Three Faces of Lizabeth Scott: Queen of the Noirs


This post is part of the Classic Movie History Blogathon Project. It’s hosted by the splendid Movies Silently (the silent era),   Once Upon a Screen (the golden age) , and Silver Screenings (the modern era). And sponsored by classic movie specialists, Flicker Alley. Click on the host links for links to all the posts! 

A sleek blonde with a strong-jaw and sleepy gaze, Lizabeth Scott was one of the queens of the noir genre. A film-nut friend of mine once said that he couldn’t decide if she was absolutely gorgeous or if she looked like a man in drag. I have a similar response. Lots of movie stars are “factually” pretty; but for me, Lizabeth Scott isn’t. Sometimes she’s gorgeous, but a moment later, she’s something else— Masculine? Homely? But you can’t take your eyes off her— pretty or not, she’s got glamor, fragility, sexuality. Like Barbara Stanwyck or Bette Davis, Lizabeth Scott proves that you don’t need flawlessness to fascinate on film.

Scott was my first noir-heroine. In fact, she might be the whole reason I got hooked on the genre. The summer between 6th and 7th grade, back when PBS used to show old movies, they played “The Strange Loves of Martha Ivers” over and over again. And I watched it. Again and again. I didn’t understand all of what I was watching—I didn’t know why Barbara Stanwyck was so cold or why Kirk Douglas was so weak or what Van Heflin was up to most of the time, but I “got” Lizabeth Scott. Blond, husky-voiced and just out of jail, she’s an outsider, a nobody. Sitting on the porch of a beat-up boarding house with her suitcase, she’s got no money and nowhere to go. When sturdy Van Heflin strolls up, she crosses her legs in tentative invitation. She starts out cool, sultry. She’s been around the block. But by the time Heflin gives her a cigarette, a light, and the time of day, her face is friendly and eager. Like a stray who’s found a friend. She’ll follow him anywhere, if he’ll let her. Scott is by no means the star of the picture, but she packs a whole life story into her performance.

LS 20140208010458!Publicity_still_for_-The_Strange_Love_of_Martha_Ivers-_(1946)

Scott didn’t always play the bruised girl with a heart-of-gold. She played all kinds of noir women— sadistic, controlling, weird. I’ve watched a few Lizabeth Scott movies recently. Dead Reckoning, Too Late for Tears, The Strange Loves and Dark City. And I’m never disappointed. The noir universe wouldn’t be the same without her. She’s a live wire. June Allison with teeth. Lauren Bacall with a cruel twist. She’s a study in contrasts: a husky-voice with a childish warble, a chiseled face with sad wide-set eyes, elegant features that go off-balance and goofy with the slightest change in expression.


Along with her weird-beautiful face, Scott was a fascinating actress, always showing you the contradictions in the characters she played. Ruthless and vulnerable. Childlike and cunning. Even when she plays someone basically deranged, she’s sympathetic. Take Too Late for Tears. It’s a b-picture filmed on drab sets with few cinematic flourishes. But thanks to Scott’s performance, it’s an electric movie. You can’t take your eyes off her. One night, hubby and bored housewife Liz are driving home late from a party and a suitcase flies out of a passing car and into their convertible. Liz opens it, sees all those greenbacks and, right there, she’s overcome. The money is HERS. No one’s gonna take it away from her. Her husband, sensibly, thinks the case should be left alone or turned over to the police, but wifey can’t let it go. She can’t. She’ll do anything. In defense of the suitcase, she goes from kittenish to stiff to reasonable. All the stops. When hubby relents, at least momentarily, relief absolutely floods her face. The way Scott plays it, her motivation isn’t mere greed. It’s need.

When people start dying because Liz won’t let the money go, you almost sympathize with her. Because you really get the size of her desire. Her dangerous little housewife is a great villain because she isn’t bad for the sake of it. She’s bad because she’s got that all-American fever—She wants things; she wants to feel like she’s somebody. And suddenly, thanks to the suitcase, that’s all within her reach. The trick with playing a baddie is that too make them interesting you’ve got to show they’ve got something real and human on their minds, that their drives aren’t so different—they’re just cranked up a few notches. Scott nails it.

Lizabeth Scott plays goodness and vulnerability just as viscerally. In Dark City, she plays a sad-eyed saloon singer sprung on troubled gangster Charlton Heston. He likes her, but he’s a bitter guy and won’t let her in too close. In her very first scene, Scott masterfully establishes her character’s loneliness and sensitivity. Heston drops by the saloon where she works and he gives her a stuffed bunny (It’s Easter-time). The rabbit doesn’t mean much to him, he picked it up as an afterthought. But for Scott, it’s major, “No one’s given me anything like this since junior high.” She embraces the rabbit and rubs it softly across her cheek. This woman is dying for tenderness. No-one’s made her feel like a cherished sweetheart in a long, long time. So the gift makes her happy, but at the same time, it just underscores her loneliness. If she had real intimacy with Heston , she’d hug him. But he’s stiff and distracted, not tender at all. So she touches her own face. It’s a short scene, but Scott packs it with gratitude and yearning. So good.

