Linbeymusol
Wonderful character development!
PlatinumRead
Just so...so bad
CommentsXp
Best movie ever!
filippaberry84
I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
boblipton
As a native New Yorker, I found the movie a bit creepy, Melville's image of Manhattan is too perfect, a city where the streets are seamless, glistening ribbons of asphalt, where the ashtrays have smoked cigarette butts stacked neatly in them with no sign of ash, where even the glass in telephone booths on the streets are spotless. When a French diplomat disappears and reporter Jean-Paul Melville in his first credited screen role -- clearly he must have impressed the director -- is set on his trail, he doesn't realize he himself is being followed. Meanwhile I was looking for a scrap of litter on the street, a straphanger on the subway whose hat and soul have been battered by a tough day.... nothing. Everyone is perfectly dressed, everything is perfectly clean, everyone dresses like a serious adult. You should have seen the motley assortment on the E train this afternoon.Finally, about a quarter hour in, Melville goes to the apartment of his cameraman, Pierre Grasset, and the wallpaper outside his apartment was poorly hung. Aha! I thought, a creature of the demi-monde, someone who cuts corners, was looking out for himself, who had pictures of the young women that the diplomat.... associated with. Off they went into the night, still followed by a mysterious trailer, Melville, the moral reporter, and Grasset, the corrupt guide. I knew they would find their prey; but how moral would Melville be and how corrupt Grasset? And who was following them and why? Who was the hero of this story and exactly what was the Great White Whale they were following?This movie is Melville's own personal fantasy, set in a fantasy New York glamorous beyond belief to anyone who has dwelt in the real one. He had been born Jen-Pierre Grumbach, and had adopted a new surname in admiration of Herman Melville. He had played Bartleby and written and directed his own movies and now was going on his own voyage to find out if he could be the hero of his own tale.
colaya
This is a road movie. We travel with two men through New York's nightlife in one night (hence the title of the film). The stops are Broadway performers, recording studios, burlesque dancers, brothels, iconic places such as Time Square, the UN building, Rockefeller Center, etc. and along the way we breathe the atmosphere, a jazz trumpet, the neon lights, hot dogs, shadows and dark alleys. The pretext for this ride (in this case the "plot": an investigation of a UN delegate disappearance and some dilemmas of yellow journalism) is just a pretext, as in any good journey. Recommended for road movie fans, New Wave connoisseurs, New Yorkers, jazz lovers, nightlife owls and noir-ish buffs.
Gloede_The_Saint
Two Men in Manhattan pushes the envelope on everything but quality. Sure, it has lesbians, bare breasts and loads of sex references, but does it help? Say hello of Jean-Pierre Melville's cheap and signature-less alter-ego.The master of French crime goes to what might be the noir capital of the world. We see New Yorks streets at night, and our entertainers throw in a heave jazz score as well - the making of a masterpiece? I wish.From the moment the first credit popped on screen I got the feeling that something was wrong. I shrugged it off, but just as soon as I was ready to embrace yet another great Melville film we are thrown into a whirlpool of disfigured English. Apparently it's only purpose is to show as that we are at the UN. The dialog was clearly not of any importance, and the sound department sure made that clear.I'm sure this introduction isn't as long as it felt like, but that's hardly no excuse. To make things worse we get to spend our first few scenes with the most unimaginative and unimportant small talk. For the next 30 minutes or so I wasn't even sure if there was a plot. Sure, they are looking for a guy but beyond that it felt so empty and devoid of any real direction.And did you expect great visuals? This whole deal feels like a cheap 40's docudrama after it had a stroke. One possibility is that Melville was testing out some new wave aesthetics, another is that he got drunk and let his assistant do the film for him.Not to say it's entirely bad. The cinematography is more or less there, despite the fact that the compositions couldn't be blander. Had it been some unknown director who was behind this I'd just brush it off as the mediocrity it is - but despite the fact that it isn't really bad it almost feels like a stab in the back from Melville. He had everything he needed, but decided to go to autopilot. All I can say is that there's most certainly a reason why this is his least known.
Bob Taylor
Melville keeps the story going pretty well, but this is a weak film compared to his best efforts. Shot partly on location in New York, and also in a Paris studio, with many of the supporting players having had to learn their parts phonetically (Monique Hennessy is particularly clumsy with her lines), this is a noir that shows its low budget and lack of inspiration in places. The attempt to find the missing diplomat ends in a woman's apartment. We get a five minute speech from the two reporters's boss about how great Fevre-Berthier was, it's a dull scene.If you are looking for a noir with verve and great music, why not try Ascenseur pour l'echafaud, with REAL actors and Miles Davis's great score.