For the men of film noir, the ones who fought the
war and returned to a changing country, the idea of a dutiful and submissive
wife, a white collar, and a white picket fence just couldn’t cut it — and
heaven knows our noir heroes tried to fit back in. They squirm in their suits,
tugging at those tight collars, chewing their nails, always on the make for
that thing that might break the monotony and remind them of what it feels like
to be alive. Pour another drink, Don Draper.
Despite a five-decade career in film and television, Mark Stevens was most visible in the years immediately after the war. He made his first big splash with Lucille Ball and Bill Bendix in 1946’s The Dark Corner, followed by a pair of notable 1948 films: the FBI-noir The Street with No Name and the Academy heavyweight The Snake Pit. Stevens is of less interest for those projects (to me, at least) than he is for his 1950s work, after he struck out on his own. He was the force behind his own film production and music publishing companies (he could sing), as well as the star and occasional director of Big Town, a popular weekly television series in which he played a crime-busting newsman. Although Stevens failed to carve out a lasting place as filmmaker, his earliest efforts, Cry Vengeance (1954) and Time Table (1956) — both surprisingly good noirs — beg for increased attention in contemporary film circles and make one wish the fledgling director had framed more crime movies.
Unfortunately
for anyone who hasn’t seen Time Table,
it’s impossible to discuss without spoiling its big twist — so let’s get it out
of the way right now (and don’t worry, the reveal occurs in the first half of
the film): Stevens plays an insurance investigator who — here it comes —
turns out to be the brains behind the very robbery he’s asked to solve.
Although it’s an old saw that may bring to mind Double Indemnity, Time Table
more closely resembles titles like Roadblock,
Private Hell 36, and The Man Who Cheated Himself. It
draws from a myriad of noir films rather than any one in particular. This much
is certain: in spite of being a cinematic mutt, Time Table is an intriguing movie that deserves to be seen.
However, if your taste prohibits enjoyment of a “derivative” film, then it
probably isn’t for you. On the other hand, if you are able to connect with a
noir picture that utilizes familiar genre tropes and still manages to
captivate, keep reading. Or better yet, go track this down. It will surprise
you.
The
second act contains a healthy dose of cop procedure. Charlie and Joe chase
leads, pal around with the yokel cops, and generally marvel at the skill of
their quarry — all while Charlie becomes more preoccupied and nervous. We’re
convinced his frustration owes to the lost vacation, until the twist occurs and
we discover otherwise: Charlie masterminded the entire robbery in the first
place, and he’s torn up because his perfect crime is unraveling all around him.
He dreamt up the caper, recruited the players, and worked out the all-important
timetable. Why? For some unknown reason Charlie is fed up — with his job, with
his home, and with his marriage. He intended to pull off the heist, then use
his Mexican holiday as a means to skip out on his old life and rendezvous with
his accomplices south of the border. There he intends to cut up the money and
start fresh in Argentina with new squeeze Linda (Felicia Farr). Yet fate, as it
so often does in film noir, has a different agenda: one of the crew is shot and
killed, throwing off the timetable and forcing everyone to hole up. In the
meantime, Joe’s investigation starts to pay off, while Charlie grows more
desperate. He is finally forced to commit a murder in order to protect himself,
scaring his remaining co-conspirators into making a run for it. Just as Joe
finally gets wise to the whole scheme, Charlie heads for Tijuana in a
last-ditch effort to find Linda. With the Federales riding shotgun, Joe corners
the lovers in TJ and guns are drawn…
Whether
explored deeply or viewed as pure escapism, Time
Table scores. Aben Kandel’s (City for
Conquest) accomplished script surpasses typical B movie fare, with an
airtight plot and plenty of tough, pithy dialog. Kandel also has a gift for
subtle double-entendres that reinforce the story’s central theme and reward
attentive viewers. For example, early on when Ruth replaces the blanket on a
dozing Charlie, he mumbles, “What’re you trying to do, smother me?” All of
Kandel’s characters, in one way or another and regardless of their gender, are
struggling to overcome the emptiness of a world in which they’ve discovered,
all too late, that the fairy tale assurances of their younger years are simply
not meant to be. Charlie finds no comfort in his bleak, middle class existence.
Fulfilling the role of the perfect wife brings Ruth little but disappointment.
Linda trades her alcoholic, disgraced husband for the promise of a better life
with Charlie, but instead leaps from the frying pan into an altogether deadlier
fire. Even Joe runs himself into the ground living up to the image of a dead
cop father who taught him there’s no such thing as a perfect crime. In Time Table, perfection is as ethereal as
the haze of cigarette smoke that obscures each frame.
Stevens’
direction might be described as workmanlike, but he understands where to
linger, when to move quickly, and how to get a lot out of his actors — Time Table has a great cast. Wesley Addy
(Kiss Me Deadly, What Ever Happened to
Baby Jane?) is fantastic as the drunken ex-M.D. who holds it together just
long enough to rob the train, while King Calder, who worked previously with
Stevens during his run as television’s private detective Martin Kane, excels as
the relentless railroad cop. Calder’s face and body language are so hang-dog it’s
hard to imagine him in roles outside of the crime genre. Two of the most
memorable performances come from actors in small parts. Jack Klugman, appearing
in his first film role after having met Stevens on an episode of Big Town, plays a chain-smoking wheelman
who squirms under the lights like nobody’s business. Klugman has just one
scene, but he steals it cleanly away from Stevens and Calder. The second
standout is Alan Reed, whose name and face may not be incredibly familiar,
though his unforgettable and iconic voice certainly is — even thirty-five years
after his death. Reed’s stocky build, unique look, and instant pathos made him
a natural for this stuff — it’s surprising he didn’t make more crime pictures.
