Tight Spot (1955): A Hidden Classic

Tight Spot showcases Ginger Rogers’s talents in a film noir: no dancing shoes and no Fred Astaire for her this time. She plays against type and does a good job of it, portraying someone with a troubled past and an uncertain future. Edward G. Robinson also plays against type: He has a supporting role as a conscientious district attorney. Brian Keith is thrown into the mix as a federal agent who muddies everything, as at least one character should do in a classic film noir. And the story is good one, much more nuanced than you might expect.

Tight Spot starts dramatically, with the opening credits appearing over a shot of New York Harbor and the Statue of Liberty in the background. The credits continue over a ferry ride and a car trip to a Manhattan courthouse. Pete Tonelli, seated in the car between two Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents, is about to testify in court. Tonelli is getting more and more nervous as they get closer and closer to the courthouse, and with good reason. He is shot in the back while walking up the steps of the courthouse between the two agents.

The film cuts to a women’s prison and two female prisoners talking while doing laundry. One of them is Sherry Conley, who advises the other prisoner, “Don’t volunteer for nothin’.” (Ginger Rogers is Sherry Conley, and she has manicured nails that are much too smooth for someone working in a prison laundry.) Willoughby, one of the female wardens, shows up because Conley is about to be released to the custody of federal agent Vince Striker, and Willoughby will act as a sort of chaperone. Conley doesn’t know yet why she is being given this type of release, and no one is yet talking about it.

The minute FBI agent Striker drives away with Conley and Willoughby in his car, they are followed by another car. Striker loses it, with Conley wondering aloud along the route why she is being whisked away. With no one willing to talk, she remarks on the dresses for sale in the store windows; fashions have changed considerably since her imprisonment. They continue to the St. Charles Hotel, which is crawling with federal agents, and Conley still waits for answers.

Conley and Willoughby chat while Conley settles in at the hotel. Willoughby lost her husband in World War II, and she is responsible for the care of her daughter. Conley is impressed by Willoughby because she talks frankly with her and answers her questions about her life, her work, and her daughter.

Conley is to be questioned by District Attorney Lloyd Hallett, who wants to convince her to testify against a man called Ben Costain. Conley, Pete Tonelli, and Ben Costain once took a yachting trip to the West Indies. On the yacht was an Italian garden expert who left the yacht in Florida and disappeared in the Florida swamp. This garden expert is really a mob boss. He was smuggled into the United States and is responsible for several mob hits since Conley saw him last in Florida. Hallett tells Conley that Tonelli has been shot and killed by the Costain mob before he could testify about the yacht trip. It’s no surprise then that Conley is not interested in testifying and following Tonelli to the grave, and she makes this clear to Lloyd Hallett.

Conley is attracted to Striker and flirts with him whenever she has the chance. Striker is attracted to Conley, but he doesn’t know it yet. But this is film noir: A better reason could be because he has a lot on his mind and never imagined he would be protecting a prisoner like Conley. He’s also a bit reticent because Conley has a reputation as a woman of loose morals. Everyone in law enforcement thinks the yacht trip was a chance for her to sell sexual favors.

Conley has another chance to talk privately with Willoughby, and she asks Willoughby what she would do if she were in Conley’s place. Willoughby doesn’t want to influence Conley’s decision about testifying, but she hopes that Conley will consider her responsibility to society. Conley asks Willoughby what she would tell her daughter. Willoughby says that she never tells her daughter what to do, but she has always tried to encourage her daughter to face her obligations. All she can do is show her daughter that she loves her.

At the start of this scene between the two main female characters, Willoughby and Sherry Conley, Willoughby is reading a book with the following title: He Stooped to Kill. I think this is the same book that Jack Lemmon is reading in Phffft (1954). If anyone has any information about this book/prop, please do leave a comment. I’m quite sure He Stooped to Kill is not a real book—noir, pulp, detective, or otherwise—but I am curious about it nonetheless.

This conversation between Willoughby and Conley is a turning point in the film, but it’s not instantly recognizable as one on first viewing. Willoughby has more influence on Conley’s decision than anyone else, but viewers have to wait for subsequent events in the story to put this conversation in much clearer relief for Conley. It’s a great narrative construct for viewers because of the surprises still to come: Tight Spot is a film with many twists and turns, which makes it fun to watch.

