn up -- is noir with a religious setting.

Crack-Up is directed by Irving Reis and collectively written by John Paxton, Ben Bengal and Ray Spencer from Fredric Brown's story Madman's Holiday. It stars Pat O'Brien, Claire Trevor, Herbert Marshall, Ray Collins, Wallace Ford and Dean Harens. Music is by Leigh Harline and cinematography by Robert De Grasse.

Art curator George Steele (O'Brien) believes he has been in a train crash, but he's told that no such crash has occurred. Is he cracking up, or the victim of something sinister?

I'm not trusting anyone this week.

Out of RKO, Crack-Up is an above average film noir that is apparently under seen. It thrusts George Steele on a crusade to prove he is not losing his mind and on his way to residency at Bellevue Psychiatric Hospital. As he trawls around the city with a foggy head, his thoughts still remembering his service in WWII, he tosses off sarcastic quips and evades tricky situations with guile and ingenuity. Who can he trust though? If anybody?

I'm outta my head. I drive around in cars picking up psychopathic killers.

His journey encompasses a number of locations that are expertly born out for noirish purpose. Smokey steam train, dimly lighted station, a ship of many murky corners, the harbour as well, a penny arcade and of course many damp streets at night that are ripe for conversations; both hushed and threatening. With Reis (The Gay Falcon) and De Grasse (The Body Snatcher) using chiaroscuro effects, the atmosphere is suitably eerie, dovetailing perfectly with George's psychologically paranoid funk.

About as smart as cutting my throat to get some fresh air!

Set to the backdrop of the art world, the narrative has an opinion on art styles and snobbery while wrapping the plot around the crooked line of forgeries. It's not wholly successful for dramatic worth or intrigue, and in fact the visual presentation and very good performances of O'Brien and Trevor deserve a more cohesive story and a motive revelation of the crimes considerably stronger in substance.

However, with its technical attributes most positive, some very well constructed scenes (the train crash sequence is excellent) and noir staples in place (amnesia, shady characters, sleuthing for truth et al), Crack-Up is well worth checking out. 7/10

Pat O'Brien is a war veteran and art expert who may just be on the verge of going nuts in "Crack-Up," also starring Claire Trevor, Herbert Marshall, Ray Collins and Wallace Ford. After breaking down the door at the museum where he works and smashing a statue, George Steele (O'Brien) is knocked out. When he comes to, he believes he was in a train wreck. A man on mysterious business at the museum (Marshall) convinces the police (Ford) to release Steele and watch him. Steele investigates matters and begins to undercover some dirty work at the museum.

This is an okay noir that has good performances, atmosphere, and a decent plot. O'Brien is a character man who is not usually the lead in a film; it's possible that "Crack-Up" would have been stronger with a true leading man, perhaps Van Heflin, who certainly would have been believable as an art expert and had some panache as well. O'Brien, a solid actor, nevertheless pulls off the role and gets strong support from Marshall and Claire Trevor as his girlfriend, who add the sophistication that befits the high-brow museum plot.

"Crack-Up" could have used a little more spark, but it's entertaining.

In Crack-Up the idea is to make art expert Pat O'Brien think he's done just that. O'Brien wants to bring in some x-ray equipment to show how art forgeries can be done to stimulate interest in his lectures.

Of course when you've got that going on at the museum, there's going to be someone who doesn't anyone snooping around. So O'Brien is framed with an elaborately concocted train wreck. Of course the train wreck never happened and people start thinking Pat has cracked up.

The only one who believes him is girl friend Claire Trevor and between the two of them, they've got quite a task before them. To convince everyone including police detective Wallace Ford that O'Brien is still playing with a full deck and find out just why someone wants everyone to think there's a suit missing from that selfsame deck.

Crack-Up is a good noir thriller from a studio which turned out quite a few of them in post World War II Hollywood. RKO always operated on a shoestring and the nice thing about noir films is that you didn't need a big budget. A good script and solid acting is usually what put over a noir.

Herbert Marshall lends some British authority as a man from Scotland Yard who acts very mysteriously indeed. For those who like the noir genre, they will not be disappointed.

Atmospheric both in Visual Style and Dialog this Film-Noir is One that was Made just at the End of WWII and there are many Lines that Cynically Reference the Conflict with a Snap-Patter that is a Noir Trademark. There are Many Noir Flourishes to Enjoy in this Murky Plot. Amnesia, Drug Induced Mind Control, Low-Brow Settings like a Penny Arcade in Mix with High-Brow Museum Art.

