I Confess (1953) User Reviews

Atypical Hitchcock

[gridoon · 7/10 · 24 July 2005]

"I Confess" is one of Alfred Hitchcock's least famous films, and it's easy to see why: there is no mystery (we know who the killer is right from the start); there is some suspense but no major set-pieces; there is very little humor (no Cary Grant-type wisecracks here). The movie is a somber psychological drama, and the story of a forbidden love, and perhaps a Christ allegory (the priest has to suffer for another man's sins - he has to bear his own cross). I wouldn't rank it among Hitchcock's best, but it certainly has some of the best acting you can find in a Hitchcock film: Montgomery Clift is superb in a difficult role, Anne Baxter is warm and utterly believable as the woman who is consumed by her love for him, and Karl Malden is perfectly cast as the nosy (no pun intended) inspector on the case. (**1/2)

"You can do a lot of things in thirty minutes."

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 11 February 2007]

I would never have thought that Alfred Hitchcock had a strict Roman Catholic upbringing, including training with the Jesuits. It's one of the interesting things revealed in a special feature on the DVD release of "I Confess". The movie allows Hitch to explore the sanctity of the Catholic sacrament of Penance, and a priest's holy vow to maintain the confidentiality of the confessional. At times, the way Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift) remains true to that vow seems awkward and hesitant, casting suspicion on himself as a murderer, especially when it's revealed that he had a personal relationship with one of the church's parishioners before he became a priest.

There was one point when I thought Hitchcock was throwing the audience a curve when the real murderer Keller (O.E. Hasse) taunts Logan with - "You can't tell them as long as you are a priest, can you?" It struck me at that point that the look on Logan's face might have had him consider giving up the priesthood, adding even more torment to his dilemma. Of course that was not to be, and rightly, as it would have been a cheap way out. In fact the revelation of Keller's guilt could probably not have been handled in any other way than the manner in which it occurred. But if Keller's conscience couldn't convince him that he was doomed to hellfire for the initial murder, and then setting up a priest for it, how was he going to reconcile himself with the Lord for killing his own wife?

Cleverly, Hitchcock keeps the viewer's attention shifting in different directions; when Ruth Grandfort states to Father Logan 'We're safe" after learning of Villete's murder, one imagines all kinds of clandestine intimacies between the two. The revelation of the back story clears Logan on that count, but he still remains on the hook for the crime as long as he maintains his priestly obligations.

This would not be the only film in which director Hitchcock would explore Catholic themes, his 1956 film "The Wrong Man" would make use of overt religious symbolism in telling the true story of a man accused of a robbery and how his faith was a factor in exposing the real criminal. Both movies are among Hitch's less well known, and hence under-appreciated gems. Both capture a noirish feel that isn't generally a characteristic of his American films, with a sense of uncertainty and discomfort that pervades throughout. Both are recommended, Hitchcock fan or not.

While watching, keep an eye out for the poster promoting Humphrey Bogart's "The Enforcer" at the movie house. It too happens to be a murder mystery where we know the identity of the killer up front, as the story's protagonist searches for a way to expose him.

Nos Deux Consciences

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 4 June 2005]

I Confess's story takes place in Quebec City, Canada is adapted from the French story Nos Deux Consciences. And the whole thing is about a priest's conscience. Does he keep his vows even at the cost of his own freedom and maybe his life, certainly his reputation.

That is what Montgomery Clift is faced with. German actor O.E. Hasse who Clift worked with on The Big Lift is the caretaker of a church where Clift is assigned. He takes the priest's garments and commits murder in them. And then offers confession to Clift. Clift knows the murder victim as well and could have his own reason for doing him harm. Of course police detective Karl Malden suspects him.

How this all gets resolved is the plot of the story. But let me give you a hint. The title of the original story is Our Two Consciences. And the consciences referred to are Monty Clift's and someone else's.

Clift and the rest of the cast do a fine job in this minor Alfred Hitchcock film. But the acting honors in this go to O.E. Hasse, an really oily malevolent villain who is enjoying the predicament he's put the priest in. You won't forget him.

Fans of Hitchcock and Clift will be entertained and others will enjoy it as well.

Forgotten, with a capital F

[fletch5 · 24 September 2000]

"I Confess" is a strong candidate for Hitchcock's most forgotten film. It never gets mentioned in any Hitchcock documentaries or when discussing about his movies. The film doesn't offer the usual amount of excitement or thrilling entertainment than his better known ones ("North by Northwest", for instance). In fact, there isn't much of "real" suspense at all, but well-sketched characters, fine acting performances, and captivating plot development are more than compensating matters.

"I Confess" is a very interesting piece of film making and should be viewed by any Hitchcock fan.

Hitch Asks Moral Question

[ccthemovieman-1 · 7/10 · 8 October 2006]

An Alfred Hitchcock film with very little action or suspense, this moral issue- drama still maintains interest for the most part. Montgomery Clift is intriguing as "Father William Logan," a Catholic priest from Quebec who hears a murder confession, is charged with the crime himself, and never wavers from his vow to keep confessions private.

The question Hitchcock apparently poses with this is is, "Is that still morally right when it means you leave a killer out on the loose?"

Complicating the matter is an old girlfriend, played by Anne Baxter, who still loves the priest. However, once again the cleric remains true to his vows and doesn't get involved with her.

Karl Malden, meanwhile, plays a gung-ho cop out to solve the crime.

This movie could use a little more suspense and action, plus a bit of the old Hitchcock humor, but still is more than passable.

The seal of confession is highly illustrated by Hitchcock's "I Confess."

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 9/10 · 12 August 2000]

If the transfer of culpability was a basic theme in Hitchcock's "Strangers on a Train," it furnished the provocative dilemma to "I Confess."

