Tourneur's Lovely Fragility in 'Experiment Perilous' and 'Berlin Express'

In Experiment Perilous and Berlin Express, Tourneur is interested in desires and ideals—the optimistic as well as the dark.

Experiment Perilous

Director: Jacques Tourneur
Cast: Hedy Lamarr, George Brent
Distributor: Warner Archive
Year: 1944
US DVD release date: 2011-03-01

Berlin Express

Director: Jacques Tourneur
Cast: Merle Oberon, Robert Ryan
Distributor: Warner Archive
Year: 1948
US DVD release date: 2009-12-02

Jacques Tourneur, son of the great silent pictorialist Maurice Tourneur, spent some of his career in France, but most of it on Hollywood B-films. He's most famous for directing Cat People and I Walked with a Zombie for producer Val Lewton, and also the noir film Out of the Past. I think his greatest achievement is possibly Stars in My Crown, a foreigner's point of view on sentimental Americana, and to my knowledge the only American film between The Birth of a Nation and Storm Warning to feature the Ku Klux Klan; the underseen Way of a Gaucho also demands attention. With the help of an excellent, sensitive, well-researched appreciation, Chris Fujiwara's Jacques Tourneur: The Cinema of Nightfall, I'm better able to "see" this director's work, including two RKO productions now available on demand from Warner Archives: Experiment Perilous and Berlin Express.

Experiment Perilous falls into a lineage of movies with "Gaslight" plots, where a husband tries to convince his wife she's going mad; the Ingrid Bergman Gaslight had come out the same year. Producer-writer Warren Duff adapted Margaret Carpenter's novel in daring ways (changing the contemporary setting to 1903 New York, for example) that partly account for Tourneur's film being the most sensible and credible example of this type of plot. Fujiwara suggests that we understand the genre contours so well that Tourneur and Duff (who was also 2nd unit director) feel free to leave mechanical questions unanswered in order to concentrate on the "Jules Verne" mise-èn-scene of the mansion and other visual extravagance. We must not only praise the set design and photography, but Vernon L. Walker's effects work, which includes the convincing and foreboding model-train effects, a "reflection" scene, and the later pyrotechnics.

This film is not only highly visual, but also highly intelligent and sensitive to its characters. That includes our uncannily beautiful yet sympathetic cypher of a heroine (Hedy Lamarr, whose vehicle this is); her oppressive yet subtle husband (Paul Lukas), who manipulates her life as if she's an actress or piece of expensive bric-a-brac; the nominally bland hero and rescuer (George Brent), given to many thoughtfully disturbed expressions, and first falling in love with the heroine's portrait as in Laura ; the sweet old lady on a train (Olive Blakeney) whose suspicions and diaries frame this elaborately structured plot; and even minor roles like the Pullman porters. Hollywood films of the era accurately reflect the porters as the first all-Negro union, but they usually play in an emphatic, distractingly comic or submissive manner. Tourneur has them act and speak in a normal manner that becomes (ironically) almost shockingly noticeable precisely by not calling attention to itself.

Four years later, Tourneur directed Hollywood's first film shot on location in bombed-out Germany, Berlin Express, just before Billy Wilder's A Foreign Affair. It's set in the ruins of Frankfurt, with some scenes in Paris that feature an interesting prologue about shooting the dove of peace. Much also takes place on trains, like the beginning of Experiment Perilous, but even more complicated. As a French damsel in distress, Merle Oberon was forced upon producer Bert Granet by RKO, but as part of the deal they also got her husband, the excellent cinematographer Lucien Ballard. They've also got Paul Lukas again, who played the baddie in Experiment Perilous.

Harold Medford's story is as straightforward and unconvincing as can be: a pacifist German bigwig is to deliver some information on the possible unification of Germany. You'd think this would be troubling to the Russians occupying half the country, but the main villains are a shadowy group of "patriots" (characterized only as "the enemy") that we must surmise are Nazi remnants. They don't want him to succeed, for reasons that leave it unclear what his position on this unification could possibly be, especially for a man continually wringing his hands in the desire that everyone should get along. Strangely, that suits this film's dominant tone of uncertainty and strain. One of the film's early tricks is to fool us about a character's identity in a manner reminiscent of The Narrow Margin (1952), a later RKO train suspenser.

While the plot mechanics drive the thing forward (with a pervasive stentorian narrator trying to flatten everything into submission), Tourneur feels less concerned with these McGuffins of kidnap and mission than in the shadowy realities of characters living in a "liminal" state, a world of eternal transition frozen between borders: East and West, past and future, hate and love, war and peace, even borders and borderlessness. The movie asks whether or not borders must exist—it doesn't want them to—but the world in between feels like limbo, a place of lawless refuge, of furtive meetings, of conspiracies and transgressions. All this sad confusion seems symbolized by the final image: a one-legged man hobbling on crutches across the screen.

Why do people live in this uncertain state? Tourneur is interested in desires and ideals, the optimistic as well as the dark, all of which drive people and places to adopt false fronts and create a false world already in ashes. Tourner's worlds feel fragile, already doomed or in the past, even when modestly hopeful. This takes precedence over personal, more standard Hollywood motives—i.e. romance between the leads, which is thankfully downplayed. He lavishes attention on setpieces, like the underground cabaret with its Fritz Langian clowns, its Von Sternbergian tatter, its play of glances and close-up clues in a dense drama of mixed signs.

Oh Jacques, you have so much to show us; and, more importantly, the things you show have real emotional meaning, all the stronger for their sense of restraint and hesitation, for their lovely fragility.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.