Pat O'Brien does His best as a Slightly Miscast and Overaged Lover that Requires some Physical and Emotional Stretches. But when He is not Romanticizing or Climbing Walls, it Works.

The Highlights of the Film are Noir. The Surreal Train Sequences, the Creepy Docks, and the Night Time Exteriors are Layered in Shadows and Render Foreboding Scenes. A Strong Cast and a Visually Arresting Movie with some Great Quotable Noir Dialog Elevate this Above a Muddled Plot. It is a Crackerjack Film-Noir and One that has been Mostly Ignored and Given Only Cursory Consideration.

Note...Film-Noir was an Organic Style that was Subconsciously Spawned Unknowingly by its Creators in a Collective Conceit Formed Unintentionally by the Artists who Drew from the Ether and Manifested a Sub-Genre of Movie-Making that has Endured. It is was not Pre-Fabricated and that Honesty is Forever On Display in a Genre, that was only Realised After the Fact, and it took French Film Critics to Piece it Together and Fans have been Thankful Ever Since.

**SPOILERS** Having helped expose a number of forgeries by the Nazis during WWII former US Army Captain George Steel, Pat O'Brian, got involved in the museum that he was working as a lecturer in the finer points of art. Even though the head curator Mr. Barton, Erskine Sanfod,was a bit taken back by his unsophisticated and earthy manner of how he lectured his audience. Where at time it almost lead to fists flying in his direction.

It's when Steel cracked up and made a spectacle of himself one night breaking into the museum belting a policemen and almost getting crushed by a falling statue that things started really getting weird. With the opinion by Dr. Lowell, a member of the museum staff, that Steel lost his mind and needs to be institutionalized he's told to take a long vacation. With Steel calming to have survived a train wreck the night of his crack-up it becomes rather obvious, to both the police and Dr. Lowell, that the poor and confused man is either hallucinating of suffering workers burn-out. Steel doesn't take all this lying down by again going through the same motions that he did the night before. Getting on the same train and taking the same ride, to a town called Marlin. Then finding out that he indeed was not making up the story about his mental crack-up. Only that the train wreck, which he found out didn't happen, was somehow for some reason implanted into his brain! but why and by who?

We later learn from a secretly on loan to the museum lawman named Traybin (Herbert Marshall), a Scotland Yard inspector of art forgeries, that things aren't exactly kosher with the art exhibits. Later Steel himself gets this cryptic phone call from his friend the museum's co-curator Stevenson, Damian O'Flynn, about a number of switch's of original masterpieces being copied and then purposely destroyed in suspicious fires. One of them is a painting titled Gainsborough, the originals ended up in the private collection of the person responsible for the destroyed copy.

Going to see Stevenson at the museum Steel finds him murdered as he's spotted at the scene of the crime, by Mr. Barton, and becomes the chief suspect in Stevenson's murder. Realizing that this scheme of copying original works. At the same time having the copies destroyed in order, for whoever does it, to steal the original without anyone knowing about it. This has Steel going down to the docks where the painting that was the big hit at the museum "The Adoration of the Kings" is being shipped back to England. With Steel feeling that it's going to suffer the same fate that "Gainsborough" did some time before.

With a fire suspiciously set in the storehouse, like Steel suspected, on the ship Steel saves the painting and takes it back to the museum. With the help of his friend reporter Terry Cordell, Claire Trevor, and museum technician Mary Ware, playing herself, Steel finds out through X-rays that the painting is indeed a forgery. Leading to the person responsible, an off-the-wall psycho art lover, of having Steel knocked out and then ,along with Terry, kidnapped. The kidnapper has Steel shot up with truth serum to make him talk talk about who else knows about his, the creepy and murderous lover of arts, diabolical plan. So he can have them done in like he's planing to do in both Steel & Terry.

This has to be the only movie where the hero sleeps through the big slam bang final with Steel completely out of it, on the truth serum that put him on snooze control. The police and inspector Traybin come to Steel's and Terry's rescue with Steel later waking up, when all the fighting and shooting is over, and wildly throwing punches at the very people who saved his life, Inspector Traybin and police Capt. Cochrean, Wallace Ford. Yet being so drugged out of is head that he almost ends up falling on his head and breaking it.

A noir that came from the B unit, a good story passably told. Pat O'Brien plays his part very calmly and with great restraint - or is it that he's not much of an actor? Hard to tell. The women are also hard to figure, either by directorial choice or because they're not up to snuff either.

It really starts to drag towards the end, there's a bit with truth serum that adds nothing to the story except padding. There are also a couple of unintentionally funny bits where the luggish O'Brien suddenly springs to action and (his double) does stunts that are totally out of character.

