Classic movie site with rare images, original ads, and behind-the-scenes photos, with informative and insightful commentary. We like to have fun with movies!
Archive and Links
grbrpix@aol.com
Search Index Here




Monday, February 02, 2026

Film Noir #33

 


Noir: Was The Killers (1964) Too Tough for TV?


Fascinating mid-60's Universal project, actually one of their key ventures of the decade, as it led off a hugely profitable arrangement with NBC for TV-movies. Why make features for the tube? Simply this: the Hollywood pix backlog was drying up and soon there'd be nothing fresh to show, post-48's having been consumed lots quicker than anyone imagined since 1961 when they began unspooling in earnest. NBC had dabbled in long-form programming, Universal their supplier for weekly ninety-minute episodes of The Virginian. For watchers at home, this was like getting a bonafide movie each Thursday night, and for nothing other than patience with drop-in ads. The western was cheaply shot, done largely on backlots, but had a solid cast of regulars and big names in guest capacity. The Virginian was a hit from outset and lasted years, being a best argument for passing the hour mark on televised drama.


A lot would say U's theatrical features by then befit the tube more than paying houses, pallets of these dumped to the network along with quickies getting "World Premiered" on primetime. Lew Wasserman was string-puller at Universal, having come to power from agent ranks. His were ice-cold business doings with indifference to quality product, but Wasserman knew The Killers had to deliver as inaugural run at Made-For-TV's. Don Siegel wrote vividly of head office bead on every Killers aspect; they'd even overshoot budget toward good as possible outcome. This was wise investment for long view re the NBC deal and dozens of custom pics that could be sold if The Killers worked out. Trades took an interest from early 1964 when Variety touted Johnny North (later renamed The Killers) as "something never before attempted for the small screen," NBC and Revue (Universal's TV arm) agreeing to each put $300K toward completion. The trade reported twenty-five days spent shooting, plus a few more by a second unit.


Don Siegel was bullish on The Killers, calling it "the only hope for TV," and vanguard of whole new concepts in programming. His version was also an improvement on Mark Hellinger's 1946 original, said Siegel, who credited Wasserman for coming up with the idea of hit-men Lee Marvin and Clu Gulugar on their own investigating a robbery-gone-wrong, "which gave it a whole new flavor," according to Don (angling here for more MCA work?). Siegel was an ideal pick for fast and economical work over "epics." "They bore me," he said, and what's more, his twenty-five days spent on The Killers could and would be trimmed to 15-20 days on future projects, this music to ears of Uni brass. In what reads like bald appeal for a next assignment, Siegel recounted how thrifty he'd been over a long filmmaking career. Saying TV movies should cost around $500,000, Siegel added that his could be done for less. "I made Baby Face Nelson for $175,000, Riot In Cell Block 11 for $225,000, (and) The Body Snatcher (as in Invasion Of ...) for $300,000."


NBC had initial objection to violence in The Killers, said Variety, but withdrew complaint "after (Siegel) explained it was essential to the story." Another tender spot was action involving a rooftop sniper, this a flag after the Kennedy assassination which took place while Johnny North was in production. As the scene was locked into narrative, all Siegel could do was shoot "in a different way, and now the killer is unseen," which in the finished film played somewhat ragged (who was firing the weapon?). Universal knew early that The Killers would be released theatrically in Europe, and it was for that reason a widescreen framing was used, with an open matte for TV broadcast in the states. Costs on Johnny North had crept to $900K, and that concerned NBC program chief Mort Werner, him acknowledging that pilots tended toward bigger spending in order to lure advertisers, but "they're trying to make this look too good."


Saying that NBC had balked on Johnny North (now The Killers) for "an overdose of sex and brutality," Variety gave the now-theatrical release a nasty pan on 5/27/64, calling it "a throwback," and "essentially an anachronism," saying that only buffs of crime melodrama would "get much of a charge out of this exercise of hate, double-cross, and sadism." Insiders knew that The Killers had gone wide of what Universal and its network customer intended, but this still was a Lew Wasserman project, to which he applied creative effort, atypical role for this ultimate bean-counter, so who would dare slap his wrist for botch that was outcome? Besides, The Killers brought $949,260 in domestic rentals, not bad for a minor actioner, but foreign receipts of at least that much would be needed to keep it from going into red. Now The Killers is a classic, a 1.85 Blu-ray out of Region Two that captures vividly how the film would look on theatre screens.


