source: The Man with the Golden Arm

I decided, on a whim, to watch this and Trainspotting one after the other (though it wasn't my first time seeing either), and the similarities were there (though the stories themselves were quite different). But one thing that puts Trainspotting above this film is the charisma of the film, the story, the characters. This film lacks much of that charisma. The characters in Trainspotting evoke little sympathy, but these characters evoke little emotion at all. It's not one of Frankie's better roles (see High Society...), and not one of Kim Novak's either (See Vertigo or Of Human Bondage). Eleanor Parker was *beyond* annoying (to give her credit: it wasn't completely her fault, her character was annoying as hell, but she did whine *way* too much...) In fact, though Darren McGavin was quite good as the pusher, the only real standout here was Arnold Stang as the 'not all there' Sparrow, who I thought was really quite excellent in a difficult role to get right. Much of the problems with this film is it's much too long, a problem not too uncommon with Otto Preminger's work. It was 2 hours but really should have been no more than 1h45 at most. Many of the scenes could have been cut down (such as the scenes where Frankie kicks in Kim Novak's apt., reminiscent of Renton's kick scene in Trainspotting which was also much too long and trite), other scenes could have been cut altogther. And the characters never seemed to have any emotion, especially Frankie who seems to be always apathetic, even when dying for a fix. As an aside: one fun game to play is to find all the lines Ministry sampled for 'Just One Fix' Overall: This film was alright, but really lacked intensity and passion, emotion and the harrow of addiction. It was hinted at, and overdramatized at times, but it never really shown through (probably because I was too busy yawning through those scenes...) That charisma and intensity is what Trainspotting does manage to convey, which is why it's a much better film. But the cast, though they have all played better roles, is still a good one, and that saves the film somewhat. 6/10.

The original novel is one of the classics of American literature and it's a shame the film bears so little resemblance to it. The soundtrack is good but the acting is a joke and the directing is utterly unremarkable. Perhaps it has some historical significance due to the subject matter but it's just a shame Mr. Preminger doesn't get beyond the "Reffer Madness" mentality. As for what's left of the story : simplistic cliche ridden melodrama of the fall asleep from boredom variety (except you don't because the music is a pleasure to listen to) Don't bother with the movie, read the book by Nelson Algren instead.

Director Otto Preminger makes a valiant attempt to interject some real feeling into this adaptation of Nelson Algren's novel, but the material is ultimately far too false and the film fails to come off. Frank Sinatra plays Frankie, an ace card-dealer and poker-player coming out of a six-month stay in an institution to kick his drug habit; in the interim, he's become a good drummer and hopes to land a job with a band, but troubles with his invalid wife and the low-life neighborhood characters set him out on the precipice once again. Preminger can't seem to eke out a realistic scenario within these studio back streets, and Elmer Bernstein's blaring music undermines the nuances with Prestige! and Importance! Sinatra manages some hard-knock looks of concern and hopelessness, but his well-intentioned Frankie is a distressing creation (and, with all that talk about the "bobbysoxers" turning out for him, he's an uncomfortable sketch of the real Frankie when he was down-and-out several years prior). Glamorous Kim Novak, cast as the local working girl, is perhaps too Park Avenue for these squalid settings, however this is one of Novak's best, most subtle performances and she carries a great many scenes in the second-half. Eleanor Parker's role as Frankie's wheelchair-bound spouse is something else altogether; played on the verge of hysteria, it's a stunning portrait of a parasitic woman on the edge, needling, needy and yet aggressive. Parker appears to relish this outré role (and chews up a few scenes in the bargain)--and her big exit scene is a beauty--but in the context of this film, the performance is too hyperbolic. It's indicative of much of the writing, which walks a fine line between human drama and soap opera. This effort, pumped up for big effects, crosses that line too many times, finishing up wilted and unsatisfying. ** from ****

