The Reckless Moment

There is some of Ophuls' graceful camera movement, and the film sets up an intriguing conflict. But "reckless" is an understatement. Joan Bennett's actions are so utterly bone-headed that for the rest of the film I was against her. I also had problems with James Mason's character, whose developing affection for Bennett never rings true. Worthwhile for the cinematography, slow tension and unusual social commentary, but definitely flawed.

Maybe I just don't understand recklessness but the motivations of the two main characters didn't make any sense two me at several points throughout the film. It's not a bad film, but I found it really uninteresting and occasionally frustrating.

Joan Bennett was never better!

Of such a tragic beauty that only Ophüls could conceive.

Interesting noir entry is unfortunately hurt by the muddy motivations of its leading characters, especially Mason, who looks especially foolish as the plot develops - Bennett fares better, but she lacks the cold brutality which would have made her arc more convincing. Ophuls masterful handling of this flawed material makes it all worthwhile - creating a sinister noir world for his characters to inhabit. Shout-out to Strudwick as the slimy boyfriend - a shame he couldn't have lasted longer!

Viewed November 11, 2021. Max Ophuls directed at least three masterpieces during his brief time in Hollywood, and I think this might just be my favorite — a sun-bleached thriller about a mother in peril while her husband is away working in Germany, this is a maddening portrait of post-World War II anxiety and the fracturing of the American family, centered around Joan Bennett's headstrong existence in a world dominated by threatening men.

# 626

I'm just not down with Ophuls. Yeah, he moves the camera like a boss, but I don't see anything else going on.

In spite of the noir plot, this Ophuls gem is really a romance between two people in different worlds, Donnelly in the world of criminal activity and Lucia in the world of of the respectable upper middle-class. Lucia acts recklessly to preserve her world, and Donnelly defies his to help her keep her place. Bennett is wonderful, her tight, compulsive movements hinting at fires underneath, and Mason is fine as the hopelessly romantic criminal whose mother once wanted him to become a priest.

731

Pensando en que estamos delante de una película poco icónica, debido a su poca conexión con el cuidado del hogar de la época, hay que mirarla con divertida ironía y con noción del suspenso. Entretenida, graciosa y sumamente intrigante. Según Ophüls la vida de las amas de casa en los 40s era igual de peligrosa y cansada a la vida de ahora.

Pretty well done, despite the entire film hinging on an intelligent and unflappable woman's brainless decision to cover up a killing, which was at worst both accidental and in self-defense. James Mason's motivations are unrealistic, given someone in his line of work, or at least required more development. Yet the relationship still somehow works and the movie is engaging.

Star Rating: ★★★

Brief, moody thriller anchored by a quite splendid Joan Bennett as a mother rapidly becoming entangled in a web of blackmail and murder. Ophüls' eye for atmospheric photography works a charm along with the enthralling Mason/Bennett scenes.

Nonsensical story, with a horrible ending.

Not much of a noir, but like pizza or sex, there's virtually no such thing as really bad noir. Still, you'd hope for more from what seems like a match made in heaven. Ophuls' elegant camerawork and brilliant B&W cinematography, working in a "genre" defined in large part by its heavy chiaroscuro? But while the visuals are what you'd expect, it lacks the edge or inspired plotting of the best noirs, with some rather iffy character development and undercooked tension. Okay, but nothing more.

watched: 2012, 2023

Decent, but ultimately forgettable. Watch Ophüls' brilliant 'Letter from an Unknown Woman' instead.

Interesting character motives in an unconventionally structured noir.

It's interesting the plot summary here doesn't fully match what happens in the movie. Anyway it's a funny title because there seem to be more than a few reckless moments in this movie. It's somewhat naive but not unintelligent. Nothing special but fine nonetheless.

749

This was my second watch of this. I didn't realize I had seen it before, which is never a great sign. I came to about the same conclusion I evidently came to the first time based on my score, which is that it's a pretty passable but unremarkable noir. it picks up a bit toward the end. The plot point of a fearsome loan shark accepting love letters as collateral (???) seems like a pretty big hole. Solid but not nearly as good as Ophuls' best work. David is a 10/10 annoying kid character.

I kinda wish there was more to the story, for what was going on was thrilling. Joan Bennett was great, while James Mason was probable a little complicated to wrap my head around with the limited screen time he got and the way he shifted his focus. Felt Max Ophüls was stumbling a little bit compared to his usual care and attention to detail, but there's still a lot where you see his excellence.

#796

For some reason I didn’t think this was a proper noir until I finally sat down and watched it. I think it definitely is noir - and also a rare one that takes place near Christmas. Balboa locations provide nice contrast but it could have utilized the festive season a bit more. My main gripe is that I wasn’t really convinced by either Mason's character’s blind love and unselfishness or the Bennett's actions. It’s still a solid middle-tier noir that keeps you entertained for 80mins.