A mildly entertaining 90 minutes of noir-ish style, has some very nice lighting effects and the train crash is well executed.

A thriller in the popular post-war noir style, CRACK-UP (1946) is not a top-grade film noir, but it does incorporate some interesting ideas, like x-raying paintings to determine if they are forgeries.

Pat O'Brien (ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES) is a WWII vet and art curator who gives lectures on paintings at an art museum. While trying to account for his actions one strange night, he finds himself pretty deep in some kind of criminal racket. On the lam from the law, he decides to get to the bottom of things on his own. (O'Brien is a street-smart art curator, knowing how to evade the police, sneak into and out of buildings, and arrange meetings in shady places.) He's mixed up in something serious. He knows too much. His life is in danger. Can he trust *him*? Can he trust *her*? Should he be trusting anybody at this point?

There are a handful of secondary characters, but the film doesn't take the time to explain who they are or what their deal is. We only know that they are associated in some way with O'Brien and/or the museum. And we know that one of those people in the room must be the "bad guy". And so the guessing game begins.

Why is Herbert Marshall so interested in O'Brien's activity? What was that person doing on the night of the murder? Is that a crooked cop? Why didn't the cigarette boy recognize him? Who's that lurking in the shadows? Could O'Brien be betrayed by *them*?

The final solution to the art theft mystery seems like too much work, too much risk, and too much bloodshed to be worth it all. (And what good is a painting that's too hot to be displayed for anybody?) But what do I know about great art?

Pat O'Brien is past his 1930s prime and looking a bit William Bendix-y around the edges. He is joined by the lovely Claire Trevor, a film noir staple, as an old friend and his only true ally. The cast also includes Herbert Marshall, Wallace Ford, and Ray Collins. The film has some typical noir touches, and the art theme is unique. Seeing the x-rayed paintings is fascinating, so the movie has that going for it. But the film overall doesn't stand out. It's okay, but not great.

Pat O'Brien is an art expert who gives lectures at a tony art museum in a big city. While riding on a speeding train, he sees another iron horse approaching. As O'Bien stares in mounting horror, it gets close. Too close. And then -- Ka-BOOM -- lights flash on and off, everything tumbles upside down, and when O'Brien comes to he finds he's punching his way drunkenly through the door of the museum, interrupting an important staff meeting, and the police are brought in to handle him. They coach the kinetic O'Brien onto a couch and everyone listens to his story, which is exciting, thrilling even, except for the fact that there has been no train crash anywhere.

The plot takes us deep into the seamy underworld of fine art. Well, we all knew it was a garbage pit to begin with, full of hoity-toity zealots who fling around the names of high-falutin' Frogs like Picasso, Gainsborough, Hopper, Rivera, el Greco, Carravagio, Da Vinci, Turner, Goya, Dürer, Hokusai, and Wang Wei.

But, okay, this doesn't make for much of a feature-length picture, so we are soon in noir territory, if you can imagine good-natured Pat O'Brien as the central figure in a movie filled with dark shadows, fog, louche dives, penthouse apartments, tuxedos, intrigues, helpful but suspicious friends, truth serum, murder, and insurance fraud.

The reason for O'Brien's imagined crack-up is banal and I won't give it away, though the discerning viewer may guess it before long. It's not a bad film. It's routine, but you'll probably stick around for the end when, as movie detectives are fond of saying, all will be explained.

Pat O'Brien plays an art critic named George Steele who believes he was in a train wreck. The only problem is there's no evidence of a wreck and now everybody thinks he's crazy. So he sets out to investigate the matter himself and get to the bottom of things. Good mystery with film noir touches. Nice direction from Irving Reis. Opening few minutes is exceptional. Pat O'Brien has one of his strongest leading roles here. Herbert Marshall, Ray Collins, Wallace Ford, and lovely Claire Trevor lead the fine supporting cast. Perhaps not cynical or gritty enough for some film noir fans but it's still a good movie. Definitely check it out.

Critics all liked this and got me interested to see it but when I did, it turned out to be a big disappointment. Pat O'Brien was the lead actor in this crime movie involving an art critic. Being a big fan of art, that also drew me to this. Also being a fan of film noir, I expected more in that regard, too. This film just didn't deliver on any of those counts. Claire Trevor and Herbert Marshall also starred, but that didn't help, either.

The story is about O'Brien uncovering a forgery scam but he's made to look like a crazy man so that no one can take him seriously. Some parts of this, granted, are really good and suspenseful, but way too much of this film simply drags. It also is not an easy story to follow, at least on the first viewing, and that can turn off people. Film noir....melodrama....what is it? After awhile, one doesn't care.