A German refugee, Keller (O.E. Hasse), murders a lawyer named Vilette (Ovila Legare) when he is caught stealing... Keller thereupon confesses his crime to Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift), a priest at the Quebec church where he is a sexton...

Vilette was blackmailing Ruth Grandfort (Anne Baxter), who was in love with Logan before he was ordained and who continues to love him in spite of his religious vows and her subsequent marriage to Pierre Granfort (Roger Dann).

Keller wore a cassock when he committed the crime and Father Logan is unable to supply an alibi for the time of the murder - a series of coincidences which eventually find the priest on trial for murder...

The dilemma of "I Confess" relates to Catholic church law which specifically forbids the clergy from disclosing those sins exposed in the privacy of the confessional... Thus forced into complicity with the murderer, Father Logan behaves as though he is guilty despite his innocence in much the same way Guy Haines takes on some of Bruno's guilt in Hitchcock's "Strangers on a Train." The film's tension derives from the audience's knowledge of the cleric's ethical problem and its desire to see him break his vows to save his own life...

Montgomery Clift makes the clergyman's inner torment apparent simply by the anguished expression in his eyes, and creates sympathy for a man who could be an object of mockery by maintaining his dignity...

Compassionate, grave, and restrained, Clift delineates the priest's conflicting emotions with the distinguished nuances of expression... His face, vulnerable but brighter by discerning yet kind eyes, reveals his suffering with eloquent intensity...

While a determined Karl Malden looks for every scrap of information to clear the murder, an embarrassing crown prosecutor (Brian Aherne) is in despair to establish a motive for the murder...

With moody atmosphere, set against the background of picturesque Quebec photographed in black and white, "I Confess" is solemn and entertaining, never getting out of control, with an overpowering sense of doom and enough amount of suspense in the manhunt of a killer...

"I want to make a confession"

[nickenchuggets · 7/10 · 6 September 2021]

Out of all the movies Hitchcock directed throughout his life, I Confess has to be one of the most overlooked, and there is definitely a reason for this. I didn't think it was as impressive as some of his other movies like Rear Window or Saboteur, but it's difficult to explain why it is not as memorable. The film stars Montgomery Clift as Father Logan, a priest working in the French Canadian province of Quebec. He is approached by a man named Keller one day who is confessing about how he killed a lawyer named Villette and then fled the scene. Even though Logan now has information that can potentially lead to this person's arrest, he is forbidden from saying anything because catholic priests aren't allowed to let other people know what someone's confession consists of. Some time later, the man responsible for killing Villette tells the cops about the killing, and Logan is questioned by a police investigator named Larrue (Karl Malden). Larrue brings in more interview subjects and two schoolgirls are interrogated in his office, but this doesn't help him solve the case, at least not directly. One of them says how she witnessed Logan near where Villette lived, and Larrue must now interview him. However, Logan is forbidden from disclosing any personal information about what Keller said to him. Because he refuses to talk, Larrue now has no choice but to consider Logan a potential enemy, and tells investigators to keep an eye on him. Meanwhile, Ruth (Anne Baxter), a friend of Logan's, tries to tell Logan he is being shadowed by cops, but he doesn't think much of it. Eventually, Larrue interrogates both her and Logan, and Ruth, under intense pressure and nervousness, gives a contradictory account of the events which lead to Villette's death. She says how Villette blackmailed her into helping him with a scandal. Despite being innocent, Logan decides to give himself up in court, but the jury finds him not guilty because there is no evidence against him. After the trial, Logan walks outside where a crowd has gathered, and Keller runs off, revealing himself as the murderer. Larrue, Logan, and some cops set off in pursuit and follow him to a ballroom. Keller, gun in hand, tells Logan to back off as he slowly advances toward him, trying to find a non-violent solution to this argument. A cop shoots Keller and he dies shortly after with Logan holding him. Like I stated before, I Confess is a very little known film by Hitchcock standards. After seeing it, it's not hard to imagine why. I thought it was decent, but absolutely not a worthy successor to most of his earlier movies. There's some plot holes in it that just drive me up the wall, like how Keller suddenly decides to run off at the end, thus blowing his cover. If he just kept quiet, nobody would have questioned him, despite Logan being acquitted. Montgomery Clift and Anne Baxter do a good job with the mostly forgettable script, but it is annoying how Clift is not allowed to tell Karl Malden's character what Keller said to him that day. Speaking of which, Karl is probably the best character in this movie since he goes after pretty much everyone. Logan gets on his bad side by refusing to disclose details about Keller, leading Karl to monitor both men. Malden was a very underrated actor. In addition to this, I Confess took 8 years to fully develop, which is an eternity by Hitchcock standards. His daughter Patricia was married in 1951 and he went on vacation for this. The original draft of the movie also concludes with the priest being executed for having an illegitimate child, but this was scrapped when studio executives realized showing a film where a priest is killed probably wasn't the best idea. Even at the time, the audience reception for this film wasn't too great, and I myself really want to like it because it's by Hitchcock, but his other movies are simply better. I would still recommend this to people who enjoy his movies because it does have an air of mystery and crime about it since it involves a murder. It also features an unlikely hero in the form of a priest. It might be Hitchcock's least best film, but it's still Hitchcock.

hitch's sleeper

[cappy-9 · 9/10 · 23 February 1999]

"I Confess" is the most under exposed/appreciated/rated of Hitchcock's films. It is as convincing (except for the minimal flashbacks) as "Shadow of a Doubt" in terms of both its art and its reality. Its mise en scene captures Quebec City, its specifically Catholic culture, its history, its moral dramas, and its character types. I think Clift and Baxter are perfectly cast, as are Aherne and Maldon. Keller and Alma truly hit home as Catholic parish staff and carry effectively much of the drama and suspense of this true Hitch sleeper, which is also a memorable romance. (There is indeed a great deal of genuine emotion and deep feeling in this very ordinary and convincing world).

