The Big Sleep: Novel or Movie?
Architects forever changed the urban landscape when they began building skyscrapers. After only a
short while they turned away from the burdensome load-bearing walls and opted for a thin, geometric
steel skeleton. The skeleton allowed more glass and embellishments; businesses could have huge
windows to display their wares on bustling city streets. Raymond Chandler creates a strong skeleton of
figurative language in his novel, The Big Sleep. Howard Hawks piles the importance of his movie on his
famous duo, Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. Which is finer? Stories and skyscrapers are the same.
Details run throughout Chandler's text. They come in the form of slap-you-in-the-face similes, lively
images and repeated metonyms. The figurative language unifies the book. With every turn of the page
we are blasted with sly similes. Chandler can pack five or more on a page and still maintain the
super-cool voice of his narrator, Marlowe. Agnes' silver nails move rather than she. But Chandler's most
crafty play is in Chapter Twenty-six. He uses figurative language to make his characters predators or
prey. Marlowe first "[hangs] there motionless, like a lazy fish in water", then he moves "like a cat on a
mantel" (Chandler 171, 172). Marlowe is stalking the office while Canino speaks to Jones in a "purring
voice;" Jones has a "bird-like voice" (175, 171). Later, Marlowe addresses Jones's body and says "You
died like a poisoned rat, Harry, but you're no rat to me" (178). Harry Jones wasn't Marlowe's prey. The
dynamic of the chapter is set up through imagery and metaphor.
I love Chandler's figurative language and I love his narrator. Marlowe is the reason that this language is
possible. Marlowe isn't going to shuffle around topics; he goes straight to the point and is determined to
drag you along. That is why he uses such language &emdash; to pull us in and let us understand. We
hear you Marlowe. We are getting every point. We can better understand his character if we know what
he is thinking about. The details offer us insider information. We see what little things he notices -- the
little things that add up.
I miss the knight in the movie. Hawks deprives us of Chandler's first details. Chandler's Marlowe tells us
about his suit, shirt, handkerchief, shoes, and even his "black wool socks with dark blue clocks on them"
(3). He gives us a detailed description; Chandler wanted us to picture "everything the well-dressed
private detective should be" (3). But the most lasting image that Chandler creates in the first page is that
of the knight almost attempting to release the maiden. The stained glass window seemed to really make
an impression on Marlowe "if I lived in the house, I would sooner or later have to climb up there and
help him" (4). This both makes an impression on me, and tells me that Marlowe must be an active guy
&emdash; he can't sit around and wait for things to happen. We don't get to see the image of the knight
in the window, nor do we get to see Chandler's knight-like character of Marlowe. (In the novel he is too
busy righting wrongs to have time to love a maiden. He can only try to save them.)
I really missed the details in the movie. I wanted to see Agnes's silver nails and hear Canino purr. But
they didn't. Agnes becomes just a fake bookstore broad, and Canino disappears. Brody kills Jones. The
knight becomes a few squares of glass. Marlowe doesn't feel a struggle. The novel's appeal is in its
language. Unfortunately, the art of language leaves the story and the foundation becomes the actors in
Hawks' Big Sleep.
The Big Sleep is hailed as a noir success. Leonard Maltin calls it "so incredibly entertaining." This movie is
actually part of the video selection at the neighborhood Blockbuster store (which has a limited
selection), so it must be a famous movie. I like to think that only a good movie would still be watched
after fifty-three years. But, everything good about the book is missing or distorted (plot, characters,
details). The plot is too convoluted to make a movie (Hawks never resolves who killed the Sternwood's
driver), but Hawks' Big Sleep is still a success and, well, a good movie. Why? They changed it. They
altered the plot and the characters to make a movie. Tim Dirks points out that the movie was originally
released without the extra Bogart and Bacall scenes, that Hawks added "some of the toughest, most
sexually-electric, innuendo-filled dialogue in film history." One The Big Sleep is appropriate for the
audience of books, the other for the audience of movies.
I prefer the book, but I can see how someone enchanted by the silver screen would be enchanted by this
movie. The greatest reason being the foundation of the film: Bogart and Bacall. The added scenes,
Marlowe's altered character and the plot changes prove that the movie was altered to create a great
romance between Marlowe/Bogart and Vivian/Bacall. The most entertaining alteration was that of
Marlowe's character. The differences are easy to recognize. The scene with Marlowe and Sternwood is
almost exactly like that in the book (minus the details). The scene with Marlowe and Vivian is also like
that of the book: unfriendly. We get to glimpse Bogart's Marlowe after this.