Reed vividly brings to life the helicopter pilot most responsible for Charlie’s
plans going down the tube. He burns the candle from both ends and pays a steep
price for turning stool pigeon — in one of the film’s best moments.
At
a quick 79 minutes, Time Table is a
second feature — it plows ahead, sacrificing much at the altar of brevity. Yet
while similar films are repudiated as rote exercises in “what happened next?”
moviemaking, they frequently provide an instructive lens through which we can
examine the cultural values of their era. Time
Table is such a film. At its core is the question of Charlie’s motivation
to self-destruct, and he offers no clues beyond a vaguely expressed desire for
a change. At a critical point in the final reel, Ruth confronts him:
“Charlie,
why’d you do it? Why?”
“Why?
What does it matter?”
And
later in the same scene:
“We
had so much Charlie. Why, why?”
“The
house becomes a prison, the job a trap.”
“What
did you want?”
“A
new kind of life.”
Yet
the film doesn’t explain why Charlie so desperately wants this new life.
Personally and professionally he has everything a man could reasonably ask for
— his situation is even admirable. Ruth is a kind and attractive woman for whom
he has genuine affection, and his tough-guy job as an insurance cop makes him a
bona fide man’s man. The most telling aspect of Time Table is how it takes for granted that viewers will embrace
Charlie’s compulsion to escape his circumstances without being given a
reason.
Look
closely at the absurdity of Charlie’s actions: he trades his job and his honor
for a satchel of money; a fine suburban home for assuredly more squalid digs in
Argentina; and a caring spouse another woman, albeit younger and a little
prettier, who nevertheless seems to be cut from the same beige piece of cloth as
his wife. It’s also worth pointing out that Linda is a Mexican — another way in
which the film drives home the point that Charlie’s all-American situation
somehow isn’t adequate. And he knows his trades are for keeps — permanently
sanctified through blood and betrayal. After all, Charlie’s a law enforcement
man who, like Walter Neff, understands the risks but believes his knowledge of
the game provides an edge. At the same time, he is aware of the looming
possibility of the little green room at Quentin, where one’s final black
moments are strained listening for the plop-plop-fizz-fizz of everlasting
relief.
Unlike
in other noir pictures, the protagonist’s downfall can’t be attributed to a
femme fatale. Time Table doesn’t have one. Sure, there’s a
girl, but Charlie’s inamorata is hardly an upgrade on his wife. Here’s a guy
who is winning the rat race and still wants out — he hates everything about his
situation. The answer to his motivation lies in the movie’s unrelenting
cynicism. Time Table consciously subverts
the post-war American dream of happiness through national prosperity and
material achievement. It thumbs its nose at the white bread promises of the
Eisenhower era: the steady jobs, home-sweet-homes, and June Allyson wives that
saturated mainstream media offerings. It gives us a protagonist who has
achieved these material things and more, yet remains unfulfilled. In many ways,
Charlie’s case is even more compelling than that of the pill-popping Ed Avery
in another 1956 film, Nicholas Ray’s brilliant Bigger Than Life — if only because Time Table is neither a character study nor a message picture. For
the men of film noir, the ones who fought the war and returned to a changing
country, the idea of a dutiful and submissive wife, a white collar, and a white
picket fence just couldn’t cut it — and heaven knows our noir heroes tried to
fit back in. They squirm in their suits, tugging at those tight collars,
chewing their nails, always on the make for that thing that might break the
monotony and remind them of what it feels like to be alive. Pour another drink,
Don Draper.
What
makes Time Table so enthralling (as
well as numerous other film noirs), is that while modern audiences might find
Charlie Norman’s gambit unfathomable or absurd, some of the 1956 crowd
undoubtedly recognized themselves in him — feeling every bit as suffocated
while having to acquiesce to the vanilla model of happiness offered up on
countless roadside billboards, magazine advertisements, and sponsor-centric TV
programs. Consequently, Charlie becomes a poster child for those who felt
trapped in that uncanny era of prosperous conformity — and an authentic film
noir anti-hero. In recognizing and understanding the daring of filmmakers who
so openly questioned the fleeting promises of the American Dream, we further
appreciate the enduring allure of film noir.
Time Table (1956)
Produced and Directed by Mark Stevens
Written by Aben Kandel
Cinematography by Charles Van Enger
Art Direction by William Tuntke
Starring Mark Stevens, King Calder, Alan Reed, Jack Klugman, and Wesley Addy
Released by United Artists
Running time: 79 minutes
Really enjoyed reading your post. I haven't seen 'Time Table,' but it seems very much of a piece with other 50s noir, as an expression of individual suffocation within mainstream culture (the lines you quote remind me of Brando in 'The Wild One': "What are you rebelling against?" "Whattya got?") -hope this is on DVD.
ReplyDeleteI also really enjoyed this post! I've just become familiar with Stevens over the last year or two, having seen him in films like THE DARK CORNER and (most recently) BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND DAWN. I appreciated your insights into the development of his career -- an interesting guy. Looking forward to catching up with these titles.
ReplyDeleteBest wishes,
Laura
I have developed a new hobby of watching Film Noir movies, primarily on Netflix. I happened to see this on YouTube and read the general review on IMDB. What a great movie! I just know read your review and it was excellent as well. THANKS!
ReplyDeleteMan did this movie stink! I laughed through most of it. Cheesy props (the exploding safe, the theater sized train aisles), the stilted dialogue, the bizarre comic facial gestures, cardboard characters. LMAO!
ReplyDelete