The Big Sleep

1946

1h 54m

IMDb RATING

7.6/10

1.1K

YOUR RATING

Rate

POPULARITY

Play trailer

4 Videos

93 Images

Mystery

Crime

Thriller

Private Investigator Philip Marlowe is hired by wealthy General Sternwood regarding a matter involving his youngest daughter Carmen. Before the complex case is over, Marlowe sees murder, blackmail, deception, and what might be love.

Directors

Howard Hawks

Writers

Leigh Brackett(screenplay by)

William Faulkner(screenplay by)

Jules Furthman(screenplay by)

Stars

Humphrey Bogart

Lauren Bacall

John Ridgely

See production, box office & company info

Videos4

Photos93

Top cast

Humphrey Bogart

Philip Marlowe

Lauren Bacall

Vivian Sternwood Rutledge

Eddie Mars

Carmen Sternwood

Joe Brody

General Sternwood

Chief Inspector Bernie Ohls

Sonia Darrin

Agnes Lowzier (uncredited)

Elisha Cook Jr.

Harry Jones

Bob Steele

Lash Canino

Dorothy Malone

Acme Bookstore Proprietress

Peggy Knudsen

Mona Mars

Charles D. Brown

Norris the Butler

Trevor Bardette

Art Huck (uncredited)

Joy Barlow

Taxi Driver (uncredited)

Max Barwyn

Max - Head Waiter (uncredited)

Deannie Best

Waitress (uncredited)

Tanis Chandler

Waitress (uncredited)

Directors

Howard Hawks

Writers

Leigh Brackett(screenplay by)

William Faulkner(screenplay by)

Jules Furthman(screenplay by)

All cast & crew

Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

User reviews4

Review

Featured review

6/10

**A film that would be truly memorable if the script wasn't so poorly written.** In general, I really like noir films, it's a style that I like. However, despite the great reputation, I didn't particularly like this film. It's good, and from a style point of view, it gives us everything we like to see in a noir. However, the film fails too much when it comes to the script and the story it intends to tell us. This is not a mistake that I am willing to forgive lightly, especially if we are talking about a production at the highest level and with professionals of the highest caliber, as is the case. In fact, the film is a sight for sore eyes. The black-and-white cinematography is of the utmost elegance, and the lighting was magnificently crafted. The sharpness is excellent, and the filming work gives us some truly well-shot and well-framed scenes. It's very difficult to do better and being more demanding would be unfair, I think. We cannot leave aside the orchestral soundtrack, accompanying each scene with dignity and notably increasing the dramatic charge of some moments. The sets are very well-designed, the costumes are excellent (the highlight, I would say, is Bogart's costume, corresponding to the classic image of the detective in a Fedora hat and trench coat), the cars couldn't be more stylish (I'm suspicious because I'm a huge fan of classic cars from this period) and the props are excellent. However, it is in the performance of the cast that the film shows all its quality: in a cast headed by Humphrey Bogart, there is not a single actor that we feel is too much or has been underutilized. Everyone had their time to shine and show talent, a sign that the director, Howard Hawks, managed the talents he had at his disposal very well. Bogart, as almost always happens, does not disappoint us: he is comfortable with these types of characters and knows well how to interpret them, giving the character a balanced dose of cynical humor, restrained heroism and well-intentioned brutality. Some of the film's most quotable and memorable lines are his. Another great actress we can see here is Martha Vickers. Her role is brief and much of it was cut in post-production, but the actress is hypnotic and sensual like a Lolita. Lauren Bacall, who was Bogart's lover at the time and would later become his wife, is also a strong and impactful presence, but I think I've seen her much better in other works. What's missing here is an equally strong and charismatic villain. Where the film fumbled was really in the script, which presents us with a confusing and disjointed story involving the two spoiled daughters of a very rich retired general. The film treats the story with indecent carelessness, and I had to make a huge effort to understand what was going on. I confess that perhaps it would have been better not to have done it, because it really is a weak and poorly developed story, unacceptable in a work of such quality. I don't know the original material on which the film was based, I just know that it gave rise to other films and adaptations. Be that as it may, I simply cannot accept it and “suck it up”! This simply cannot happen. But anyway, things are what they are, and it's sad to see a film with so much quality have such an unforgivable flaw.

FilipeManuelNeto08 Feb, 2024