CRACK-UP is one of those films you hope you're going to like because it deals with amnesia, forged art works, a Scotland Yard detective concealing his identity, a film noir type of blonde (Claire Trevor) and a neat premise.

Unfortunately, it tells its tale in a muddled way--almost as though the audience is supposed to be suffering from the same kind of amnesia as the protagonist (Pat O'Brien). O'Brien was never a dynamic actor nor as sympathetic as he should be in this role. It's the kind of part that would have been perfect for someone like Humphrey Bogart, Alan Ladd or Edmond O'Brien in the lead. O'Brien simply doesn't have the persuasion needed to make the film believable as either melodrama or full-blooded film noir.

A nice try for a modest suspenser, but it doesn't build up enough steam to make it worth watching. Only one who seems to know she's in a film noir kind of drama is Claire Trevor, effective as always as O'Brien's loyal and patient girlfriend.

Wish I could recommend it, but it's too slow in even getting started. Of the other cast members, Herbert Marshall is as somnambulent as ever in a colorless supporting role, almost looking as though he's the one with amnesia, playing his role with bored indifference.

Crack-Up came on BBC2 one afternoon and as I was out, I recorded this and was pleased I did.

An art curator gets a phone call claiming his mother is unwell, so he gets the first train to New York and it turns out this call was a lie and he gets the idea the train has crashed, which it hasn't. He then takes part in a forgery involving fake paintings. Two women are also involved in this but the police catch up with them at the end.

Crack-Up is rather atmospheric in parts, especially the New York dockside sequence. It is also light-hearted at times.

The cast includes a good performance from Pat O'Brien and is joined by Clare Trevor (Key Largo), Herbert Marshall (The Secret Garden), Wallace Ford and Ray Collins.

This is worth viewing at least once. Enjoyable.

Rating: 3 stars out of 5.

I might have cast this film a little differently, but for what it is -- a no-budget, post-war thriller -- it ain't half-bad. Pat O'Brien plays a museum curator who is about to X-ray some paintings when he ends up on a train that is in a wreck. Or was he? Maybe he suffered a mental breakdown and only imagined the train wreck. Hence the title. By the time he sorts things out, the issue appears to be the planned X-raying of certain paintings. To say more would be to give away the ending. At least one person is murdered and OBrien is blamed and on the run through a good part of the picture. Not to say any of this couldn't happen in real life, and a real curator might have been just like O'Brien. But he doesn't strike me as the best fit for this movie. I'm not sure who I would have cast in the role, perhaps someone like Robert Cummings. Claire Trevor is the girlfriend and Herbert Marshall is an official on the trail of certain paintings. Popular writer Frederic Brown wrote the story on which the screenplay was based. To these eyes, the film appears to be a programmer, which is a movie shot for purposes of running on the undercard of a more prestigious flick. Remember, these was no television in those days.

"Crack-Up" is a fun noir that stands out as unique entry in the genre because of its setting: the world of art forgery.

Forget about the plot. Who cares? Enjoy instead the murky museum corridors and shady dirty dealings. It's too bad that Claire Trevor plays a good guy -- noirs are so much more fun when she's the femme fatale. But no matter -- some Claire Trevor is never a bad thing.

Grade: A

Directed by Irving Reis, and based on a story by Fredric Brown that was adapted by John Paxton, Ben Bengal and Ray Spencer, this average film noir drama stars Pat O'Brien, Claire Trevor, and Herbert Marshall (among others).

O'Brien plays George Steele, a man who is 'caught' breaking into a museum by a police officer, who subdues him. It is then learned that Steele is an art forgery expert who gives lectures at the museum, much to the chagrin of Mr. Barton (Erskine Sanford), the nervous head of the museum. A disoriented Steele then tells a story about having been in a train wreck while going to visit his sick and dying mother.

The police detective, Lieutenant Cochrane (Wallace Ford) is skeptical about Steele's story. Others listening in include his longtime girlfriend Terry Cordell (Trevor); Dr. Lowell (a psychiatrist?), played by Ray Collins, who's helps Steele recall his story (shown in an extensive flashback sequence) and is also a member of the museum board; Barton, and a man named Traybin (Marshall), who'd earlier been introduced to Steele by Terry as a potential donor (her job at the museum consists of schmoozing and soliciting donations from rich philanthropists), but who also admits that he worked for the British in much the same capacity as Steele during the war (trying to detect forgeries among the paintings confiscated by the Nazi's).