More about The Killers, both versions, at Greenbriar Archives HERE.

7 Comments:

Blogger Reg Hartt said...

Both versions of this are great. The Burt Lancaster Robert Siodmak version is Hemingway as he wrote it.

12:08 PM  
Blogger Phil Smoot said...

Was "The Killers" ever on a Network broadcast in any (edited) form?
I'm glad you mentioned the TV vs Theatrical Aspect ratio (1.33 & 1.85), as many people don't believe me when I say you often had to frame safely for both.

12:48 PM  
Blogger Walter S. said...

Phil, THE KILLERS(filmed 1963, released 1964) didn't have a prime-time television network premiere or any kind of premiere on the networks. Why? I don't really know. You would think the movie would have had a prime-time network premiere on NBC-TV, either on NBC's SATURDAY NIGHT AT THE MOVIES, MONDAY NIGHT AT THE MOVIES, or TUESDAY NIGHT AT THE MOVIES in the late 1960's. Universal Pictures had a licensing deal with NBC-TV to premiere their features and their World Premiere Movies(made for tv).

Universal Pictures licensed THE KILLERS to local television stations for airing. As far as I know(if anyone else has different information please inform us) the movie began appearing on local tv stations in 1968. As far as I can find it first aired on Friday January 26, 1968, by way of Sacramento, California's CBS-TV affiliate KXTV Channel 10 at 9:00 PM(Pacific Time). Channel 10 showed their own FRIDAY MOVIE instead of the network's THE CBS FRIDAY NIGHT MOVIE, which aired the ISLAND OF LOVE(filmed 1962, released 1963).

11:52 PM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Thanks for this detailed info, Walter. THE KILLERS indeed went into that large Universal syndicated package which included a number of off-network features plus a group of Hammer films U had distributed, a few but not all of which had played on NBC's prime time movie slots.

4:51 AM  
Blogger scott said...

All I can say is that the trailer to this movie got a hell of a lot of laughs at a local niche movie theater here in San Diego in the early 70's.

1:32 PM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Do you recall what made them laugh?

3:26 PM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Dan Mercer shares some thoughts about THE KILLERS:


It’s fascinating, this background you’ve provided for “The Killers.” I’ve little doubt that it was pulled from network release for its violence, but I have a feeling that it was less for the violence itself as for what that violence represented.

Even with the skill and efficiency of Don Siegel's direction and the higher than anticipated production costs, there are still signs of corner cutting in the film, as in the flat lighting to allow for more setups, the obvious use of process screens in the race sequence, and the too familiar street sets of Universal City. It lends a visual aridity to the film, everything bright and bland, though this complements the moral aridity of the film itself.

In the Hemingway short story, there is a protagonist who sees the events unfold, in the killers come to kill the washed-up boxer, the boxer’s resignation to his death, and the willingness of others to go about their daily routines, indifferent to impending killing. Unsettled, he leaves town. The film provides a back story to this, but in telling the story itself from the perspective of the killers, it removes that overview, with its suggestion of a moral order apart from that of the characters. So, no one serves any good purpose, all motivations are questionable, and everyone comes to a bad end.

The killers see behind the apparent reality, but only to the extent of sensing the possibility of a big score. Otherwise, they are as blind to the implications of what they are doing as anyone else. Even with their shrewdness, they find themselves lured into the same kind of trap as the man they killed. At that, their would-be killer is also blind and cannot foresee that one of his victims may be too tough and determined to fall without trying to see his own plan through to the end.

The violence in “The Killers” is sharp and pungent but not excessive by network television standards of the time, when you consider the number of police, detective, and western shows airing then, with their gunplay and death. The blood is more apparent, but that is all. In those shows, however, there was always the gloss of moral justification, with the “bad guy” receiving his just deserts at the end, thus making up for his less justified killings between commercial breaks and restoring the moral order.

