Touch of Evil: An In-Depth Review of Orson Welles’s Noir Classic

Touch of Evil: A Deep Dive into Welles's Borderline Masterpiece

Is Touch of Evil good? It’s essential. This film is a cinematic landmark. It’s a film noir masterpiece. It continues to thrill audiences long after its release.

A Film Ahead of Its Time

When Touch of Evil premiered in 1958, there were no parades in America. In fact, it was the opposite. The film, now a classic, was dumped onto the bottom half of a double feature. It tanked at the box office. Welles lost his opportunities in Hollywood. A rough break indeed.

Across the Atlantic, Europe recognized its brilliance. At the 1958 Brussels World Fair, notable figures like Godard and Truffaut declared Touch of Evil the best film. While America was confused, Europe saw the gold. It’s a classic case; often, art gets appreciated more abroad than at home.

Box Office Blues, European Applause

So, did Touch of Evil succeed? Financially, it flopped in America. Universal Pictures ignored it as a failure. Its box office failure led to Welles's Hollywood exile. This shows acclaim doesn’t always mean financial success, especially when pushing boundaries.

Yet, Touch of Evil didn’t disappear. It found its audience, mostly in Europe. Word of mouth and critical support helped it flourish. This shows great cinema endures; it may need time and the right audience to be recognized.

Is it Worth Your Time? Absolutely.

The big question: is Touch of Evil worth watching today? Absolutely yes. Critics have praised it over time; it has become almost canonical. It embodies classic film noir. Touch of Evil isn’t just a film; it’s an experience.

If you need more reasons, Kino Lorber released a stunning UHD version. It looks and sounds fantastic now. One reviewer noted, “Citizen Kane is weighty; Touch of Evil is more fun.” High praise, indeed, especially when comparing it with the greatest film ever made.

Think of Touch of Evil as a toybox—rich and indulgent. It’s immensely pleasurable. You can enjoy every scene, every line, every shadowy frame. If you want a film both intellectually stimulating and wildly entertaining, Touch of Evil awaits.

Plot Unraveled: Borderlines and Bomb Blasts

The story behind Touch of Evil? It kicks off with a bang, a car bomb on the border. This explosive act throws together two opposing forces: Miguel Vargas and Hank Quinlan.

Vargas and Quinlan: An Unlikely Duo

Miguel Vargas, played by Charlton Heston, is a Mexican drug enforcement agent. He’s principled and suddenly investigating a crime that crosses borders. Hank Quinlan, played by Orson Welles, is the corrupt American police captain. His methods are unconventional. "Shady" won’t do; he's morally bankrupt.

Vargas and Quinlan initially work together on this case. But then things go wrong fast. Vargas's sense of justice uncovers discrepancies in Quinlan's investigation. He suspects Quinlan and his partner Menzies (played by Joseph Calleia) have planted evidence. Framing an innocent man? Just another day for Captain Quinlan.

A Bride in Jeopardy

Vargas's doubts become personal as Quinlan reacts poorly to his investigation. His new bride, Susie (played by Janet Leigh), suddenly faces danger. Their honeymoon turns into a horror show.

Susie becomes a pawn in this dangerous game. She’s targeted, caught in the crossfire. Vargas realizes he is fighting not just for justice; he’s fighting to protect his wife.

Susie's Ordeal: Kidnapping and Conspiracy

What happens to Susie? Things get ugly fast. She's kidnapped by a group called the Grandes. Mike rushes back to Mexico to save her. He finds her at a hotel in Rancho Grande, where she is drugged and vulnerable thanks to Uncle Joe Grande.

In typical noir fashion, Uncle Joe doesn't make it out alive. Quinlan strangles him to death. However, Susie gets arrested—not for kidnapping but for drug possession and murder. It's a frame job because of Quinlan’s tangled corruption.

The plot of Touch of Evil isn’t simple; it’s a maze of moral ambiguity, with blurred lines between right and wrong. The innocent often suffer the most here. Buckle up; it’s a wild ride.

Characters in the Shadows: Heroes, Villains, and Moral Grays

Touch of Evil has a cast as morally ambiguous as the border town itself. Here are the key players in this drama.

Mike Vargas: The Reluctant Hero

First, Mike Vargas plays the protagonist role by Charlton Heston. He’s the closest thing to a hero in this dark world but isn’t typical. Vargas is complex; he has a strong moral compass but faces situations that test his values.