.......from Pasto,Colombia...Via: L. A. CA., CALI, COLOMBIA and ORLANDO, FL If you're under 70, there's probably no way you can remember how controversial and cutting edge MAN WITH The GOLDEN ARM was when it was released in 1955. Fortunately, my parents were very liberal in permitting me to see films and even took me to see it just after turning Eight. WOW! What a tremendous impact it had on me. It was the first "Grown-up" film that made me realize there was more to cinema than just Sci-Fi/Horror, Westerns and Kids' movies! Mainstream cinema had never touched the subjects of drug addiction and heroin withdrawal, which were considered taboo topics, even at the dinner table, let alone as the focus of a movie to be shown in public! The MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) refused to give its seal of approval to GOLDEN ARM, forcing Producer/Director Otto Preminger and Distributor United Artists to release it without the MPAA's seal. This, of course, contributed greatly to both the films commercial and critical success! It also opened the door to new ways of making, distributing and classifying films. Before my recent third viewing, I had only seen it once at age 8, mentioned above, and again, in my late teens (Perhaps the 10th Anniversary Re-Release?). Despite some of the production elements and dialog that do date the film considerably, the last half of GOLDEN ARM had me in a headlock. The acting, Bernstein music, photography and editing all contribute to the mood of the movie, precisely as Otto Preminger intended! The scene where Machine(Sinatra) undergoes withdrawal pains is still unbelievably hard-hitting today. In general, Sinatra's performance is quite surprising. His Oscar nomination was very well deserved. When you consider this performance in conjunction with Sinatra's role in MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE and From Here to Eternity, you begin to appreciate just how underrated OLD BLUE EYES was as an actor! 9*STARS*.....ENJOY/DISFRUTELA! Any comments, questions or observations, in English or Español, are most welcome!

Frank Sinatra did so many excellent things in the world of entertainment that it's hard to single one out as the best. If I had to name the best thing he ever did, though, it would be his performance as Frankie Machine, the heroin- addicted musician and poker dealer who is saved, just barely, by the love of a good woman (played by an exceptionally babelicious Kim Novak). The "cold-turkey" scenes between Sinatra and Novak are terrifying and heartbreaking. The movie is very nearly perfect, in fact, from Saul Bass's title graphics to the ground-breaking jazz score by Elmer Bernstein. It might not be the sort of thing anyone thinks of in regard to the 1950s, but it's a must-see nevertheless.

Sinatra is thoroughly convincing as the addict in this grim horror story of what life is like for someone who has lost his soul to drugs. This is film noir made even more noir by the drab sets and lighting. We go through the terrifying experience of a man who is trying to escape from the monster he has placed on his own back. Elmer Bernstein's score is a mixture of jazz and symphony that makes the addict's frightful journey even more believable to the audience. This film opened the topic of drug addiction the way LOST WEEKEND broached the subject of alcoholism. At least people could talk about these addictions a little more freely.

(Mild Spoilers) Frankie Machine had been dealt a bad hand in life. A card dealer at an illegal gambling den in his Chicago neighborhood he was busted when the joint was raided by the cops and given six months in jail. While behind bars Frankie was treated for his heroin addiction at the prisons hospital and learned how to play the drums as part of his rehabilitation program. Now out of prison and back in his old neighborhood Frankie is trying to put his life back together by getting a union card in the Musicians Union and then a job as a drummer in a band and put his old life behind him but instead it catches up with Frankie in no time at all in "The Man with the Golden Arm". Otto Preminger's ground-breaking 1955 film about heroin addiction with Frank Sinatra giving the performance of his life as the drug addicted card sharp Frankie Machine, the Man with the Golden Arm. Frankie tries to getaway from the life that he lead but has this monkey or, better yet, gorilla on his back that just won't let him. Soild performances by the entire supporting cast starting with Frankie's friend Sparrow, Arnold Stang. Sparrows attempt to get Frankie back on his feet by shoplifting a suit of clothes for him ends up putting him and Frankie in the slammer, and almost back to prison, until his former boss at the gambling den Schwiefka bailed him out. There's Frankie's psychically as well as emotionally crippled wife Zosch, Eleanor Parker, who sees that her hold on Frankie is slipping and is slowly driven to madness murder and suicide. There's Frankie's drug dealer Louie, with Darren McGavin in one of his first acting roles, who's hold on Frankie is only good as long as he stays addicted and Louie goes out of his way to make sure that he does. There's the owner of the gambling joint that Frankie works at as it's top card dealer Schwiefka, Robert Strauss, who like Louie goes out of his way to get Frankie back to work for him even though if he's arrested again Frankie's hopes for a new and better life will go down the drain. And then there's Frankie's next-door neighbor and friend Molly, Kim Novak,who goes to almost impossible lengths to get him over his addiction by locking him up in her apartment. It's there that he goes "Cold Turkey" and almost ends up dying trying to kick the habit in one of the most harrowing sequence ever put on film. A no holds barred movie with explosive performances by everyone involved makes "The Man with the Golden Arm" one of the great classics of realism in motion pictures coming out of the 1950's.