Intriguing and thrilling movie by the Master of Suspense in which a good priest is accused of killing

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 6 June 2013]

Entertaining suspense movie packs thrills ,intrigue , tension and ordinary Hitch touches . Indispensable seeing this quintessential Hitch movie , demanding various viewings . Classic and haunting suspense by the master himself , Hitchcock , dealing with tragic events when a priest (Montgomery Clift) takes confession from a man who coincidentally killed a blackmailer who he knew of pre-vows relationship with a married woman (Anne Baxter). Refusing to give into police investigators' questions of suspicion, due to the seal of confession, the Father becomes the prime suspect in a murder. The murderer is called Otto Kellar (O.E.Hasse) and his wife Alma (Dolly Haas) work as caretaker and housekeeper at a Catholic church in Quebec . Meanwhile , the priest named Fr. Michael Logan walking through the town, passes in front of a cinema showing ¨The enforcer¨.

Interesting Hitch film shot in Canada's colorful Quebec by Warner Bros , being based on the 1902 play "Nos Deux consciences" by Paul Anthelme, but little is known about any production of the play. However , in the original play, the priest was hanged ; this scene had to be eliminated and replaced with another scene to avoid the wrath of the censor. Alfred Hitchcock's films have become famous for a number of elements and iconography : innocent men wrongfully accused, blonde women , long non-dialogue sequences, etc . Hitch apparently decided to leave this movie location unspecific and without recognizable landmarks and filmed it in the city of Quebec . In spite of some shortcoming , this is the picture that best reflects many of Hitchcock's puritanical ethics . Hitch plays on the senses and keeps the suspense and action in feverish pitch . All the elements for a suspenseful evening are in place and things move at an intelligent pace . The story is typical Hitch fare , an issue of wrong accusation , dual guilt , and treason that embroils a man in murder . Hitch had two of most charming actors of all Hollywood as Montgomery Clift and Anne Baxter . As a pretty good acting by Montgomery Clift as a priest falsely framed of killing and Anne Baxter as his old friend who cannot handle the situation wrought in her life by the gross injustice . Montgomery Clift drank during the shooting and his eyes appear glazed during the ferry scene , Hitchcock was a very non-confrontational director and delegated an assistant director and Karl Malden to talk to the actor about it . Supporting cast is frankly excellent such as Karl Malden as Inspector Larrue , Brian Aherne as prosecutor Willy Robertson , O.E. Hasse as Otto Keller , Roger Dann as Pierre Grandfort and Dolly Haas played Alma Keller in this film ; Haas was selected to play "Alma" Keller, because of her physical resemblance to Hitchcock's wife Alma Reville . As usual , Hitch's cameo as man walking , as he is uncredited crossing the Top of Long Staircase . Atmospheric and moody cinematography in evocative style by Robert Burks , Hitch's ordinary . Very good sets and production design by Haworth and Beckman . Riveting and thrilling musical score by classic Dimitri Tiomkin .

The motion picture was well directed by Alfred Hitchcock , he was famous for making his actors follow the script to the word, but in this movie the Hitch's method filmmaking clashing with Clift's method interpretation and the result falls short of the Master of Suspense's best pictures and never quite comes off at all . This is one of Hitch's most stylish and discussed films and will keep you riveted and excited until the edge-of-your-seat .

Brooding, moody, deceptively simple, and beautiful study of guilt and honor

[secondtake · 10/10 · 30 October 2009]

I Confess (1953)

This is one of Hitchcock's darkest films, and one of the best for seamless believability--it lacks some of the breaks from verisimilitude that bigger hits like Psycho and Vertigo famously use. It also has the incomparable Montgomery Clift, who took intensity to new heights as the first in a series of great method actors in the 1950s. He really wasn't a Hitchcock kind of actor (the director liked the artifice and changeability of a Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart much more), but he makes the film what it is, and Hitchcock surely knew it, and made the most of it. When the camera (in the hand of Robert Burks) sweeps up to a full screen view of Clift's face and you see those glowing, brooding eyes, you fall under their collective spell. Yeah, it's great stuff.

The plot is pretty simple and amazing--a priest (Clift) learns something in a confession that come to haunt him in unexpected and very threatening ways. Hitchcock manages to push the envelope a little, as usual, in this case by having an illicit-seeming sexual affair be one of the keys to the plot. This implication naturally complicates the priest's life, but during the main plot of the movie and in a cheery flashback for backstory. Anne Baxter, the principled, strong woman (also not a Hitchcock forte) is terrific throughout, terrific the way Ingrid Bergman was in Notorious. Unlike most of Hitchcock's output, there is essentially no comic relief here, and the light and camera-work are equally dark--and truly gorgeous.

The French New Wave directors really admired this particular film of Hitchcock's, and you can see why. But it is also just a great, fast, distressing American melodrama set in France. It's not sensational, but it is spectacular, one of my favorites among many by this odd, brilliant auteur.

Good, not great Hitchcock...