As a narcotics officer, Vargas shows integrity and professionalism. He investigates the bombing but soon finds himself in deeper corruption. His quest for justice turns into a personal fight against Quinlan’s darkness. Heston gives Vargas a mix of determination and vulnerability.

Hank Quinlan: The Corrupt Antagonist

Now let’s discuss Hank Quinlan, the embodiment of “evil” in Touch of Evil. Orson Welles plays him with memorable menace. Quinlan is the antagonist and possibly one of cinema's greatest villains.

He operates on his twisted code and plants evidence without remorse. Frame suspects and bend laws to achieve results, even if it damages due process and human rights principles. Welles delivers an outstanding performance portraying moral decay.

Who's the Real Bad Guy? No Contest.

If there’s any doubt about who the "bad guy" in Touch of Evil, let’s clear it up: it’s Hank Quinlan. He drives corruption forward and ignites moral decline. While the film explores various shades of gray, Quinlan represents pure darkness.

entrenched in the shadows. He murders, frames, and manipulates for a twisted sense of justice. Hank Quinlan is the villain of this piece.

The Killer Revealed: Quinlan's Descent

Still asking "Who is the killer in Touch of Evil?". The answer is Hank Quinlan. He kills in many ways (like strangling Uncle Joe). Beyond that, he kills justice, innocence, and his soul. His actions are more than crime; they reveal a deeper moral sickness, a dark descent.

Charlton Heston as Vargas: A Casting Controversy?

Who plays Vargas, the Mexican drug enforcement agent? Charlton Heston. This casting has raised eyebrows. Heston is famously Caucasian, playing a Mexican character. Today, this would spark major controversy, and rightly so.

In 1958 Hollywood, such casting was more common. It reminds of the industry's representation issues. But setting that aside, Heston's performance is compelling. He brings intensity to Vargas that fits the narrative, despite the problematic casting choice.

Rudy Linnekar: The Spark of the Story

Who is murdered at the start of Touch of Evil? Rudy Linnekar, a local construction magnate. Linnekar and his female companion die in a car bomb explosion that ignites the plot. Their deaths are not random; they set off investigations, corruption, and moral compromises.

Though dead early on, Linnekar is crucial. His murder brings Vargas and Quinlan together. The mystery of his death reveals the town's darkness. While we don't get to know him, Rudy Linnekar’s death drives the drama forward.

Femme Fatale? Not in This Noir.

Is there a femme fatale in Touch of Evil? Interestingly, no. Unlike many film noirs, this film lacks a traditional femme fatale. The two main women, Susie (Janet Leigh) and Tanya (Marlene Dietrich), don’t fit that mold.

Susie is primarily a victim. Kidnapped and framed, she does not seduce men to their doom. Tanya, Dietrich's fortune teller, acts as an observer and commentator. Wise but not manipulative, the film subverts the femme fatale trope. It focuses on male corruption and moral decay instead.

Versions of Evil: The Film's Different Cuts

Touch of Evil holds a fascinating history in its reception and various cuts. The film exists in multiple versions, each offering a different perspective on Welles's vision. Navigating these can feel like exploring alternate dimensions.

The Reconstructed Cut: Welles's True Vision?

Which version of Touch of Evil is the best? Many cinephiles favor the "reconstructed" version. Forty years later, editor Walter Murch and producer Rick Schmidlin reassembled it based on Welles's detailed 58-page memo.

This work resulted in a version considered closest to Welles's original intent. It's cinematic archaeology, piecing together Welles's vision after decades. While some prefer the theatrical cut, the reconstructed version is seen as more authentic.

Theatrical, Preview, Reconstructed: A Trio of Touch of Evil

What are the different versions of Touch of Evil? There are three main cuts: Theatrical, Preview, and Reconstructed. The Theatrical Cut released in 1958 often faced studio interference against Welles's wishes. The Preview Cut offers slight variations, while the Reconstructed Version aligns with Welles's memo.

The existence of these versions reveals studio control over filmmaking at that time. Welles often fought for his artistic vision against studio pressures. The reconstructed version shows a desire to see Welles's true masterpiece realized.

Opening Shot Showdown: Music and Credits

What's the difference between theatrical and reconstructed editions? A notable aspect is the iconic opening tracking shot. The theatrical version features credits and Henry Mancini’s music over this famous sequence.

In the reconstructed version, the opening shot appears with only sound effects. This change is significant. Welles wanted that opening to deliver pure cinematic experience through visual storytelling, not diluted by music or credits.

