In Search of the Third Man (2000)

I said I would comment on my recent reading, so there!

If you’re looking for an extensive account of the production of the 20th Century’s greatest British film, Charles Drazin’s effort is well worth it. In Search of The Third Man (2000) can’t be faulted in terms of research and detail.

However… I think I saw question marks over the bits where Drazin got into more subjective areas—for instance, the pointless comparisons of director Carol Reed with Hitchcock, providing a rather meaningless and impertinent excuse to be critical of Hitch (for repeating himself endlessly and never taking chances, etc.). It’s true that Hitch had formulae, just as it’s true that Reed really didn’t… he didn’t make any two films alike, nor did he have a particular way of doing things that attracts special viewer recognition… but I don’t believe this can be made into a virtue any more convincingly than it could be seen as a failing. Hitch catches some heat for no good reason.

As does Orson Welles. Taking no chances is a bad thing in this book, but being a maverick with a healthy, independent ego is also apparently a bad thing! Welles is surely the anti-Hitch, though they both have in common the tragic flaw of not being Carol Reed. Welles acolytes have occasionally tried to suggest that OW practically directed and wrote The Third Man himself, but this is a senseless claim. The highly relevant fact that Welles personally made no such claim is dismissed by Drazin as false modesty! I mean, what was Orson to say to make the author happy? Highly puzzling.

Like it or not, The Third Man would be a massively lesser picture without Orson’s presence. Try to imagine someone else (Noel Coward and Cary Grant were both considered) in the role of Harry Lime. Well, uh… nah. It’s probably quite annoying to some people that what is essentially a cameo role somehow manages to elevate the film to a much higher plateau than it would otherwise have reached.

I wouldn’t take anything from Reed. The direction is masterful. Graham Greene’s script is wonderful. The cast is superb. Everything’s just about perfect. But without Orson Welles, it seems to me it would just be merely great, rather than the incredible piece of work it is. Though I admit to not being able to explain why… (Perhaps I need to use the word ‘ineffable’ and leave it there.)

In any case, Drazin’s book is a terrific read, aside from those niggling factors. If you love the film, get it. If you don’t love the film, buy the DVD and discover why you should.

See also: My review of The Third Man (1949).