When some see "The Man With the Golden Arm" today, they may find the film a big quaint. After all, some aspects of addiction are sanitized--everyone looks so middle-class, clean and white plus you never even heard WHICH drug he's using--though it would appear to be heroin. But, if you put it in context, this was a tough as nails and cutting edge film in 1955. And, for many reasons, it's well worth seeing. The film begins with Frankie (Frank Sinatra) returning to his home turf after a stay in the hospital. Exactly why and the rest of his back story comes out in a natural way through the course of the film. Apparently, he's an addict and when into rehab. However, there are many forces that seem to be pushing him to return to the addicted lifestyle, as Frankie foolishly returns to his old haunts. Two hoods (Darren McGavin and Robert Strauss) want him to return to gambling--and getting him hooked on the drugs once again will ensure this. He also has a very needy wife who is in a wheelchair--and you eventually learn that he only married her out of guilt--guilt because his driving resulted in her being hurt in an accident. What's to happen to Frankie?! There are two main reasons the film works so well. The film is very well written and often surprises you with its violence and dark mood. Also, I really marveled at Sinatra's performance--probably the best of his career. Seeing him go through withdrawal was painful but exceptionally well done. Folks familiar with his lightweight fare such as "Guys and Dolls" or "Oceans 11" would be best to remember that he also appeared in some really gritty films like "Suddenly", "The Manchurian Candidate" and "The Detective"--and he really could act. Overall, one of the best films about addition of its age--comparable in quality to the exceptional "Days of Wine and Roses" and well worth seeing. The only negative was the soundtrack--which was too often too loud and too repetitive--making it very invasive.

The Man with the Golden Arm (the movie) is a decent career vehicle for Frank Sinatra, but fails abysmally as a good adaptation of a fantastic book. You always hear about how books are "changed" when they are made into films- things are cut out, dumbed down, etc. Well, you can't even say they "changed" anything with the movie- they just told a completely different story. The characters and setting are the same sure- but not the ambiguous characterization, the depth of the men and women of Polish Chicago in the book. As for the setting, it's become merely a play stage, complete with the unnecessary "supporting role" players walking all too busilly down the claustrophobic, interior exterior streets. The movie is a dumbed-down, completely different take on Frankie Machine and drug addiction. When this happens, Zosh, Frankie, Sparrow, all lose their psychological edge. Frankie's drumming, a modest dream in the book, becomes his full passion in the movie (probably because Sinatra is a musician). And drug addiction is treated as shlock, exploitavely. The acting is decent, especially the snakelike Louie, who is more menacing in the movie than the book. But it's just a shame this kind of movie can be heralded as a classic alongside the book it is "based upon," the real story of Frankie Machine. The movie just goes to show Hollywood can' get anything right without dumbing it down and adding a happy ending. In this case, they just changed it completely, cheapening an important and realistic story into Hollywood fluff. I'm sure as hell biased because I read the book first, so I can't really treat the movie honestly by knowing how good the book is. I actually thought about turning the movie off (and I never do that), just so I wouldn't get its silly plot confused with the beauty of the book. But this is an overrated film, and while it's not so bad, the book should come first, as it was the first. And it should have remained the only story of Division Street and Frankie Machine.