Noir more than any other genre, is about the tension between the American dream and its reality. No one played these tensions better than Scott. She was too smart, too unique, too sensitive to play the good little housewife or even the plain old ruthless bitch. Her women are always conflicted, stuck between bitter reality and driving desire. Scott was a master. Her characters are never just bad, never just nice. She was so much more than just a pretty face. RIP.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Three Faces of Lizabeth Scott: Queen of the Noirs

  1. Pingback: The Classic Movie History Project presents THE GOLDEN AGE | Once upon a screen…

  2. Vienna says:

    I love DARK CITY and your description of that first scene .
    Must watch TOO LATE FOR TEARS again.
    Such a contrast in these two roles.

    • regularpop says:

      Hi Vienna.
      Yes! I love that Scott could bring so much texture to two such totally different kinds of women. I have yet to read much about her personally, but I plan to study up. She must have been a fascinating lady!

  3. Yes, I completely agree. Lizabeth Scott is mesmerizing in Too Late for Tears. If it weren’t for Dan Duyrea, she would have walked away with the whole film. She’s also fab in Dark City – it’s not a movie I care for, but she alone is worth the price of admission. (What on earth did she see in Charlton Heston, anyway?)

    I’m so glad you brought attention to Lizabeth for this blogathon. She’s not nearly as famous as she should be, and posts like yours will hopefully introduce her to more people.

    • regularpop says:

      Ah yes, Charlton Heston. He’s a weird one. Never really likeable, but sometimes compelling… I can’t say I love Dark City either, but often, one great performance makes a movie.
      I’m glad you’re a Scott fan too. As you say, she deserves a lot more attention.
      Thank you so much for hosting and dropping by to comment, too!

  4. Aurora says:

    I’m technically just getting into Lizabeth Scott’s noirs. My first introduction to her was in “Loving You” with Elvis when I was a kid. That movie was always playing on TV and I adore Elvis. Loved Lizabeth in that, but as years passed and I grew to enjoy films noir more and more I never delved into the ones she’s starred in. In fact outside of Martha Ivers I hadn’t seen any that I remember until – at this year’s TCMFF – I saw ‘Too Late for Tears’ and she blew me away! Just last week I saw ‘Dead Reckoning’ and again, as you describe, I couldn’t keep my eyes off her. Anyway – I could go on and on. Love your post, which only fed my newfound admiration for Scott.

    Thank you for submitting this to the project!


    • regularpop says:

      Hi Aurora_
      I haven’t seen Loving You and I need to. In fact, I’ve never seen Scott in color- it will be a bit of a shock.
      If you haven’t read it, The Sheila Variations has a fun appreciation of Scott’s performance in it:

      I’m so pleased you like the post and I really appreciate yopu stopping by again. Thank you for hosting a delightful blogathon!

      • Aurora says:

        Thanks for that link. Scott’s presence in Loving You adds a great balance to the story. Take a look at it and let me know what you think – after you recover from the shock. 🙂

  5. CineMaven says:

    GREAT SCOTT!! Ahhhh, another acolyte of the great Lizabeth Scott. She was beautiful, but not in that all-American, girl-next-door, W.A.S.P.y. Naaaaah, she had strong features; something you could hang your film noir tropes on. And the cherry on top, the voice. I think I came upon her the same as you did, with “…Martha Ivers.” But I’ve expanded my repertoire to “Desert Fury” “I Walk Alone” “The Company She Keeps” along with the ones mentioned above. She was absolutely relentless in “Too Late for Tears.” You say, “The way Scott plays it, her motivation isn’t mere greed. It’s need.” Hell, she made Dan Duryea afraid of HER. My lasting regret is that TCM did NOT book her to appear at one of their film festivals. That screening would have been Standing Room Only. I found out she passed away while I was hanging out one night. You can read my account here: . There was no one quite like Lizabeth Scott. Yep, not even Lauren Bacall.

    • regularpop says:

      Great Scott indeed! I saw “Too Late” on the big screen and the audience seemed to love /hate her just as her performance deserves. Love what you say about her strong features as just right for film noir. I love me some Doris Day, but you need cheekbones and chin for noir, don’t you?!

  6. girlsdofilm says:

    For me, Lizabeth Scott’s ambiguity has always been part of her appeal. I like that I don’t know how to take her, what to think about her. So many actresses – especially from the era when ‘image’ was so carefully cultivated – are sold to you on a promise it’s always refreshing to find someone that doesn’t fit the mould. That said, it certainly means she’s often overlooked – so thanks for reminding me I need to re-watch some of her greats!

    • regularpop says:

      That’s a great point. And it may go a ways to explain why she’s never been a mega-star. If we don’t know how to pigeonhole someone, we may not think of them as easily. We know what to expect from Bette Davis, Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, so we go their films when we’re in the mood for that kind of archetype. Hard to be an archetype of ambiguity….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s