[waha99 · 7/10 · 13 August 2002]

I Confess is one of those movies that almost reaches the brink of greatness, but just doesn't quite make it. Hitchcock's direction is certainly fine, if not a bit pedestrian. There are no signature scenes that seems to be present in many of his other films (such as the shower scene in Psycho, or the Mount Rushmore chase in North By Northwest). There is a flashback sequence, showing Clift before his character was a priest, that starts off beautifully....the camera is slightly cock-eyed, and Anne Baxter descends the staircase in slow motion, almost flowing down the stairs. However, the rest of the flashback just doesn't live up to the potential established in that first shot. Karl Malden is good as usual. Clift does an okay job in the role of the priest who hears the confession of the murderer. Anne Baxter is very good, and the supporting cast is certainly fine. I have also had a problem with the musical score of this film. Seems that Jack Warner had a standing rule at WB studios, of filling nearly every second of a film's soundtrack with background music. I'm sure Hitchcock and Tiomkin both cringed at this insane policy. Tiomkin DOES provide the film with a beautiful love theme of sorts. I recommend this film, but I don't guarantee that you'll be watching a classic. *** out of ****.

the greatest spiritual denouement in film history

[danielj_old999 · 9/10 · 19 October 2005]

I have read the other comments on this film and nobody seems to have grasped the single essential point that makes it timelessly relevant, and that lifts it, in that respect, above all other movies: its portrayal of an individual of total spiritual integrity. All candidates for the priesthood should view this film and then decide whether they can live up to the standard set by this priest - if not they might as well give it up and become auto mechanics or carpet cleaners. Montgomery Clift's priest believes utterly in the essential worth of all human beings, regardless of their spiritual condition - and believe me Otto Keller is not in good condition. Clift is willing to take his integrity to the electric chair - who does this remind you of? Only by sheer accident is he vindicated - if had he not been, and been executed, it would not have made the slightest bit of difference to his destiny. Here is a man who has his house in order. Forget about the romantic subplot, and look at this movie as spiritual education -- just set your lights by this man and your problems are over.

The trouble is that the story is intriguing but has no suspense.

[piapia · 6/10 · 26 April 1999]

There are not worse mystery stories than those that are resolved by a confession. This picture starts with a confession, and starts well. But the very complicated, and very absurd story's denouement is another confession: The real murderer confesses by shooting people. Hitchcock himself said to Francois Truffaut that he did not remember why he bought the old play in which this picture is based. Lots of coincidences do not construct a suspense story.The picture is saved by the performances of Montgomery Clift (even if it is slightly monotonous), Anne Baxter and Anny Ondra. Imagine a Hitchcock picture without humor!

Atmospheric, But Lacks Bite

[slokes · 5/10 · 12 February 2010]

Watching any Alfred Hitchcock film can be enjoyable when you know something about the director going in. That he got his start as an expressionist filmmaker, that he was a Catholic, and that he had a deep suspicion of law are all points thrashed out enjoyably in "I Confess". It's when you try to watch it as a movie that it feels unsatisfactory.

Late one night, Father Logan (Montgomery Clift) sees someone enter his church. It's Keller (O.E. Hasse), an attendant at Logan's rectory. Keller tells Logan he has a confession to make: He just murdered a man. Logan is now bound by the seal of the confessional from telling what he knows, a tough thing as suspicions begin to center around Logan himself.

From the opening shot, of a church spire set high atop the city of Quebec, the film makes clear this is going to be a dark and psychological treatment of the sort Hitchcock did in the 1920s with "The Lodger" and "Blackmail". The Catholic angle is presented sincerely, if a bit grimly, making clear the depth of Logan's dilemma. And the authorities are even more overbearing here than usual, pressing not only Logan but his former lover Ruth (Anne Baxter) with cold certainty and some shady tactics.

If only the film worked better as a mystery. The film hinges on a pretty goofy coincidence, that the victim of Keller's murder just happened to be blackmailing Ruth about her relationship with Logan. With the notable exception of Karl Malden as a police investigator, the cast seems to be sleepwalking through the film, Clift so woodenly you might call him the Manchurian Prelate. Hearing Keller's confession, he seems almost catatonic, and you get as tired as Malden's character listening to his polite evasions. "There is nothing I can add to what I've already said," he basically says, and seems a bit miffed that it's not enough.

The confession is the heart of the film, and at the heart of the film's problem. Like JoeytheBrit and other posters here, I'm struck by the turn in Keller's character, from genuinely remorseful to taunting and even conniving to set Logan up. If he's so depraved, why did he confess in the first place? Understanding Logan's position (he can't rat out Keller no matter how he deserves it because he is now the keeper of Keller's soul), it seems he's still too passive, not giving Keller any grief when it becomes clear Keller is not turning himself in.

It's not a bad film, just convoluted and underdeveloped. The exploration of Hitchcock's faith is fascinating stuff, and skillfully presented in an expressionistic way; plenty of shots where crucifixes are seen in shadow, reflection, and profile. The encounters between Keller and Logan in the rectory have a certain power even when (because?) Clift is not projecting very much; as if presenting a kind of Christian existentialist message of a lost shepherd left undeveloped in the script. Cinematographer Robert Burks' work on other Hitchcock films is easier to appreciate, but his contribution relative to everyone else may not have been greater than it was here.

A good film to see with this one is Hitchcock's "The Wrong Man", which showcases Catholic guilt in a different but no less complicated light. Both are darker films, but speak to qualities that undergirded Hitchcock's artistic vision and, in more measured doses, lifted his work above that of anyone else.

Average For Hitchcock, Good By Any Other Standard

[Snow Leopard · 15 May 2001]

"I Confess" is merely an average entry in Alfred Hitchcock's filmography, but it is a pretty good film by any other standard. It has some basic weaknesses, but also some major strengths that make it worthwhile. The basic story is established early: Catholic priest Father Logan (Montgomery Clift) hears a confession from the church caretaker, who has just killed a man. Circumstantial evidence leads to Father Logan himself being suspected, but he is bound by the seal of the confessional and is unable to clear himself, putting him in serious danger of being wrongly convicted.

Two basic weaknesses keep "I Confess" from being one of Hitchcock's better works. First, too much of the plot hinges on the priest's confessional responsibility. In itself, this is an interesting plot device, leading to an interesting twist on one of Hitchcock's favorite themes, the wrongly accused man. But there are not enough other significant plot elements, and this one point cannot bear the load that it has to carry. In particular, a non-Catholic viewer, without an intuitive sense of the importance of confessional, will find it difficult to remember just how impossible it is for Father Logan to clear himself. This could have been established somehow earlier in the film - Hitchcock could be very creative when demonstrating things like this - but as it is, it is assumed that we already appreciate its importance.

