On honeymoon with his new bride, a Mexican narcotics officer is unwittingly drawn into a web of crime and corruption when he witnesses a fatal car bombing. Following the case with interest, he's repulsed by the brusque attitude and morally-questionable methods of the local authorities; particularly their notorious lead detective, Quinlan, whose dubious past hangs like a rumbling storm cloud over the whole town.
Like most late-period noir films, Touch of Evil is a wash of pulp and grit, with the seedy subject matter providing a sense of persistent danger and the black-and-white film stock pumped for all the grain and contrast it can muster. Orson Welles, sitting in the director's chair, may have gone overboard in his quest to probe these depths, although post-production on the film wasn't exactly trouble-free and he was eventually ousted from that post en route to a studio-mandated final cut. The result is a jumbled narrative, stocked with far too many loud characters and pointless subplots, albeit one with a stylish, progressive look and feel. Welles is good on the screen (he also plays the shady, multifaceted gumshoe Quinlan), but the double-billing may have been more than he could manage at this stage of his career.
Supposedly this is a classic, and part of the "canon" of great films. I dunno, seems all over the place and badly directed/written to me. But maybe that's because I can conceive of Mexicans as people not criminals. Also Brownface much!
Aba Cinema 2: version suggested by Welles, image 3.5 / 5 . Actors well, Orson Wells and his plans and frames, but over one hour begin to spin about the same and not convince me
Watching the reconstructed version of the film, the opening sequence is rightly lauded as masterful and sets up the film perfectly. With so much of the film set at night too, Welles use of black and white cinematography is stunning and it is easy to see why this film has been much imitated since. Whilst the story ostensibly follows an investigation into a car bombing, the real hook is the battle between Heston's straight-laced character and Welles' corrupt detective. Watching today, it is hard to accept why they decided to cast Heston as a Mexican character, but he does have a certain screen presence here that is much needed given that Welles' character is a fantastic creation and commands the screen every time he is on. What doesn't work quite as well is Leigh's character and her initial involvement in the first half of the film is less interesting, even though she is cleverly worked into the main plot for the final act.
If you can get past Charlton Heston and Marlene Dietrich (!?) as Mexicans, the film's a gem. Outstanding performances and Welles at his best since Kane.
Shout by bondlessBlockedParent2018-12-18T21:28:27Z
The irony of this film is that it is supposed to show the evils of racism while casting the all too white Charlton Heston, Akim Tamiroff and Marlene Dietrich as Mexicans. Aside from this irony, the film is one of the most important films within the genre of Film Noir for good reason. The cinematography in the first and last scenes are pure brilliance. This is arguably one of Orson Welles best films, both as an actor and director. If you do watch it make sure and watch the reconstructed version, based on Welles original desire for the film.