I had my doubts about Humphrey Bogart in this role. He played Andrew Morton - an attorney who grew up on the wrong side of the tracks but got out, getting (as he says) a law degree by night school and taking on contract and property law with a major law firm who gets dragged back to the old neighbourhood so to speak to defend a young man charged with the murder of a police officer. Something about this role seemed "un- Bogart." I really didn't think he'd work well. I was wrong. He's actually pretty convincing in the courtroom scenes; he does a good job with them. The basic problem with the movie is that more than half of it isn't a courtroom drama, and so it doesn't make the most effective use of Bogart as it should. Instead, most of the movie is really spent exploring the background of Nick Romano (John Derek) - the accused young man.
I'd say first that the movie's a little bit laughable by modern standards. Honestly, Nick does't come across as that bad a guy (he drinks, he gambles, and, yes, he's pulled off some robberies) but that all seems pretty tame compared to what we see today on the news on a daily basis. Also, the neighbourhood he grew up in doesn't look all that bad, compared to - well - a few neighbourhoods today. So, in that sense, it doesn't strike home with a 21st century viewer. Even things like the press and prosecutor calling Nick "Pretty Boy" - maybe when this was made that would have carried a connotation; today, it just seems silly. So perhaps the basic story loses some of its power.
It loses its power, because the long recounting of Nick's past is used by Morton as a way of defending him. The basic message Morton is offering seems to be that whatever Nick has become - it's not his fault. It's society's fault. There's a moralistic, preachy tone to this that grated on me a little bit - and I'm certainly not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. There were extended periods when I felt I was being lectured at rather than entertained. I would guess, then, that today's conservatives must sneer at this movie and at Bogart's performance. Now, they'd probably sneer at Bogart anyway. He was, after all, a liberal Democrat who once took on the House Un-American Activities Committee during the great Communist witch hunt known as the Red Scare. I admire him for doing that. But I was put off by the tone of this movie.
Having said that, Bogart's performance, when he was front and centre, did not put me off. I liked him in this. He surprised me in a role that I didn't really think would suit him. There are also enough twists and turns in the story (right up until the end) and enough uncertainty about Nick (did he do it or not) that, its overly moralistic tone aside, this wasn't a difficult movie to watch. It made its social point, I suppose, but it did so by focusing too much on Nick's background and the hardship of his upbringing at the expense of creating what probably could have been a more compelling courtroom drama. (6/10)
I'd say first that the movie's a little bit laughable by modern standards. Honestly, Nick does't come across as that bad a guy (he drinks, he gambles, and, yes, he's pulled off some robberies) but that all seems pretty tame compared to what we see today on the news on a daily basis. Also, the neighbourhood he grew up in doesn't look all that bad, compared to - well - a few neighbourhoods today. So, in that sense, it doesn't strike home with a 21st century viewer. Even things like the press and prosecutor calling Nick "Pretty Boy" - maybe when this was made that would have carried a connotation; today, it just seems silly. So perhaps the basic story loses some of its power.
It loses its power, because the long recounting of Nick's past is used by Morton as a way of defending him. The basic message Morton is offering seems to be that whatever Nick has become - it's not his fault. It's society's fault. There's a moralistic, preachy tone to this that grated on me a little bit - and I'm certainly not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. There were extended periods when I felt I was being lectured at rather than entertained. I would guess, then, that today's conservatives must sneer at this movie and at Bogart's performance. Now, they'd probably sneer at Bogart anyway. He was, after all, a liberal Democrat who once took on the House Un-American Activities Committee during the great Communist witch hunt known as the Red Scare. I admire him for doing that. But I was put off by the tone of this movie.
Having said that, Bogart's performance, when he was front and centre, did not put me off. I liked him in this. He surprised me in a role that I didn't really think would suit him. There are also enough twists and turns in the story (right up until the end) and enough uncertainty about Nick (did he do it or not) that, its overly moralistic tone aside, this wasn't a difficult movie to watch. It made its social point, I suppose, but it did so by focusing too much on Nick's background and the hardship of his upbringing at the expense of creating what probably could have been a more compelling courtroom drama. (6/10)