It is quickly learned that Lt. Cochrane takes 'orders' from Traybin as well. A couple of other characters are also introduced, Dean Harens as Reynolds, a wealthy philanthropist who scowls during Steele's lecture to the public about his trade and later throws a party; Damian O'Flynn as Stevenson, a friend of Steele's who's later murdered for what he learns; and Mary Ware, playing a character of the same name, who works for Mr. Barton.

There's not a lot of mystery, intrigue or substance to the plot, which deals with whether the museum has recently exhibited forgeries that had been substituted for the originals. O'Brien didn't encourage a lot of interest in this style of film (at least for me) either; Trevor's character seems to have little place or purpose besides providing a confusion factor for O'Brien's in relation to Marshall's.

In the end, it's just a simple story about a thief (and his accomplice); the false character meant to throw the viewer off the trail (e.g. Reynolds) hardly appears at all, though Sanford's character does for one scene. When the criminal is revealed, it's neither an 'oh my' surprise, nor is his motivation for murder entirely satisfactory; his accomplice's actions made no sense either (e.g. why would the accomplice help Steele to learn what was already known before taking him to the murderer?).

Crack-Up is directed by Irving Reis. The film stars Pat O'Brien, Claire Trevor and Herbert Marshall.

Art curator George Steel(Pat O'Brien)goes crazy and breaks a door at the museum where he works. He is convinced he has been involved in a train crash, there are no reports of any crash happening when he claims. It turns out the authorities are investigating the museum because of some art forgery.

Steel, his girlfriend (Claire Trevor)and an Inspector(Herbert Marshall)try and get to the bottom of what is going on.

The film has it's moments, but I just found the fake memory plot to be a bit much. If they wanted Steel out of the way so much why not just fire him? That bit comes across as extremely far fetched.

The film is very enjoyable and O'Brien in particular is excellent. There is strong support from Marshall and Trevor.

An offbeat film noir from the 1940's. Pat O'Brien plays an art aficionado who holds court over art critique symposiums which are quite popular, so popular in fact he asks the gallery's board of trustees to reacquire some recently released works so he can give a new series of lectures on them. All that sounds fine until he gets an emergency call from his mother prompting him to leave town on the next available train but when it crashes, he seems to be the only person who experienced it, causing all those around him to question his sanity. For the most part this offbeat take on a noir is welcome since it isn't the usual criminal or mild mannered individuals falling victim to the paradigms of the genre but when the machinations of the gambit are revealed, I thought the overall plan was a little too far fetched for me to buy but if you do go w/it, you'll enjoy the ride.

Great film noir and a suspenseful mystery. Who would think that an art gallery would make a good noir setting? But it's a labyrinthine maze of shadow in Crack-Up. George (Pat O'Brien) is the quintessential noir hero--an unsuspecting victim of a criminal plot. The story traces his quest to 'square' himsellf. With rapid intensity, the plot adds dream-like sequences to highlight George's psychological terror and palpable fears.

The art forgery scheme that George discovers is only verified near the end, leaving his various antagonists plenty of room to entrap him, and leaving the viewer wondering if George knows what he's about. The repetitive horror of the train wreck imagery consumes George like a drug; he can barely function. Like someone who's seen a ghost, no one believes him. Diabolically, the doctor (Ray Collins) who should help him with the nightmares, is actually causing them. And Mary (Mary Ware), an apparently innocent helper, also betrays him. Ironically, it's the untrustworthy Claire Trevor (as Terry) that he has to rely on.

Retrieving the painting from the ship's hold lands George in the ultimate noir trap: locked in a burning compartment. Escaping all that, he has to escape again, and only finally escapes thanks to the police. Before that deliverance, however, he's drugged yet again, the 'L' train conveniently stirring up his nightmare...at gun point as well. After the denouement, it's satisfying to have the humorous final scene. He's right, everyone else is nuts. He's been the victim of all the mayhem. With the noir hero's combination of risk and cunning he's survived, and won back his self-respect, as well as his place in society.

Everything works here. The performances are even and convincing. No time is wasted. The most harmless of settings--the penny-arcade--quickly becomes a claustrophobic, menacing trap. Life in Crack-Up is inherently off-key, discordant, and the hero is on his own, desperately trying to make sense out of it all. The best aspect is the interplay between the psychological and the physical; the nightmare thats seems real, and the reality that seems nightmarish. We're not told what we should see with intrusive narration; this noir vision is painted for us to experience. In an early scene, George's casual dismissal of the surreal painting (and the appreciative cackling of the audience) comes back to haunt him, as he's about to experience more reality than he ever wanted or expected.