The two leads also are less than ideal in their roles, making it harder for the audience to develop the deep identification with them that makes Hitchcock's best movies such exciting experiences. The ever-brooding Clift is very believable as a priest, but his acting range is too limited to make us fully appreciate his dilemma, nor can he make the romance angle as compelling as it could have been. Anne Baxter is also too melodramatic as Logan's old friend who wants to clear him. Baxter is a good actress in the right part - for example, her breathlessness is ideal in "All About Eve" - but her character here really called for something different.

Yet there are some strengths to "I Confess". One that stands out is the wonderful black-and-white photography. The film was made on location in Quebec, and Hitchcock masterfully uses a careful selection of shots throughout the picture that establish Quebec's distinctiveness and its stark beauty. It is one of Hitchcock's best pieces of location filming, rivaling the French Riviera scenery of "To Catch a Thief", although of course with a much different tone. In both films, the location nicely complements the story.

Karl Malden is good as the inspector assigned to the case. Malden must accept the usual role of a Hitchcock policeman - hard-working, honest, and earnest, but not very perceptive. Malden makes what could have been a bland character come to life.

There is also a fine climactic sequence: Father Logan is finally put on trial, and the verdict sparks public outrage and a carefully filmed and suspenseful chain of events. The climax is perhaps less satisfying than those of Hitchcock's best films, but that is mainly because we never learned to identify very much with the characters; it is not a fault of the ending itself. There are some fine Hitchcock touches here that you have to catch on repeat viewings.

If you knew what he knew...what would you do?

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 2 April 2022]

Montgomery Clift plays a young priest named Michael Logan, who hears the confession of the distraught Otto Keller (O. E. Hasse), a German refugee turned handyman / gardener. Keller has just killed a slimy attorney named Villette (Ovila Legare), while attempting to rob him. Obviously, Logan can't inform the cops, which puts him in a bind, but making matters worse is the fact that two young girls witnessed a man in priests' garb leaving Villettes' residence. This, naturally, leads Logan to be suspected later on, and brings his former relationship with married woman Ruth Grandfort (Anne Baxter) into the open.

While not up there with the absolute best of Hitchcock (who has his usual fleeting cameo in the opening minutes), even lesser Hitch still qualifies as pretty good. "I Confess" tells a good, reasonably absorbing story in which the viewer knows who the guilty party is almost immediately, and waits through the film waiting to see when (or if) they will be revealed / get their comeuppance. And the killer is treated with some nuance, initially coming off as somewhat sympathetic and becoming more malevolent as the story plays out.

Based on a play by Paul Anthelme, this was scripted by George Tabori & William Archibald, and derives a lot of its effectiveness from being filmed (and set) in the Canadian province of Quebec, which has its fair share of "Old World" atmosphere. It tells a fairly romantic story, in which we can see that Michael was the great love of Ruths' life, although she does care for her husband (Roger Dann), who's portrayed as a very understanding and decent man. It spends a fair amount of time in flashback mode, as we learn something about character motivations.

Clift is good, of course, but rather overshadowed by some of his supporting players, especially Karl Malden as the investigating detective, the pretty Ms. Baxter, Brian Aherne as the district attorney, Mr. Hasse, and Dolly Haas as the killers' guilt-ridden wife.

An engaging yarn about a holy mans' struggle (does he keep his vows or not), given style and some weight by Hitch. A similar premise was utilized for a 1980s thriller titled "The Rosary Murders".

Seven out of 10.

Montgomery Clift's Face

[marcelbenoitdeux · 8/10 · 25 April 2023]

I could follow the film just by looking into Montgomery Clift's extraordinary face. Look at his reaction to the confession. Clift's eyes are a symphony of emotions with him doing nothing. Powerful, brilliant, unforgettable. I forgot it was a Hitchcock film not matter how suspenseful it is, and it is, because Clift's internal torture is so pungent. Dimitri Tiomkin's score, terrific as it is, pushes us away from Hitchcock's territory. What I'm saying is that is not Bernard Herrmann.

A blonde Anne Baxter, an intense Karl Malden, and a delightful Brian Aherne keeps us a bit dislocated. The conclusion, framed by faces reacting to Clift's secret is a powerful and totally satisfying ending.

An underrated Hitchcock masterpiece that shouldn't be ignored

[Diego_rjc · 7/10 · 22 January 2010]

By the time Alfred Hitchcock shot this movie, he already had a really strong career, with lots of great and excellent films, but it was after this one that he made his best-known masterpieces that became all-time classics, with the exception of 'Rebecca' and 'Strangers On a Train', that came before.

This movie begins with lots of shots of Quebec, the town where it's set. Then it shows a dead man inside a house. Right after it, we see another man going into a church and confessing the murder to a priest. But the plot really begins when the priest is considered the prime suspect of the murder, and he can't tell the police who did it because of the church's principles. The plot itself is already very interesting, ans it's so well-written that doesn't make the viewer bored at all, with great character development and a few clever twists, it's but Alfred Hitchcock's directing makes it even more interesting, with some clever shots at interesting angles, and a film-noir style to it.

Montgomery Clift stars here as the priest. Even though he is, in my opinion, a too good-looking priest, and that feels weird, if you can get past that, you can see how powerful is his acting here. Karl Maden also gives a nice acting as the police inspector, but it's Anne Baxter that isn't good. Although her character is important to the story, she feels weird and out of place.

