Watching Shockproof (review coming soon-ish) I was struck by how a few noir just aren’t allowed to stay true to their narrative and intent, instead hijacked by presumably nervous studio execs and saddled with audience-friendly happy endings. In the case of Shockproof, I’ll get into it in more detail within the review, but suffice to say for about 75 minutes its a great noir about a parole officer gone bad because of his love for a beautiful woman who killed someone, and then in its last five minutes, maybe less, it becomes a different film entirely with a stupid ending that practically ruins the film. I mean, literally I was loving it, the cast, the story and the locations (they even filmed at the Bradbury Building!) and then boom, Game Over.
Its an ending that comes out of nowhere and I can’t see how anyone ‘buys’ it. A pretty much identical thing happens in The Brothers Rico, a edgy noir directed by Phil Karson (The Killers, The Dark Mirror) about an ex-Mafia book keeper who thinks going straight means he has left the mob behind. Its a very dark thriller that is totally undone by a happy ending so blatantly tacked on it almost undermines everything that has occurred before (which reminds me, I really need to rewatch that film and post a review).
One of the most beautiful and intoxicating things about film noir, about great film noir, are the grim, ‘downer’ endings that sometimes frustrate and sometimes disturb but yet always feel fitting and right, like the ending of Criss Cross, which continues to haunt and disturb me, months after having seen it. Real-life is less like traditional Hollywood films and more like film noir; things don’t always go right, things sometimes get out of control and when push comes to shove, we are all far less in control of our fates than we like to think we are. Very often things go bad, very bad: there is a Truth in that. Noir films often get away with grim endings because they are about bad guys or good guys gone bad or good guys who do the wrong thing for the wrong woman- and the Production Code always stated that films should show that crime doesn’t pay, so hey, they get away with grim endings that ordinary flicks couldn’t. But sometimes the studio execs just can’t let it go.
Which allows me the excuse to mention Blade Runner again (oh yes, yet again) as everyone will recall its own abortive 1982 release version and its own tacked-on happy ending in which Deckard and Rachel are literally driving off, escaping to a happy future into the sunset. I just never appreciated at the time that the film had been shockproofed.
There. ‘Shockproofed’ is a thing now.
the ghost of 82 
I thought your description of Shockproof sounded familiar, and I did indeed watch it back in 2018 (sometimes these films have such generic titles, I struggle to remember them off the top of my head!) According to, um, my own review, it’s exactly as you said: the happy ending was tacked on by a producer, against the will of director Douglas Sirk. But “shockproofing” would definitely be a perfect shorthand name for those kind of shenanigans. Indeed, it’s more meaningful in that context than as it pertains to the film itself, as I recall (a generic title indeed).
Where did you find this one? I’m curious now.
Shockproof is on the Sam Fuller box from Indicator, and is now available on a seperate disc with Scandal Sheet, another very good noir (its a great double-ill) and is I think the only release of the film on Blu-ray but I’m sure Shockproof is available on DVD and streaming services, its not an obscure noir far as I can tell.
Pingback: Shockproof – the ghost of 82