October
11, 1944, release date
Directed
by Howard Hawks
Screenplay
by Jules Furthman, William Faulkner
Based on
the novel To Have and Have Not, by Ernest Hemingway
Music by
William Lava, Franz Waxman
Edited by
Christian Nyby
Cinematography
by Sidney Hickox
Walter Brennan as Eddie
Lauren Bacall as Marie “Slim”
Browning
Dolores Moran as Madame Hélène de
Bursac
Hoagy Carmichael as Cricket
Sheldon Leonard as Lieutenant Coyo
Walter Surovy as Paul de Bursac
Marcel Dalio as Gérard (aka Frenchy)
Walter Sande as Johnson
Dan Seymour as Capitaine Renard
Aldo Nadi as Renard’s bodyguard
Paul Marion as Beauclère
Eugene Borden as the quartermaster
Patricia Shay as Mrs. Beauclère
Sir Lancelot as Horatio
Emmett Smith as a bartender
Pat West as a bartender
Distributed
by Warner Bros./First National Pictures
To Have and Have Not is a film noir? I know any film starring Humphrey
Bogart, Lauren Bacall, or Bogie and Bacall should make characterizing
that film pretty simple: It’s a Bogart film, a Bacall film, or a Bogie and
Bacall film, respectively. Both actors project such star power on the screen;
both have become legendary; both stars are worthy of their own categories. To Have and Have Not has also been accused of being
a Casablanca remake. But I’ve never been a big fan of a strict
adherence to categories, and I see no reason why To Have and Have Not
can’t be called a film noir, too.
The opening
credits appear over a map of the Caribbean Sea and its islands. When the
credits end, the camera zooms in on the island of Martinique. Type over the
screen reads “Martinique, in the summer of 1940, shortly after the fall of
France.” Then more type reads “Fort de France.” The credits, the camera
movement, and the type orient viewers right away, but I did wonder as the film
started if 1944 viewers would have known a lot already about Martinique and its
role in the Vichy government. The film’s opening certainly helps modern-day
viewers, but did 1944 audiences really need this much information stated
upfront about the events, which would have been current events for them, that
form the backdrop of To Have and Have Not? I wasn’t able to find out
much about this point, but I wondered nonetheless.
When the
narrative starts, Harry Morgan walks into a scene on a dock and goes to a
window in what appears to be a government building to request clearance for his
boat, the Queen Conch, out of Key West, Florida. After being granted
clearance, he approaches his boat and finds his assistant Eddie passed out and
hungover on the dock. Mr. Johnson arrives at the same time to rent Morgan’s
boat. Most of the plot threads converge on this opening scene: Harry is loyal
to his friend Eddie, although viewers never find out why; Harry struggles to
make a living because rich tourists aren’t always interested in paying him; and
the government is keeping a watchful eye on citizens and foreigners alike.
Later that day, someone named Gérard
asks Harry if he will help some of his friends in the French Resistance. It
isn’t obvious to viewers at first, but Gérard owns the hotel, the Hotel
Marquis, where Harry is staying. Harry refuses Gérard’s request at first, but
then Slim arrives on the island by plane and is staying in the room across the
hall from Harry. Harry meets her when he follows here to her room, which he
does because he saw her steal Mr. Johnson’s wallet in the hotel’s nightclub. He
takes Slim by the arm and leads her into his room so he can examine the wallet
for himself. Mr. Johnson hasn’t been paying Harry for the rental of his boat,
and he owes Harry several hundred dollars.
Several of Gérard’s friends visit Harry
in his room, and they arrive while he is still talking to Slim. But it turns
out that they are not just friends of Gérard; all of them are fellow Resistance
fighters. They do their best to convince Harry to help them, but nothing they
say or do, not even the offer of money, can change Harry’s mind. He wants no
part of their fight against the Vichy government and the Nazis.