This movie also suffers from the same problem as many movies of its time: because of the Hayes Code, they were forced to chance the movie's ending from the one featured on the original play in which the movie was based on. If it had stick to the original ending, it would be much better. The other problem I have with this picture is the two major flaws that bothered me. I'm not gonna spoil it here, but anyone can see it, and one of the then is the ending itself.

Overral, this is a nice directed Hitchcock film, with a clever plot, but with a weird ending. It also features nice interpretations by Karl Maden and Montgomery Clift, but Anne Baxter screws it. In my opinion, it is much better than Hitchcock's so-called better 'Strangers On a Train'. I wouldn't put it on a list of my favorite movies of the master, but it's far from the worst ones.

7/10

Atypical but underrated Hitchcock

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 3 June 2013]

As Alfred Hitchcock is my favourite director of course I would see I Confess. And on the most part I wasn't disappointed, for my tastes Dmitri Tiomkin's music score is too much of a drone(unusual for Tiomkin) but while not among Hitchcock's finest I Confess is what I consider Hitchcock's most underrated(Stage Fright got that honour before I saw this though). We do know who the killer is right at the start and after the first 40 minutes it is somewhat more talky and not quite as suspenseful as other Hitchcocks, there's also the unfamiliarity at the time of the Catholicism codes. It is strikingly shot, helping a lot with the atmosphere, and the settings and costumes are rendered nicely too. The dialogue is talky but is thoughtfully written and gripping, just don't expect the wit of North By Northwest and To Catch a Thief or black humour of The Trouble with Harry and Family Plot(it's not that type of film) and be thankful that it isn't overwrought and stilted like Under Capricorn, Juno and the Paycock and Paradine Case. The story is quite slow but very atmospheric with a suspenseful(in that you wonder whether Logan will betray the confessional's secrets or not) first 40 minutes and reasonably tense climax, like 39 Steps and North By Northwest it is a classic wrong man story with also the idea of guilt seen in Strangers on a Train. The idea of Logan's dilemma throughout the film is one we can relate to, no matter how unfamiliar it was at the time, and it is relevant today I think. Hitchcock's direction is fine, and so are the performances. I can see why people may not like Montgomery Clift's performance, but I loved his brooding intensity and methodical nature for the difficult role he has to do, a similar style of acting to Paul Newman in Torn Curtain but far more convincing. In fact for any of the actors who did any of the brooding intense roles for a Hitchcock film that aren't Cary Grant or James Stewart, I consider Clift one of the better ones. Anne Baxter is very good as a less likable but just as interesting character, while Karl Malden is perfectly cast and Brian Aherne does menacing and sympathetic rather well. All in all, not typical for Hitchcock but it is a great film and his most underrated. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Another Great Character Study From The Master

[zkonedog · 7/10 · 5 March 2017]

Much like "The Wrong Man", another Alfred Hitchcock gem, "I Confess" is a classic "what if?" scenario, this time involving a Catholic priest and a confession that completely changes his life.

For a basic plot summary, "I Confess" sees Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift) hear the confession of murderer Otto Keller (O.E. Hasse). Sworn to secrecy by the tradition of the confessional, however, Father Logan must grapple with his devotion to the cloth when outing Otto would mean saving himself and the woman he loves.

This is a simple little film (nothing grandeur or over-the-top about it), but at the same time it works very well on a number of different levels. The acting is superb (also including Anne Baxter in a key role), the plot is classic Hitchcock character-driven suspense, and the narrative keeps progressing forward in such a way that it continues to build upon itself. In other words, the pressure only continues to mount on Logan as each new development in the murder case comes to light.

Overall, "I Confess" is a solid Hitch effort that, while maybe not in "Top Ten" status for the famous director, is most certainly worth a viewing for the emotional characters and progressive drama.

Superior, if not superlative Hitchcock

[Spleen · 9/10 · 23 July 2000]

It's never been satisfactorily explained why this wasn't a commercial success. It's not a bad film. Nor is it good in an inaccessible way. Hitchcock's explanations for its failure aren't at all convincing... Non-Catholics don't know about the seal of confession, he said; they can't believe that a priest will sacrifice his freedom and career just to keep a secret. Rubbish. They can and they do. EVERYONE knows about the seal of confession, and Montgomery Clift makes Father Logan's sacrifice perfectly plausible. (Besides, I've never had much time for the objection that a lead character is "too good".) The one thing some people don't know about the seal of confession is that the priest can't mention the sin even to the guilty party, but this is made clear enough in the film in one of the confrontations between Keller and Logan. (All such confrontations are excellent, by the way.) Hitchcock also complains that audiences missed the point by hoping for Logan to tell the police what he knows, a complaint which betrays a misunderstanding of audience psychology. We NEVER hope that the hero will "get out of jail" by doing something dishonourable or morally wrong; so long as there is some other way for the plot to be resolved, THAT'S what we're hoping for. Besides, it's obvious that Logan will never break his vows. Another reviewer says that Logan should simply say to the police: "The seal of confession prevents me from answering your questions"; but the film makes it clear he can't say even this. It would put the police on Keller's scent, and Logan feels - rightly or wrongly, but at any rate plausibly - that his vows force him to be genuinely silent, not nudge-nudge wink-wink silent. I'm on his side here. It's hard to feel much sympathy for the "I won't say who did it, but I WILL drop a hint" attitude adopted by the priests of modern police dramas.

So what IS wrong with "I Confess"? Too much "Teutonic[?] gravity", as some have alleged? "Not enough humour"? Please. those imposing shots of stony Quebec MAKE the film. And let's face it: Hitchcock isn't funny. Give me this kind of thing over the leaden levity of "North by Northwest" any day. No: the short answer is that there's NOTHING, or nothing to speak of, wrong with "I Confess"; certainly nothing that explains its unpopularity.