Themes of Evil: Morality on the Borderline

Touch of Evil offers more than crime thriller elements; it delves into morality issues, justice, and evil itself. Beneath surface-level corruption lies profound exploration of ethical dilemmas and human conditions.

Ethics in the Arena: Bullfighting and Morality

What is the film's theme? One interpretation views it through bullfighting lenses. Yes! The film uses three stages of bullfighting — tercio de varas, tercio de banderillas, tercio de muerte — to explore responsibility. It's a battleground of ethics.

Deontological ethics prioritize duty; consequential ethics emphasize results. Hank Quinlan represents flawed consequentialism, claiming his corrupt methods clean the town. Vargas embodies deontological principles, believing in due process regardless of outcomes. This battle unfolds in the border town's dusty arena.

This thematic depth elevates Touch of Evil. It prompts meditation on justice complexities and corruption's nature. The film makes viewers ponder shades of gray in a world often demanding black and white.

Filming Locations: Venice, California, as a Border Town Mirage

Where was Touch of Evil filmed? Surprisingly not in Mexico. Orson Welles aimed to capture a Mexican border town’s atmosphere. He thought of Tijuana or Juarez but faced objections from Mexican authorities concerned about sleaze portrayed in the script.

Venice, California: Standing in for Tijuana

Aldous Huxley recommended Venice, California as an alternative location. Venice Beach transformed into an unlikely stand-in for a seedy Mexican border town. Welles's crew recreated parts of Venice to depict border town decay.

Filming occurred mostly at night to enhance noir atmosphere and obscure recognizable landmarks. This creates a mix of Hollywood artifice and gritty realism. Venice became an effective mirage for the desired setting.

A stage for Welles's vision. The film shows how cinematic magic can change unexpected locations. Welles created a convincing border town atmosphere in Southern California.

Related Tangents: Scary Movies and Femme Fatales

Let's explore related cinematic themes from Touch of Evil.

Hanson: Weird Fingers and Scary Movie Spoofs

Hanson is from Scary Movie. He is a supporting character in the franchise. Played by Chris Elliot, Hanson has distinctive fingers. These fingers are used for comedic effect in the series. While he differs from the noir elements of Touch of Evil, he offers a fun tangent.

DiCaprio and Horror? Shutter Island Calling

Leonardo DiCaprio starred in Shutter Island. Martin Scorsese directed this psychological thriller. DiCaprio plays a U.S. Marshal on a remote island. He investigates a psychiatric facility. There, he uncovers dark secrets. The film is intense and serious, unlike the Scary Movie parodies. DiCaprio's role here adds depth to his filmography.

Idle Hands: When Your Hand Has a Mind of Its Own

Idle Hands tells the story of a killer hand. The horror-comedy features a slacker with a possessed hand. His hand has murderous intent. Chaos arises as he tries to regain control. This cult classic takes a humorous angle on possession, compared to the weighty Shutter Island.

Evil Dead: Gore, Bans, and Chainsaws

The original Evil Dead (1981) was banned in some places. This was due to its violence and graphic content. It gained a cult following for its extreme gore. Many consider Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn as the goriest entry. It ramps up comedic horror and gore, making it unforgettable for fans.

Types of Evil: Moral, Natural, Instrumental, and Beyond

Evil comes in many forms. Moral evil arises from human choices—murder, theft, and lies. Natural evil includes earthquakes and diseases, which lie outside control. Instrumental evil does harm as a means to an end, such as pollution for profit.

You have physical evil (pain), metaphysical evil (imperfection), and structural evil (systemic injustices). Some traditions see "evil" as part of a cosmic balance. Understanding these types gives context to Touch of Evil. Quinlan's actions fit moral and perhaps instrumental evil.

Dark Femme Fatale: Beyond Seduction

A dark femme fatale is a timeless figure. She exceeds mere seduction; she is dangerous and self-serving. Unlike traditional fatales, she operates with a calculating mind. Self-preservation drives her agenda. Dark femme fatales cannot hesitate to destroy anyone who obstructs their path. Touch of Evil lacks a classic femme fatale, choosing instead to showcase male corruption.

Femme Fatale Symbolism: Danger and Duality

The femme fatale is a vital symbol. She represents the threat of female sexuality to male dominance. This figure illustrates beauty alongside danger, reflecting human complexity. Femme fatales challenge gender roles and societal norms. From ancient myths to modern films, she evolves with cultural changes.