During Conley’s next conversation with Striker, she tells him that she was best friends with Mitzi Tonelli, Pete’s sister. Conley went on the yacht trip to the West Indies only to do Pete and Mitzi a favor and nothing more. Conley and Striker begin to dance, and while they are distracted, a gunman shows up at the window. A shootout between Striker and the gunman results in Conley being shot in the arm. Willoughby tries to protect Conley and is also shot, but she doesn’t say anything about her injury right away. While Conley is treated by a doctor in the hotel bedroom, Willoughby collapses in the doorway and is rushed off to the hospital. It now seems like Conley’s resolve to avoid testifying will never break. But Willoughby made such a strong impression on Conley that their conversations and Willoughby’s injury continue to influence Conley’s thinking about her predicament and her sense of duty to society.

I very much enjoyed Tight Spot, even more than I thought I would. Yes, I could quibble about a couple of minor points. I do think that the film would benefit from a little bit of tightening up in some of the scenes between Sherry Conley and Lieutenant Vince Striker. Sometimes their flirting seemed to go on too long and they tossed maybe one-too-many play-insults back and forth. I imagine, however, that these scenes were a good way to showcase Ginger Rogers in this film noir. (She did get top billing in the opening credits after all.) And during one of these conversations with Striker, Conley does explain what got her into prison: She was duped by her old boyfriend and never knew that he was planning to commit a robbery. In stark contrast, the ending was too quick. I would have appreciated a bit more detail surrounding Conley’s final decision and the events leading to Ben Costain’s appearance in court.

Ginger Rogers was wonderful in the starring role of Sherry Conley, even more so than her first scene in the prison laundry led me to believe. Age works to Ginger Rogers’s advantage in Tight Spot. She is not a young woman in 1955 (Rogers was forty-three when Tight Spot was filmed), and she is thus able to project a world-weariness that might not have been possible when she was younger. Sherry Conley is a strong character, and many issues are touched upon because of her central role in the narrative. A scene with her sister reveals that they had a very unhappy childhood, and Sherry is still feeling its effects. Another example of Conley’s strength is her interest in Vince Striker and not being afraid to let him know about it.

Sherry Conley could have been a femme fatale, but her character is more complicated and multidimensional than that. She develops a brief friendship with Willoughby, and this relationship turns out to one of the most important in the film. Willoughby’s honest answers to Conley’s questions about her life have the most influence on Conley’s decisions as the film progresses.

Another plus for the film is the different sources of tension in the plot: Will Conley risk her life and agree to testify? If Conley does agree to testify, will she make it to the witness stand or will she be killed in a mob hit? Will she and Vince Striker pursue a romantic relationship? Tight Spot has more than a few surprise plot twists. It’s definitely one of those films that “ain’t over till it’s over,” to quote baseball great Yogi Berra.

This blog post about Tight Spot is my entry for the Classic Movie Blog Association’s 2021 Spring Blogathon: Hidden Classics. Click here for the complete list of blogathon participants and links to their entries. The list is updated with live links each day of the blogathon, from May 18 to May 21.

March 19, 1955, release date  •  Directed by Phil Karlson  •  Screenplay by William Bowers  •  Based on the play Dead Pigeon by Lenard Kantor  •  Music by George Duning  •  Edited by Viola Lawrence  •  Cinematography by Burnett Guffey

Ginger Rogers as Sherry Conley  •  Edward G. Robinson as District Attorney Lloyd Hallett  •  Brian Keith as Lieutenant Vince Striker  •  Lorne Greene as Benjamin Costain  •  Eve McVeagh as Clara Moran, Conley’s sister  •  Katherine Anderson as Willoughby  •  Allen Nourse as attorney Marvin Rickles  •  Peter Leeds as Fred Packer  •  Lucy Marlowe as the woman in prison  •  Helen Wallace as the prison warden  •  Frank Gerstle as Jim Hornsby, newspaper reporter  •  Gloria Ann Simpson as Ms. Masters  •  Robert Shield as Carlyle  •  Norman Keats as Arny  •  Alfred Linder as Pete Tonelli