A few things weaken it a little. If Montgomery Clift plays one of Hitchcock's most likeable characters, Anne Baxter plays one of the least likeable ones; I found it hard not to hope that Ruth would fall into the sea, or walk in front of a bus, or induce a casual passer-by to strangle her. This is okay: the fact that she's irritating helps the story. All the same, her explanatory flashback DOES tend to drag, and one wishes her scenes could be speeded up a little. Then there's Dmitri Timokin's score. It's a fine score, in its way, but it DRONES. Tiomkin is never allowed to get a crescendo out of the orchestra; instead, the sound engineer turns up the volume every so often.

Not that any of this matters much. Overall it's one of Hitchcock's more engaging films. The worst that can be said of it is that it's not a masterpiece, nor is it among his very best. Try it if you think that all the critical carrying-on over such films as "Foreign Correspondent", "Notorious", "Strangers on a Train" and "North by Northwest" is a bit much, and you long for something that isn't so theory-driven.

A real let down compared to other Hitchcock films of the period

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 7/10 · 9 September 2013]

I won't say this much ado about nothing, because murder is certainly not nothing. But compared to the pompous musical background, one would think this was the most significant story in the planet's history. If it was an actor going to such extremes, we would accuse him or her of overacting.

That was the first hint to me that this was not going to be one of Alfred Hitchcock's great films. In fact, it may have been his worst film since the 1930s (until the cheap-thrill ecstasy of "Psycho" and "The Birds"). Of course, to a devout Catholic, the story may have been far more fascinating than it was to the rest of the viewing public. Here and there there is inane dialog that wasted my time. And some of the photography was downright lousy.

That's not to say this is a bad film. It's actually fairly good...but if you didn't know it was a Hitchcock film, you wouldn't think it was. After all, we know who the murderer is from the beginning. So there's little suspense. It's just a question of how the priest will handle a murder confession...particularly when it indirectly involves him in a love triangle that makes him a suspect.

Ironically, the best thing about the film is the acting by Montgomery Clift...and Hitchcock reportedly hated Clift's method acting style. The other performances are good, as well. Anne Baxter is good as the love interest. Karl Malden has a fair good role as a police inspector. Brian Aherne is excellent as the prosecutor, and it made me wonder why I am not more familiar with his acting. Roger Dann is fairly good as the husband of Bancroft. Dolly Haas is satisfactory as the wife of the murderer. I'm not so sure that O.E. Hasse's performance as the murderer is up to snuff. His character is such a coarse man, but I almost felt this was a case of overacting.

I have watched this film twice now, and I doubt I'll watch it again. And that's a good example of why I believe this film is not up to Hitchcock's usual standards. I have quite a few Hitchcock films on my DVD shelf, and every once in a while I'll pull one down and enjoy watching it again. This one wouldn't lead me back again. It's a good, but average film.

A Crisis Of Conscience

[seymourblack-1 · 8/10 · 10 August 2013]

Murder, blackmail and romance all feature strongly in Alfred Hitchcock's "I Confess" but the story's most compelling component is the moral dilemma faced by a Catholic priest who, after hearing a murderer's confession, is unable to disclose what he knows to the police. The priest's duty to honour the sanctity of the confessional is paramount but by doing so he becomes complicit in concealing the guilt of a killer and later, when the priest becomes the prime suspect, he's left to face not only a crisis of conscience but also the possibility that he'll be executed if he refuses to tell the police what he knows.

This movie was based on Paul Anthelme's 1902 play called "Nos Deux Consciences" and the fact that the plot involved certain issues (Catholicism, the wrong man theme and reasons to mistrust the police) which had preoccupied Hitchcock throughout his life, makes it easy to understand the appeal that this project had for the great director and also the seriousness with which he focuses on the priest's predicament. It's this seriousness that determines the mood of the movie and also contributes to the tension that's a constant feature of everything that takes place.

Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift) is a young Catholic priest in Quebec who, late one night, discovers the church's caretaker in one of the pews looking very distressed. Otto Keller (O.E.Hasse) asks Father Logan to hear his confession and in the confessional describes how he murdered a local lawyer called Villette (Ovila Legare) when he'd been caught in the act of stealing some money. Keller tells his wife Alma (Dolly Hass) what he's done and next morning goes to Villette's house, as usual, where he's also employed as a part-time gardener. On "discovering" the body, he calls the police and Inspector Larrue (Karl Malden) and some other officers soon arrive to investigate.

Father Logan also goes to the victim's house on the same morning and claims that he had an appointment to meet Villette. After he leaves, Larrue sees him talking outside to Ruth Grandfort (Anne Baxter) in a way that raises his suspicions and later when two young girls report that they saw a priest leaving Villette's property at about the time of the murder, Larrue's suspicions are reinforced.

Ruth and Logan had been in a relationship before he became a priest and on one occasion, after having been separated for some time, had spent the night together. Logan was unaware that during his absence, Ruth had married a politician named Pierre Grandfort (Roger Dann) and unfortunately for the young couple, they were seen together by Villette who throughout the following years blackmailed Ruth.

On the night of Villette's murder, Logan was with Ruth because she'd sought his advice about the blackmail problem and so when he's subsequently interviewed by Larrue, Logan doesn't feel able to account for his whereabouts at the time of the murder. This makes Larrue convinced of the priest's guilt and later when Ruth comes forward to provide Logan with the alibi he needs, she actually makes matters worse for him because the fact that she was being blackmailed provided a strong motive for wanting to bring an end to Villette's activities by any means possible. A number of further complications and problems then follow before Logan's ordeal is finally brought to an end.

"I Confess" is a great-looking movie with wonderful expressionistic cinematography which perfectly complements the sombre mood of the piece. The use of numerous close-ups and low-angle shots creates an unsettling atmosphere and some camera techniques, such as the way that Larrue's face is revealed just before he sees Logan and Ruth together in the street, create a frisson of their own.

