That was an excellent one.

Really Surprised!

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

This is a road movie. We travel with two men through New York's nightlife in one night (hence the title of the film). The stops are Broadway performers, recording studios, burlesque dancers, brothels, iconic places such as Time Square, the UN building, Rockefeller Center, etc. and along the way we breathe the atmosphere, a jazz trumpet, the neon lights, hot dogs, shadows and dark alleys. The pretext for this ride (in this case the "plot": an investigation of a UN delegate disappearance and some dilemmas of yellow journalism) is just a pretext, as in any good journey. Recommended for road movie fans, New Wave connoisseurs, New Yorkers, jazz lovers, nightlife owls and noir-ish buffs.

Two Men in Manhattan pushes the envelope on everything but quality. Sure, it has lesbians, bare breasts and loads of sex references, but does it help? Say hello of Jean-Pierre Melville's cheap and signature-less alter-ego.The master of French crime goes to what might be the noir capital of the world. We see New Yorks streets at night, and our entertainers throw in a heave jazz score as well - the making of a masterpiece? I wish.From the moment the first credit popped on screen I got the feeling that something was wrong. I shrugged it off, but just as soon as I was ready to embrace yet another great Melville film we are thrown into a whirlpool of disfigured English. Apparently it's only purpose is to show as that we are at the UN. The dialog was clearly not of any importance, and the sound department sure made that clear.I'm sure this introduction isn't as long as it felt like, but that's hardly no excuse. To make things worse we get to spend our first few scenes with the most unimaginative and unimportant small talk. For the next 30 minutes or so I wasn't even sure if there was a plot. Sure, they are looking for a guy but beyond that it felt so empty and devoid of any real direction.And did you expect great visuals? This whole deal feels like a cheap 40's docudrama after it had a stroke. One possibility is that Melville was testing out some new wave aesthetics, another is that he got drunk and let his assistant do the film for him.Not to say it's entirely bad. The cinematography is more or less there, despite the fact that the compositions couldn't be blander. Had it been some unknown director who was behind this I'd just brush it off as the mediocrity it is - but despite the fact that it isn't really bad it almost feels like a stab in the back from Melville. He had everything he needed, but decided to go to autopilot. All I can say is that there's most certainly a reason why this is his least known.

French director Jean-Pierre Melville is known for directing several classic films such as Bob le flambeur (1956) and Le samouraï (1967), but he also did some acting over the course of his career. However, his only starring role was in his own 1959 crime film Two Men in Manhattan, where he plays a journalist named Moreau who is assigned to find out why a French diplomat named Fèvre-Berthier was absent from a United Nations council meeting. With his photographer friend Delmas (Pierre Grasset), Moreau suspects a female lover might be involved and follows clues from woman to woman in the night of New York City, a place that never sleeps. There also seems to be a car following Moreau and Delmas...Said to be a combination of American film noir and the budding French New Wave movement, Two Men in Manhattan very neatly utilizes the good sides of both styles. The urban street views and skyscrapers look excellent in the glow of the bright ad signs on store marquees and the dark, stark lighting set up for interior scenes is a joy to the eye too. The laid-back jazz soundtrack is highly enjoyable, creating a mood softer than in hard boiled detective noirs, even though the seedy locations would fit in such flicks seamlessly as well.A lot of the film's charm lies on the shoulders of the two protagonists, who suit their roles splendidly. Melville's sad-looking appearance matches his character's melancholic but righteous attitude perfectly, while Grasset makes a great pairing for him as the greedy and amoral Delmas, prone to drinking and sleeping around. Ultimately their opposing approaches to the ethics of journalism are what create one of the main themes of the film; namely, examining the responsibility of the press when publishing stories of delicate nature. Besides the lead duo, the supporting actors do a good job too, from a suicidal stage actress Judith Nelson (Ginger Hall) to a jaded cabaret dancer Bessie Reed (Michèlle Bailly) and a jazz singer Virginia Graham (Glenda Leigh) who we get to see recording a haunting song in a studio.All in all, when a film successfully combines a totally smooth and cool atmosphere with suspense and humour like Two Men in Manhattan does, it just cannot be anything but highly enjoyable. The movie is simply thoroughly entertaining, but since the technical elements are also very skilfully created, there is no reason to skip this one if you're even remotely interested in film noir and French cinema.

The main character in this film is Manhattan, as imagined and idolized by Melville. This impression is strengthened by the mostly unknown cast and the director himself playing the male lead. The rudimentary plot is mostly an excuse for Melville to feast on his favorite scenes and images: shiny cars driving through nocturnal city streets, neon signs and all-night bars, sultry women and smoky jazz music. The emotional tension of the film comes from the familiar Melville treatment of men's code of honor and loyalty tested by their weakness, here mostly the temptation of women, money and whiskey. Recommended for fans of Melville and stylish noir films.