I was surprised to learn that this was the third film version of James M. Cain's 1934 novel "The Postman Always Rings Twice", earlier versions having been made in France in 1939 and (remarkably) in Fascist Italy in 1943. The American version was eventually made by MGM after three other studios (RKO, Warner Brothers and Columbia) had considered filming the novel but had abandoned the idea because they feared possible objections from the Production Code Authority. Neither the French version "Le Dernier Tournant" (The Last Turning) nor the Italian one "Ossessione" (Obsession) actually used Cain's enigmatic title, which is never explained in the novel itself. (No postman appears in it). This film does attempt an explanation, but it is not very convincing and too complicated to set out here.

The plot has something in common with "Double Indemnity", another film noir from the mid-forties based on a Cain story. (It was the success of that film which finally persuaded MGM to go ahead). Both films feature seductive but evil women who conspire with their lovers to murder their husbands. Here the lethal seductress is Cora Smith, the beautiful young wife of the owner of a diner just outside Los Angeles. Her lover is Frank Chambers, a drifter who stops to eat at the diner and ends up working there. At first sight Cora's marriage does not seem particularly unhappy; her husband, Nick, is much older than her and physically unattractive, but he is a kindly man who clearly loves her. He does, admittedly, have a drink problem, but he is an amiable drunk, not an aggressive one.

Cora, however, feels trapped in a marriage to a man she does not love, and soon after Frank starts working at the diner they begin an affair. Frank's original suggestion is that the two should run away together, but she does not want to exchange a life of comparative affluence for one of poverty. Nick may not be a particularly rich man, but neither is he a poor one like Frank, and Cora does not want to become a "tramp". (She is using the word in its British sense of "hobo", not its more common American one of "sexually immoral woman"- she already is that). They decide that Nick should die so that Cora can inherit his money. The film tells the story of his murder and its aftermath.

Like some of her contemporaries, Lana Turner was not so much a Great Actress as a Great Star, although she was capable of giving decent performances as in the later "Imitation of Life". Here as Cora she looks supremely seductive, but this is not really a great performance. To be fair to her, a great performance is not really required as Cora is written as a rather one-dimensional character, a sexy villainess and not a lot else.

According to one story, Turner remarked "Couldn't they at least hire someone attractive?" upon learning that John Garfield was to be her co-star. According to another story, her initial reaction did not prevent the two from having a brief affair during filming, but I think that in one respect she was probably right. Garfield never really invests Frank with the sexual magnetism which would be needed to explain why Cora, a woman so attractive that she could have virtually any man she wanted, should have given herself to a penniless drifter. The best acting comes from Cecil Kellaway, who makes the hapless Nick an amiable slob who does nothing to deserve his ruthless treatment at the hands of Cora and Frank, and from Hume Cronyn as the shyster lawyer Arthur Keats.

Despite its thematic similarities to "Double Indemnity", one of the all-time great noirs, I have never regarded "The Postman Always Rings Twice" as being in anything like the same class. The first half, dealing with the build-up to Nick's murder, is not too bad, but in the second half, dealing with the trial of Frank and Cora, it starts to descend into absurdity.

A lawyer who was a witness (indeed, the only witness apart from the perpetrators) to a crime is permitted to act both as investigating detective and attorney for the prosecution. The same lawyer acts for both defendants, even though each is trying to blame the other for the crime, and tricks one of his own clients into signing a confession. The prosecuting attorney in a capital murder trial agrees to accept a plea of guilty to manslaughter on the basis of virtually no argument at all- it is not even explained whether this is voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. The judge agrees to accept that plea and then allows the defendant to go free on probation, without having to spend a single day in prison. You don't need to be a lawyer to realise that, legally, the whole thing makes very little sense, although the ending is admittedly an ingenious piece of plotting.