Distributed by Columbia Pictures  •  Produced by Columbia Pictures

The Glass Key (Book) (1931)

After I saw the 1942 film version of The Glass Key, I was anxious to read Dashiell Hammett’s novel that is the basis of the film. (It’s possible I read the novel years ago, but my memory is a bit fuzzy on this point.) The novel is told from the point of view of Ned Beaumont, a gambler and political operative for Paul Madvig, who runs the Voters League. Madvig is helping Senator Ralph Bancroft Henry in his reelection bid, which Madvig also hopes will help him win the heart of the senator’s daughter, Janet. The three male characters—Ned Beaumont, Paul Madvig, and Senator Ralph Bancroft Henry—are willing to do what it takes to advance their own agendas, and that includes ignoring the rules and breaking the law.

I have written two blog posts about the 1942 film adaptation of The Glass Key. Click here for my first blog post; click here for my second post, which I wrote for the Classic Movie Blog Association’s 2020 Fall Blogathon: Politics on Film.

Ned Beaumont does have a set of ethics that he bases on loyalty. His friends can count on him, and they reciprocate. And they won’t let the law limit their willingness to help out a friend. As a gambler and Paul Madvig’s friend and political operative, Beaumont is privy to a lot of backroom dealing and politicking. Part of his value to Madvig is his ability to ferret out information and then use it to protect Madvig and their other operatives. Beaumont’s job becomes much more complicated when Taylor Henry, the senator’s son and Janet’s brother, is found murdered.

(This blog post about the novel The Glass Key contains spoilers.)

The novel is much darker than the film. Here are just a few examples of the differences between the two:

◊ Beaumont is a gambler in the novel. His gambling debts are taken care of by Madvig. In the 1942 film, gambling is never mentioned, and Beaumont’s assistance in Madvig’s work doesn’t often stray outside the law.

◊ Taylor Henry’s murderer, his own father, claims that his son’s death was an accident in both the novel and the film, but it’s hard to believe his assertion because of the senator’s political ambition. In the novel, the senator wants to kill Paul Madvig before he can tell the truth to the police about the senator’s role in Taylor’s death.

◊ It’s clear in the novel that Senator Henry wants his daughter Janet to marry Madvig because he needs Madvig’s political maneuvering and loyalty. He never considers his daughter’s feelings because he is mainly interested in his own political future. In the film, Janet agrees to see Madvig because she wants to help her father, at least until the election is over.

In the 1942 film, Taylor Henry’s murderer is brought to justice, and Jeff Gardner is arrested for the murder of Nick Varna. (Gardner works for Varna, who oversees the gambling operations in town.) Murderers are brought to justice, which fits the mandates of the motion picture code in 1942, but what about political corruption? Is Paul Madvig serious when he tells a reporter at the end of the film that anyone he backs is sure to become the next governor? Just how much clout did the head of the Voters League carry in 1942, or earlier if you consider that Dashiell Hammett’s novel was serialized in Black Mask magazine in 1930 and published as a book in 1931? I still wondered about this as I read Hammett’s novel.

I tried to do an online search about voters leagues in general, but I couldn’t find much information. (The only information that came up consistently was about the League of Women Voters.) I wondered if the term voters league was a kinder name for political machine, a term used when politics were run by people like William M. “Boss” Tweed (1823–1878), who ran the political machine called Tammany Hall in New York City. Maybe Paul Madvig’s Voters League was a concept that the film’s writers (and Dashiell Hammett) didn’t feel the need to explain to 1942 viewers because it was common knowledge going by a fictional screen (film) name.

The back cover of the Vintage Book edition that I read describes Paul Madvig as a “ward heeler.” The copy on the back cover was not written by Dashiell Hammett, but I decided to find out what I could about ward heelers; maybe this term was the clue that I needed all along. Here is what Wikipedia has to say on the topic:

A ward heeler is an American urban political operative who works for a political party in a political ward, the smallest electoral subdivision of a city, usually to achieve an election result. A ward heeler may have controlling influence with a small clique in the ward organization. Often, ward heelers have been low-level operatives soliciting votes and performing campaign tasks on behalf of a political boss, including get-out-the-vote efforts, placing campaign signage, coordination of constituent support, etc. In many urban areas, ward heelers also serve as precinct captains.