Afterward, when everyone is in the
café/nightclub of the Hotel Marquis, a gunfight breaks out, with the French
Gestapo firing into the hotel. Shooting continues out on the street in front of
the hotel between the Resistance fighters and the French Gestapo. Beauclere and
Émil are the only Resistance fighters who survive.
After falling for Slim, Harry
finally he decides to take the job from the Resistance fighters and their money
so he can help Slim leave Martinique. He agrees to pick up two Resistance
fighters and bring them back to Martinique. He learns that one of them is Paul
de Bursac; the other is his wife. Paul de Bursac will work from Martinique to
find Pierre Villemars. The Resistance feels that Villemars is one of the few
who can inspire fighters to continue the struggle against the Nazis, in spite
of the terrible odds.
The locale in
Martinique is more exotic than usual for a film noir, but To Have and Have
Not does have elements of noir: wartime intrigue, some betrayal, and petty
crime. Lauren Bacall’s character, Slim, finds herself on Martinique because she
ran out of money and could afford to travel only as far as the island. She
tries to support herself by pickpocketing in the clubs and swindling tourists
out of their money.
To Have or Have Not is based on a novel by Ernest Hemingway that I have not
read (not yet, anyway), but summaries of its plot paint it as noir literature.
It’s the story of Harry Morgan, a man trying to keep his family financially
afloat during the Great Depression (the film takes place a bit later). He is
drawn into criminal activity when he and his boat are hired to smuggle
contraband between Cuba and Key West in Florida. From all I have read, it is a
story of betrayal, crime, poverty, despair, and sorrow—about as noir as it
gets.
Hemingway’s
novel has been adapted to the screen a total of four times, and two out of the
four are considered film noir:
◊ To Have
and Have Not (1944)
◊ The Breaking Point (1950)
◊ The Gun Runners (1958)
◊ Captain Khorshid (1987)
The last might be a
neo-noir, but I haven’t had much luck finding information about it. Humphrey Bogart
and Lauren Bacall have appeared in four films together:
◊
To Have and Have Not (1944), based on the novel by Ernest Hemingway
◊
The Big Sleep (1946), based on the novel by Raymond Chandler
◊
Dark Passage (1947), based on the novel by David Goodis
◊
Key Largo (1948), based on
the play Key Largo by Maxwell Anderson
The latter three
films are considered film noir, and The Big Sleep and Dark Passage
are based on novels written by two writers famous for their work in crime
fiction and pulp novels. In addition to the noir elements that I already
mentioned, I am calling To Have and Have Not film noir partly out of
association, if you will.
To Have and Have Not is a fun movie and basically lives entirely off the chemistry between its two stars. It has virtually nothing to do with Hemingway's story, except the title and a guy named Harry Morgan who has a boat.
ReplyDeleteFor a more faithful adaptation watch The Breaking Point with John Garfield. It's very good but pretty depressing. Hemingway wasn't the most upbeat kind of guy.
About Walter Brennan, he plays another one of his old coot roles who are supposed to be comic relief but are just annoying. He did that way too often.
Hemingway's novel and the film adaptation The Breaking Point are on my to-do list.
DeleteYour comment started me thinking about Walter Brennan and his portrayal of Eddie, and I have the opposite reaction now to his character! I have started seeing Eddie as much more central to the plot and much more than a local drunk. I think he gives Harry the chance to demonstrate his loyalty to his friends: He helps Eddie through thick and thin. And when Slim repeats some of Eddie's bee story, she proves her loyalty and acceptance of Eddie, too.
If I ever write about To Have and Have Not again, I'll have to give some extra writing space to Eddie!
That's interesting about Brennan's character. My problem with the sidekick is that I watch too many Westerns and the stupid/drunken friend as comic relief is a regular (usually played by Brennan or Gabby Hayes). The sidekick is like a millstone around the hero’s neck. He’s a complete oaf and I don’t find stupidity funny or entertaining.
DeleteHis function is definitively to test the loyalty of the hero, but every time I wonder if they couldn't have come up with a character less bumbling. OK, enough of the rant, but it's simply my pet peeve.