Touch of Evil

by Jim.

I find that the best films are rich enough to offer an almost endless wellspring of discussion. This review, then, is a bit of a starting point - a spring board intended for further inquiry into the nature of Welles' vision.

What struck me initially about Touch of Evil, after of course the opening shot which could (and probably has) inspire whole pages of study, was of Welles' attention to texture and size.

Textures seem to me to be a somewhat less overt method of expressing an idea or mood cinematically, but nonetheless a formidable tool in the efforts of a great filmmaker. Welles' Quinlan limps through the film's length, and when he is presented out of the dark recesses of the film's frame, the viewer is all but rubbed sore by the persistent stubble that clings to his face. Pockets of wrinkled skin sag beneath his eyes, and a suit that looks like it has seen better days seems to have been tossed on haphazardly. One gets the impression of a smaller, former self that exists somewhere behind the lumbering heap of this, "some kind of a man."

Vargas, on the other hand, down-played with his dark characteristics that all but dissolve into the india-ink shadows of the film, is neat and polished. It would give the wrong impression to call him "slick," but where Welles' Quinlan is steeped in roughly hewn textures, Vargas is handsomely neat and smooth.

Within the frame throughout any number of scenes, dominance between the players shifts with, for an aspiring filmmaker, almost maddeningly assured force. One particular shot that struck me has Hank Quinlan (played by Mr. Welles) walk away from "Mike" Vargas (Heston). Quinlan has been brought in to investigate the murder of a prominent American and he and Vargas square off in an exchange that underscores the film's central, anti-fascist theme. The shot looks at Vargas, standing against a well lit backdrop as Quinlan's shadow, a dominant presence, passes Vargas over. It's a shot which speaks to the nature of the film's play of light, size and "weight" - that the hero of the film is dwarfed by fascism's looming specter.

It's of little wonder that the film wasn't recognized when it was released, as it is, as one of the most impressive feats of motion picture art. The story, which presents the viewer ordinarily accustomed to clear, concise definitions of "good" and "evil" with an intentionally challenging view of the film's theme, probably at best confused audiences of the time. One needn't strain to think of instances where the Quinlan character would have otherwise been presented as the hero - American films, to this day, often present such a character as "just" in their flagrant abandoning of the law. It must have been difficult, then, for an audience, anticipating the sort of release they feel when the hero gets the bad guy by any means necessary, to meet with the unease that Touch of Evil's ending thrusts upon them.

But I wouldn't want to ruin it for you - if you haven't seen this film yet, I suggest you do it soon.

back.