This is a neglected noir. It's possible that the film failed on its initial release due to its complicated, yet always logical, plot. Audiences of the time were probably more used to simpler, less intricate, plots. Yet the film has much in common with The Maltese Falcon. The acting is superb, though one wishes that Duryea's performance was so obviously evil. A Raymond Burr could have given more complexity to the character, as in his Rear Window role.
The other characters and actors are superb as are the directorial touches. The criterion of a good director is the details, not the obvious plot. Hawks is a superb example of this. Then there's Shakespeare! Not that this film comes anywhere close, but the principle is the same.
In stage and cinematic terms it's called "business." There's a lot of "business" going on in the film. There's one scene that I'm not sure about. The head cop has to sign a document and puts his signature on several pages of what looks like a carbon document.
I would have given this film 9 stars or even 10 except for the flaw in the plotting. SPOILER ALERT: To me it doesn't make sense why the doctor doesn't kill Duryea after Duryea points him out as the murderer. Instead he locks him in the closet as he absconds with the jewels. This development, of course, allows for the ironic ending where Duryea cannot pin the murder on the doctor, but it doesn't make sense. If the doctor already killed one person for the jewels what did he have to lose by killing another person, esp after that person pointed him out as the murderer? It's pointless to have him alive knowing that he could go to the police with what he knows or at least suspects.
Otherwise it's a noir that really will engross the viewer from the very opening dream sequence to the ping-pong of suspects, each of whom seems obvious as the film transpires. Even the husband who took 4 sleeping pills, it turns out, could have been the murderer.
This is a highly recommended, and under-rated noir, though I LITERALLY predicted the final line that Sterling Hayden says to Dorothy Lamour. Who couldn't predict it?
The other characters and actors are superb as are the directorial touches. The criterion of a good director is the details, not the obvious plot. Hawks is a superb example of this. Then there's Shakespeare! Not that this film comes anywhere close, but the principle is the same.
In stage and cinematic terms it's called "business." There's a lot of "business" going on in the film. There's one scene that I'm not sure about. The head cop has to sign a document and puts his signature on several pages of what looks like a carbon document.
I would have given this film 9 stars or even 10 except for the flaw in the plotting. SPOILER ALERT: To me it doesn't make sense why the doctor doesn't kill Duryea after Duryea points him out as the murderer. Instead he locks him in the closet as he absconds with the jewels. This development, of course, allows for the ironic ending where Duryea cannot pin the murder on the doctor, but it doesn't make sense. If the doctor already killed one person for the jewels what did he have to lose by killing another person, esp after that person pointed him out as the murderer? It's pointless to have him alive knowing that he could go to the police with what he knows or at least suspects.
Otherwise it's a noir that really will engross the viewer from the very opening dream sequence to the ping-pong of suspects, each of whom seems obvious as the film transpires. Even the husband who took 4 sleeping pills, it turns out, could have been the murderer.
This is a highly recommended, and under-rated noir, though I LITERALLY predicted the final line that Sterling Hayden says to Dorothy Lamour. Who couldn't predict it?