Ultimate Femme Fatale: Phyllis Dietrichson

The ultimate femme fatale is Phyllis Dietrichson from Double Indemnity. Played by Barbara Stanwyck, she is cold and ruthless. She manipulates an insurance salesman into murder for profit. Dietrichson is iconic in film noir, capturing seductive danger and moral void.

Scariest Movie Killers: Beyond the Human Monster

Who tops the list of scariest movie killers? The answer varies, but several names frequently appear. Hannibal Lecter stands out for his chilling intellect. Norman Bates from Psycho embodies terror with his duality. Classic figures like Count Dracula remain iconic, alongside modern killers like Michael Myers. Each taps into primal fears of the unknown and moral decay.

Orson Welles and Citizen Kane: Shadows of Genius

No talk about Welles can skip Citizen Kane. This was his magnum opus, changing film history. Its influence extends into Touch of Evil, linking Welles's career and themes.

Welles at 25: A Prodigy Unleashed

Orson Welles was only 25 when he made Citizen Kane. At an age when many are unsure of their paths, Welles directed a groundbreaking film. Citizen Kane revolutionized cinema, introducing new techniques.

Before this film, Welles was known in theater and radio. His memorable "War of the Worlds" broadcast in 1938 made listeners fear Martians. Citizen Kane was his big leap into film.

Citizen Kane Controversy: Hearst's Wrath and Authorship Debates

Why was Citizen Kane controversial? It portrayed William Randolph Hearst, upsetting him deeply. Charles Foster Kane mirrors Hearst closely. The media mogul attempted to suppress the movie, leveraging his media empire.

The film sparked discussions about screenplay credit too. Welles as co-writer faced scrutiny from Herman J. Mankiewicz, who felt underappreciated. Film critic Pauline Kael reignited this debate in 1971 with "Raising Kane." The controversies shaped film history and impacted Welles's career.

Hearst's Hatred: Fear of Mortality?

Why did William Randolph Hearst despise the movie? It may relate to death's portrayal. Kane's dying word "Rosebud" might have struck a nerve with Hearst, highlighting vulnerabilities.

Welles had a deep fear of death. He avoided discussions on the topic. The film explored mortality and lost innocence. This might have hit a nerve. It fueled Hearst's drive to bury Citizen Kane.

Welles's Farewell: A Heart Attack at the Typewriter

Orson Welles passed away from a heart attack. He died in 1985. He was found at his typewriter, still writing early in the morning. He worked on a script. Even in death, he crafted projects and stories. This script was for a TV show called "Orson Welles Solo." His dedication to filmmaking shines through. Welles left a legacy of cinematic innovation. His work continues to inspire audiences today.

Ending of Evil: Justice, Betrayal, and a Dying Breath

The finale of Touch of Evil shows suspense and moral reckoning. It leads to a dark confrontation. The goal? Expose corruption and seek justice.

Quinlan's Downfall: Betrayal and a Fatal Shot

At the end of Touch of Evil, tension peaks. Vargas uses a hidden device to catch Quinlan corrupt. Quinlan, in paranoia, hears Vargas's recorder. He realizes Menzies, his partner, betrays him. Their partnership ends in gunfire.

In anger, Quinlan shoots Menzies fatally. Before Vargas can act, Menzies shoots Quinlan in a conflicted moment. Quinlan falls, his reign ends violently. It's chaotic and morally ambiguous. This fits Welles's world perfectly.

Susie's Freedom, Vargas's Weary Victory

After the shootout, Susie is free. Her nightmare ends. She reunites with Vargas. Yet, this is not a traditional happy ending. They survive, but are deeply scarred. Their experiences in the border town haunt them.

Vargas achieved a weary victory. He exposed Quinlan and cleared Susie. Yet, this victory tastes bitter. The film reflects moral ambiguity and darkness. Justice is served, but it's complex. Touch of Evil's ending reveals a world where evil hides in unexpected places.

Heston as a Mexican? Casting Choices Revisited

What movie had Charlton Heston playing a Mexican? That film is Touch of Evil. Heston's role as cop Mike Vargas sparked controversy. It showed Hollywood's problematic casting history. Heston’s performance is strong, yet the casting choice highlights misrepresentation.

Interestingly, Heston helped bring Welles back for Touch of Evil. Despite casting concerns, the film is important for Welles's direction and Heston's portrayal. His character embodies principles, albeit controversially.