First, Marlowe goes to the library and tells the beautiful, young, blonde librarian that he "collects
blondes in bottles." He makes his way to Geiger's bookstore and flips up his hat brim, puts on sunglasses
and acts like a geek to talk to Agnes. He then crosses the street and participates in some "sexually
electric" behavior with the clerk (Dirks). In the novel she just describes Geiger, then Marlowe thanks her
and leaves as it starts to rain. The reader barely notices the scene. In the movie she looks Marlowe up
and down as she describes Geiger and when it starts to rain, she shuts the store and "takes down her
hair" &emdash; they'd rather "get wet" in the store than out in the rain. One of Marlowe's best lines of
the movie is as he leaves her and says, "So long, pal." Not only is he quite the lady's man in the movie,
he's also a comedian.
The string of women doesn't end here. He goes on to have a female taxi driver who finds him
irresistible: "If you can use me again sometime, call this number...night's better, I work during the day."
(Did women work in the 40's &emdash; especially as taxi drivers?) The cigarette girls at Eddie Mar's bar
get giggly around Marlowe. And finally (aside from Vivian falling in love with him and Carmen constantly
telling him that he is "cute"), a gorgeous woman happens to be working in the coffee shop just so that
she can smile at Marlowe. Why do women want this less-than-hunky, less-than-tall guy? He's Humphrey
Bogart. So, if Marlowe's new sense of humor doesn't add comic relief to the movie, his interactions with
women do.
The way Marlowe seems to attract women everywhere he goes is a change from Chandler's character. I
think that Chandler's Marlowe is suave enough to intrigue women, but he is "cool" enough to not care.
In the movie he cares. He urges Vivian on. A lot of their dialogue is very witty (especially that maintained
from the book). Brackett, Faulkner and Furthman add dialogue that is incredibly suggestive. As I said,
Vivian and Marlowe's first meeting is kept almost exactly as it was written in the book, except we don't
see that Marlowe is inspecting Vivian's legs so we think they actually dislike one another. The insults and
flippant comments must be flirtatious play &emdash; in the novel they seem sincere. Later Marlowe
brings Carmen home from Geiger's and unlike the book, Vivian helps &emdash; this way they get to
exchange more witty dialogue. The attraction grows...Vivian goes to his office to tell him about the bribe
for Carmen's pictures, instead of a scene ending on "Oh, go to hell, Marlowe;" Bogart and Bacall get to
act 'cute' playing with the police (Chandler 61). Perhaps the most altered part of this scene is when
Marlowe says, "I think I'm beginning to like another of the Sternwoods." Slightly different. Sickeningly
sweet. And forming the greatest breadth between the novel and the movie is the "notorious nightclub
scene" between Vivian and Marlowe (Dirks). Vivian informs him that her rating "depends on who's in the
saddle." Then Marlowe kisses Vivian on the ride home Eddie Mars'. (Well, I think it'd be more accurate
to say that Bogart kissed Bacall, but we'll just believe what Hawks wants us to.)
Despite all of Marlowe and Vivian's changes, the greatest discrepancy between the book and movie is
the end. Marlowe and Vivian profess their love for each other. After Marlowe has killed of the last the
bad guys with the help of his "angel," he calls the police. They decide to tell Sternwood about Reagan
and to send Carmen off for a "cure." This little bit of dialogue ends the movie:
Vivian: You've forgotten one thing, me.
Marlowe: What's wrong with you?
Vivian: Nothing you can't fix.
The sirens approach and the scene fades out, the lovers gaze longingly and hopefully into one another's
eyes. Happily ever after.
In contrast, Chandler has Marlowe think about death, "the big sleep." The movie is a fairy tale, a happy
ending heaped atop the giant load-bearing actors. The novel consists of minute details, running through,
holding it together. The details and the beauty of the language of the book hold the novel higher: easier
and more completely above the movie like the steel frame allows for refinement in architecture. The
steel frame building can boast &emdash; it stands taller and more elegantly. Each serves its purpose
well; the steel frame buildings just do so with more flair.