In those television shows, the moral justification was often a sham, a mask to allow the audience to enjoy the surreptitious delight of seeing lives violently extinguished, provided that manner in which that was carried out was somewhat discrete. In “The Killers,” that mask was ripped away. In it, every death diminishes the characters and the audience, for it is not merely the way death is administered or the number of people killed, but why they are killed. There is always a want of goodness and charity. It’s little wonder, then, that it was considered unsuitable, when it told a truth that would have unsettled a lie.

10:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

grbrpix@aol.com
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • July 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • July 2008
  • August 2008
  • September 2008
  • October 2008
  • November 2008
  • December 2008
  • January 2009
  • February 2009
  • March 2009
  • April 2009
  • May 2009
  • June 2009
  • July 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • October 2009
  • November 2009
  • December 2009
  • January 2010
  • February 2010
  • March 2010
  • April 2010
  • May 2010
  • June 2010
  • July 2010
  • August 2010
  • September 2010
  • October 2010
  • November 2010
  • December 2010
  • January 2011
  • February 2011
  • March 2011
  • April 2011
  • May 2011
  • June 2011
  • July 2011
  • August 2011
  • September 2011
  • October 2011
  • November 2011
  • December 2011
  • January 2012
  • February 2012
  • March 2012
  • April 2012
  • May 2012
  • June 2012
  • July 2012
  • August 2012
  • September 2012
  • October 2012
  • November 2012
  • December 2012
  • January 2013
  • February 2013
  • March 2013
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
  • July 2013
  • August 2013
  • September 2013
  • October 2013
  • November 2013
  • December 2013
  • January 2014
  • February 2014
  • March 2014
  • April 2014
  • May 2014
  • June 2014
  • July 2014
  • August 2014
  • September 2014
  • October 2014
  • November 2014
  • December 2014
  • January 2015
  • February 2015
  • March 2015
  • April 2015
  • May 2015
  • June 2015
  • July 2015
  • August 2015
  • September 2015
  • October 2015
  • November 2015
  • December 2015
  • January 2016
  • February 2016
  • March 2016
  • April 2016
  • May 2016
  • June 2016
  • July 2016
  • August 2016
  • September 2016
  • October 2016
  • November 2016
  • December 2016
  • January 2017
  • February 2017
  • March 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2017
  • June 2017
  • July 2017
  • August 2017
  • September 2017
  • October 2017
  • November 2017
  • December 2017
  • January 2018
  • February 2018
  • March 2018
  • April 2018
  • May 2018
  • June 2018
  • July 2018
  • August 2018
  • September 2018
  • October 2018
  • November 2018
  • December 2018
  • January 2019
  • February 2019
  • March 2019
  • April 2019
  • May 2019
  • June 2019
  • July 2019
  • August 2019
  • September 2019
  • October 2019
  • November 2019
  • December 2019
  • January 2020
  • February 2020
  • March 2020
  • April 2020
  • May 2020
  • June 2020
  • July 2020
  • August 2020
  • September 2020
  • October 2020
  • November 2020
  • December 2020
  • January 2021
  • February 2021
  • March 2021
  • April 2021
  • May 2021
  • June 2021
  • July 2021
  • August 2021
  • September 2021
  • October 2021
  • November 2021
  • December 2021
  • January 2022
  • February 2022
  • March 2022
  • April 2022
  • May 2022
  • June 2022
  • July 2022
  • August 2022
  • September 2022
  • October 2022
  • November 2022
  • December 2022
  • January 2023
  • February 2023
  • March 2023
  • April 2023
  • May 2023
  • June 2023
  • July 2023
  • August 2023
  • September 2023
  • October 2023
  • November 2023
  • December 2023
  • January 2024
  • February 2024
  • March 2024
  • April 2024
  • May 2024
  • June 2024
  • July 2024
  • August 2024
  • September 2024
  • October 2024
  • November 2024
  • December 2024
  • January 2025
  • February 2025
  • March 2025
  • April 2025
  • May 2025
  • June 2025
  • July 2025
  • August 2025
  • September 2025
  • October 2025
  • November 2025
  • December 2025
  • January 2026
  • February 2026