During their heyday in the forties and fifties films noirs were often regarded as little more than money-making potboilers; "The Postman Always Rings Twice" was a big box-office success. They were not always looked on with favour by the more high-minded critics and, generally speaking, they were not the sort of films which won Oscars. Their star began to rise when they were taken up by the French New Wave directors of the sixties, which explains why a predominantly American genre should have a French name, and today they are often regarded as masterpieces of the cinema. There are some, such as "Double Indemnity", which do indeed deserve such a description, but not every noir was a great film, and the overrated "The Postman Always Rings Twice" has always struck me as one of the lesser ones. 5/10

Those movie audiences who think that explicit sexual scenes shown in movies these days make a film sexy, should take a look at this 1946 steamy MGM picture. "The Postman Always Ring Twice" made an impact on the way movies looked at the time, when the censure of the Hays Code dominated what could be shown on the screen for general consumption.

James M. Cain's novel of the same title was adapted by Harry Ruskin and Niven Busch, two writers that clearly caught all the nuances of the book. Ty Garnett direction made this film a surprise and a star out of the gorgeous Lana Turner, who was at the height of her beauty when the movie was shot. The great camera work of Sidney Wagner made this movie a classic for its sensual look it focused on its female star.

Nick, the older owner of the roadside diner, has married Cora, a woman much too young for him. Cora, who clearly has found her meal ticket, is happy in the way her life has changed. When Frank Chambers arrive at the diner, Cora realizes the mistake she made in marrying Nick; Frank stands in sharp contrast with Nick. Cora's sexual needs awaken when Frank pays attention to her. As lovers, we realize they are doomed.

Because both Cora and Frank are amateurs, they botch the well laid plans they have for getting rid of Nick. Everything conspires against them because it's too clear what they have done. They will not be able to get away with the crime, or a life together because unknown to them everyone had seen through them from the beginning.

Lana Turner, whose whole wardrobe is white, made a great Cora. She is heartless, but she is all sexual whenever she is around Frank. This was perhaps was one of the best things Ms. Turner did in the movies. John Garfield, who is so sure of himself, at the start, loses all his will because Cora smolders him and he doesn't think rationally. Cecil Kellaway is good as the older Nick. Leon Ames, Hume Cronyn are seen in small roles.

"The Postman Always Ring Twice" is a classic of this genre thanks to Ty Garnett's direction and a brilliant appearance by an inspired Lana Turner.

This is one of those films that I just don't see what others see. While I would agree it's a decent film with some great moments, it also is very uneven and I can think of many Noir films I like a lot more. Now before I go on there are a couple important things to mention. First, Noir is perhaps my favorite type of film and I have a genuine love for the genre--and having seen so many Film Noir movies I think I have a rather informed opinion. Second, I just saw this film for the second time because I thought perhaps my original assessment for the film was unduly harsh. While I liked it a little more the second time, my opinion didn't change dramatically.

As far as why I didn't love the film, I think much of the problem is that casting Cecil Kellaway as the husband of Lana Turner goes WAY beyond just suspending your disbelief to enjoy the film. He was old, drank too much and wasn't particularly rich or interesting. So, WHY would a lady that looks like Lana Turner marry him in the first place?! And, if she did, of course she'd want to get out of the marriage!! Additionally, the first half of the movie was much weaker than the second. The dialog was pretty sappy and unbelievable between Turner and Garfield until after Kellway returned from the hospital. It just didn't ring true and didn't sound like Noir--it needed to be punched up somehow.

For me, the movie improved a lot when the couple were brought to trial for the murder of Kellaway, as Hume Cronin stole the show as the cynical and manipulative defense attorney. He WAS a great Film Noir attorney! And, following his appearance the film just seemed to get a lot smarter. Garfield and Turner's dialog also improved greatly. While I could not believe they were in love (almost instantly) in the first half of the film, their hatred and contempt was a wonderful antidote to their earlier sappy personalities. And, when they began turning on each other it really took off as a film.

While not a bad film at all, you could certainly do a lot better with a film such as THE KILLERS, DOA or DOUBLE INDEMNITY. Plus, a somewhat similar but underrated film that came out a year later (THEY DON'T BELIEVE ME),is definitely a better take on the adultery and spousal murder theme.

UPDATE: I recently saw a film similar to "The Postman Always Rings Twice" but it handled a very similar story better. In "The Adultress", you have a story that works better because the husband is far less likable and younger--and you could understand ANY woman hating this vapid existence. Making the viewers more sympathetic towards the wife really helped the story.