The quality of the acting is impeccable throughout but Montgomery Clift's contribution really stands out because of the dignity, sensitivity and intensity that he brings to his character's anguish.

Plot holes, poor acting and directing weaken this film and story

[SimonJack · 6/10 · 1 July 2021]

Some critics and reviewers think that "I Confess" is not a typical Hitchcock movie. True, it's not a "Rebecca," or "Suspicion," or "Dial M for Murder." But neither are so many other Hitchcock films - "Lifeboat," or "Vertigo," or "The Birds," or "North by Northwest." For that matter, most others of his suspense murder mysteries are quite different from one another. "Psycho" isn't anything like "Rebecca." "Rope" is nothing like "Saboteur." "The 39 Steps" is nothing like "Strangers on a Train."

So, while some folks ponder what constitutes "typical" Hitchcock, I'll just weigh in on this film. First, Hitchcock surely knew the main subject of the plot. He was raised Catholic and practiced his faith. He knew about the seal of the confessional - that a priest can never reveal what he hears someone confess. That is the core around which this entire story and film are based. Hitchcock said he knew that Protestants and people other than Catholics couldn't understand that. Yet, I don't think the film handles it in a way to help others understand what it is about. But then, if it did, the plot would have to come out differently. And that would change the story.

Second, it seems to me that Hitchcock proceeded with this film with one of two premises. He either didn't care that some or many people might see the subtle hole in the screenplay; or, he didn't mind the conclusion by those who would notice, that many Catholics in Quebec didn't really know their religion very well. In 1950, the population of Quebec, Canada was close to 90 percent Catholic.

Inspector Larrue (Karl Malden) says that he had been an altar boy. But when Fr. Logan responds to his questions three different times, and says "I can't say," Larrue is clueless. He doesn't think to ask him if he can't say because of the seal of confession. That's the first thing that should cross the mind of a knowledgeable Catholic if he heard a priest say that and not explain it any further. Later, when Otto Keller is confronted by Larrue, Logan and others, Fr. Millars is also present. When Keller says that he thought Fr. Logan had spilled the beans about Keller's having done the murder, Fr. Millars looks pleasantly surprised. Had it never occurred to him that his fellow priest was bound by the seal of confession?

Third, the film has one other gaping hole. In the courtroom, the Crown prosecutor, Willy Robertson (Brian Aherne) shows Fr. Logan a cassock the police had found in his dresser. It was the one Keller had worn as a disguise the night of his attempted robbery and then murder of the lawyer, Villettte. It had blood on it. Keller's wife, Alma, had hid it in Fr. Logan's dresser. Robertson asks Fr. Logan if it was his cassock, and he replied that it wasn't. Yet, Robertson proceeds with the premise that Logan had hid the cassock in his own dresser.

Wouldn't the police have asked Fr. Logan about it before the trial? And when he said it wasn't his, wouldn't they dig deeper. If it belonged to another priest, would that not raise other questions and suspicions? If none of the priests were missing a cassock, where did that one come from? If Keller had purchased or stolen it from somewhere else, there would have been a trail. Inspector Larrue was supposed to be the top detective and a smart guy. Wouldn't he wonder about Fr. Logan being so dumb as to try to hide a cassock with blood on it that would link him to the crime, in his own dresser drawers?

These are obvious holes and things that one would expect the police to be very sharp about. But they would also completely change the story and plot - and ruin it from the type of mysterious theme that it plays out. Yet, this is one crime and mystery film that has too many simple goofs and slipups on the part of the police to be believed. And, that makes this one of the weakest plots and screenplays from which Hitchcock made a movie.

Then there is Montgomery Clift's portrayal. Clift had a film persona of a quiet type. None of his films have him with long dialog. Much of the power of his acting was in his mannerisms, his facial expressions, and how the cameras caught closeups of him. His characters seldom showed signs of a lot of energy.

But in this film, Clift seems inordinately wooden. Even his walk along the streets seems robotic. There's not even the slightest bounce in his steps that all people show a little of when they walk. And on the ferry and in some short scenes with pauses, he seems to be dazed or unaware of anything around him. I read that he had been drinking heavily during this filming and that it concerned Hitchcock and some others of the cast. That might explain this somewhat.

Finally, there is one other thing doubtful and irritating in this film. Ruth Grandfort (Anne Baxter) professes her long and deep love for Michael Logan. So, why did she not wait for him during the war? Many, many young women did wait for their men. A beautiful love story of such waiting is in the 1946 smash hit and Oscar-winning movie, "The Best Years of Our Lives." Wilma Cameron waited for and married her childhood sweetheart, Homer Parrish, who came back with both arms missing. Yet, in this movie, Ruth Grandfort tells her story in Robertson's office, and just says rather matter of fact, that she married Pierre while Michael Logan was off to war.

Compared to the many great and excellent films that Hitchcock made, this one has too many holes, a sub-par script, and some weak acting by the leads.

Set In Quebec.

[AaronCapenBanner · 5/10 · 12 October 2013]

Alfred Hitchcock directed this drama that stars Montgomery Clift as Father Michael Logan, a catholic Priest in Quebec who finds himself caught up in a murder investigation when the church caretaker(named Otto), after murdering a man whose home he was robbing, flees to the church for sanctuary after confessing the crime to Logan, who tries to convince him to turn himself in to the police, though he refuses. His wife Alma works in the church as a housekeeper, and keeps watch over him. The inspector in charge of the investigation(played by Karl Malden) comes to suspect Father Logan, which puts him in a bind if Otto won't confess, since he can't break confidentiality, even to save his life... Good cast can't save misfired drama, that never comes to life with a compelling story, despite some potential. A shame.