The term originated during the period of machine politics around the turn of the twentieth century, when powerful political machines in major cities run by political bosses, such as the Tammany Hall organization in New York City, used corruption, such as graft and patronage, to maintain their power. So “ward heeler” has the connotation of a corrupt political operative. As integral players in the “spoils system,” ward heelers were often both recipients and distributors of patronage, illegal benefits from the political machine. Examples of illegal acts which a ward heeler might do include tearing down an opposition party’s posters or paying constituents for their votes. In return for his services, the ward heeler was often given a sinecure job, such as in the city’s civil service, which was controlled by the organization.

 

Wikipedia’s description certainly fits both Ned Beaumont and Paul Madvig, especially as Hammett portrays them in the novel. I guess a little bit of knowledge about U.S. history helps when it comes to reading Hammett’s novels about detectives and the politically connected.

 

Click here for more information, and additional links, about ward heelers and machine politics at Wikipedia.

Hammett is said to have written in a fact-filled, objective style. But it’s very hard for any writer to remain objective when he or she uses adjectives and repetition as often as Hammett does. It is true that Hammett almost never allows readers into the inner thoughts and worlds of his characters in The Glass Key, but I didn’t find him all that objective about his characters. For instance, Jeff Gardner is almost always described as “apish” whenever he is mentioned in the novel, and not just the first time, when he is introduced to readers. District Attorney Farr is always “pugnacious,” and his face is represented in varying degrees of “florid.” Toward the end of the novel, Farr’s face is not as red as usual:

Farr did not get up from his desk, did not offer to shake hands. He said: “How do you do, Beaumont? Sit down.” His voice was coldly polite. His pugnacious face was not so red as usual. His eyes were level and hard. (page 182)

I had to wonder why Hammett felt compelled to remind readers of these descriptions. I don’t think he wanted to let readers forget what he thought of his characters, and it never sounded very positive.

Some of Hammett’s characters do show emotion. Those that show the most emotion are most often female. Women, but not the men, it seems, are allowed to be emotional. Opal Madvig, Paul Madvig’s sister, cries on Ned Beaumont’s shoulder after Taylor Henry is murdered. Lee Wilshire, Bernie Despain’s girlfriend, doesn’t like Beaumont and is only too happy to let him know it. Janet Henry needs Ned Beaumont, but he doesn’t seem too interested in her. She believes him to be a man of character, but he is honest with her about how he spends his time. Janet Henry is the one who shows emotion through Hammett’s choice of adjectives, for example:

He smiled. “Then you’re wrong. I’m a gambler and politician’s hanger-on.”

                “I’m not wrong.” A pleading expression came into her eyes. “Please don’t let us quarrel, at least not until we must.” (page 149)

If readers over the decades have chosen to focus only on Hammett’s male characters, a case could be made that they show little to no emotion, and Hammett doesn’t describe what they’re thinking or feeling. But that certainly isn’t true of the female characters in The Glass Key, and readers know what Hammett thinks of his male and female characters because he reminds us again and again.

Of all the pulp novel and detective story writers that I have read so far, Dashiell Hammett may be my least favorite. I say “may” because I haven’t read every pulp novel and detective story, but I have read recently The Glass Key and The Thin Man, both by Hammett, and I didn’t find either one completely engrossing. In fact, I much prefer the 1942 film version of The Glass Key. I have not yet seen the 1935 film version, but I still want to and it’s on my list.

The Glass Key, by Dashiell Hammett  •  New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1989  •  Originally published in 1931

List of main characters: 

Ned Beaumont, gambler and political operative  •  Paul Madvig, crooked political boss  •  Opal Madvig, Paul Madvig’s daughter  •  Senator Ralph Bancroft Henry, seeking reelection  •  Janet Henry, Senator Henry’s daughter  •  Taylor Henry, Senator Henry’s son  •  Shad O’Rory, local gangster and Paul Madvig’s rival  •  Bernie Despain, gambler who owes Ned Beaumont money  •  Lee Wilshire, Despain’s girlfriend  •  Jack Rumsen, private detective hired by Ned Beaumont  •  Michael Joseph Farr, district attorney  •  Jeff Gardner, Shad O’Rory’s bodyguard