This film has as much confusing dialog as any I can remember. The characters speak in riddles, points are made without any explanation, and many things said just seem to make no sense in this murder mystery set in the early stages of WWII.
An example of my third point, from early in the film. John Garfield's character, John McKittrick, known by all at "Kit" enters a police station and asks to see Inspector Tobin. The desk sergeant says his office is in another precinct. Kit insists that is wrong and the sergeant invites him to look around. Kit goes to a hallway with offices and promptly finds his man. I have no idea why the sergeant tried to steer Kit away from the building altogether. Nothing more was ever said about that, not even a hint.
We are given to understand that Kit fought in the Spanish Civil War, was held prisoner for two years after it ended, and was finally released through actions of a dear friend, Louie Lepetino, who died one month ago, three weeks before Kit found out about it. Kit challenges the police theory that he fell accidentally out of a window to his death, believing he was killed.
We soon run into an array of suspects, including a wheel-chair bound historian played by the delightful Walter Slezak (delightful actor, his character was anything but), aided by his nephew Otto Skaas, played by Beaumont who is so much young looking than Ward Cleaver, that with his foreign accent, fooled me totally-I had to back up the DVR to see that it truly was Ward.
Now I understand this was a "noir" film and I have enjoyed many others of that type. But the dialog was so packed with hidden meanings and unexplained statements that I found myself somewhat confused. I actually abandoned the show a night ago about 2/3 through it. Tonight, I gave it a second chance and watched the whole thing. It made more sense, but there were still confusing actions and irritating dialog.
Kit seemed to really be rude to his two girlfriends at times where he didn't seem to have a reason to be. The story is eventually, near the end, developed that the Nazis tortured him for something he had-but we never get to know what it was. He was shown to continue to be feeling the effects of his torture, needing to get away and have a quick drink when various things happened to remind him of his tortured days. I also tired of his 8-12 references to "Der Fuhrer" as "the little man in Berlin." When the film was made, we were already at war with Germany...I think he could have said the name at least a couple of times.
I think what I'll remember best is seeing a mustache-less Sergeant Schultz from Hogan's Heroes, John Banner, as a much young, slimmer man. While my wife could spot him as soon as the camera focused on him, I could not tell it was him until he spoke a couple of sentences and sounded like Schultz.
Nevertheless, I just cannot give this film a score higher than 4.
An example of my third point, from early in the film. John Garfield's character, John McKittrick, known by all at "Kit" enters a police station and asks to see Inspector Tobin. The desk sergeant says his office is in another precinct. Kit insists that is wrong and the sergeant invites him to look around. Kit goes to a hallway with offices and promptly finds his man. I have no idea why the sergeant tried to steer Kit away from the building altogether. Nothing more was ever said about that, not even a hint.
We are given to understand that Kit fought in the Spanish Civil War, was held prisoner for two years after it ended, and was finally released through actions of a dear friend, Louie Lepetino, who died one month ago, three weeks before Kit found out about it. Kit challenges the police theory that he fell accidentally out of a window to his death, believing he was killed.
We soon run into an array of suspects, including a wheel-chair bound historian played by the delightful Walter Slezak (delightful actor, his character was anything but), aided by his nephew Otto Skaas, played by Beaumont who is so much young looking than Ward Cleaver, that with his foreign accent, fooled me totally-I had to back up the DVR to see that it truly was Ward.
Now I understand this was a "noir" film and I have enjoyed many others of that type. But the dialog was so packed with hidden meanings and unexplained statements that I found myself somewhat confused. I actually abandoned the show a night ago about 2/3 through it. Tonight, I gave it a second chance and watched the whole thing. It made more sense, but there were still confusing actions and irritating dialog.
Kit seemed to really be rude to his two girlfriends at times where he didn't seem to have a reason to be. The story is eventually, near the end, developed that the Nazis tortured him for something he had-but we never get to know what it was. He was shown to continue to be feeling the effects of his torture, needing to get away and have a quick drink when various things happened to remind him of his tortured days. I also tired of his 8-12 references to "Der Fuhrer" as "the little man in Berlin." When the film was made, we were already at war with Germany...I think he could have said the name at least a couple of times.
I think what I'll remember best is seeing a mustache-less Sergeant Schultz from Hogan's Heroes, John Banner, as a much young, slimmer man. While my wife could spot him as soon as the camera focused on him, I could not tell it was him until he spoke a couple of sentences and sounded like Schultz.
Nevertheless, I just cannot give this film a score higher than 4.