Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > Strange Impersonation (1946) > IMDb user comments
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 11 comments in total 

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
A film noir without the noir film, 11 October 2000
Author: CatTales from United States

This film literally illustrates that without expressionist shadows or dark, dreary streets, a film noir plot turns out more like a soap opera, no matter how dark the plot is. That doesn't take away from the nightmarish quality, however, as things go horribly wrong: betrayal, blackmail, disfigurement, murder. It is only because of this that the female lead becomes our heroine but her fairytale rebirth into beauty cannot erase her "guilt" of independence - as someone has already mentioned, the post-war message was encouraging women to return to the home. However, the film cannot indulge in grim fatalism either, preferring to be prescriptive rather than prohibitive, so it displays a 'whatif?' scenario, allowing for an upbeat ending. Philosophically it falls between the more contemporary sci-fi "Dark man," and the recent spanish fantasy "Open your eyes;" perhaps today these genres are the heirs of film noir.

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
Anthony Mann plays fast, loose with early noir conventions, 2 March 2002
8/10
Author: bmacv from Western New York

Heralded noir director Anthony Mann made his name in legendary collaborations with cinematographer John Alton (T-Men, Raw Deal, Border Incident). But his work in the cycle started earlier when it was still coalescing -- before its essentials had become codified.

A 1945 Republic release (under an old, pre-eagle logo), Strange Impersonation comes in a compact package holding a lot of plot -- perhaps too much. Pharmaceutical chemist Brenda Marshall, anxious to test a new anesthetic she devised, goes home to do so. [On the way, however, she gets into an unpleasant traffic scrape involving a tipsy woman and an ambulance-chaser.] Finally ensconced in her luxurious penthouse, she injects herself and goes under, only to wake in hospital, suffering disfiguring burns from an explosion and fire among her bottles and beakers.

The next year proves to be no picnic. During her convalescence, her rich fiance (who owns the drug company) drops her like a hot brick. She accidentally murders the accident victim -- see above -- who has resurfaces with a gun and a blackmail scheme. On the lam, Marshall assumes a new identity and buys a swell new face through reconstructive surgery. Then she returns to her old firm with a notion of settling scores.

Cheeky, and with the courage of its conventions, Strange Impersonation draws us in by rapid and unexpected changes in its course. Marshall holds an especially strong hand as the brainy victim of outrageous fortune, and plays her cards well. But she's almost matched by Hillary Brooke as her duplicitous assistant/rival. William Gargan (later to become TV's first Martin Kane, Private Eye) remains no more than a plot point as the duped fiance.

Mann plays fast and loose with themes and gimmicks that were to become staple ingredients later in the noir cycle, as if trying them on for size. There are elements here that recall or prefigure movies such as The Woman in the Window, Dark Passage, A Stolen Face and No Man of Her Own, to name just a few. And if they're not worked out with the ruthlessness of vision that was to shape the finest film noir, no matter. Strange Impersonation is a swift, dark funhouse ride.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Fascinating Anthony Mann Film from Republic, 1 November 2007
8/10
Author: David (Handlinghandel) from NY, NY

First off, I practically fainted at seeing a Republic Picture that didn't star John Wayne and wasn't one of their few big-budget movies. That studio turned out some excellent films and they are rarely seen. (This even though till about ten years ago our ABC affiliate showed one, sometimes two, every Saturday night.) The movie itself is not Mann at his best but it's very good. He's been given a fabulous cast. Brenda Marshall is a great favorite of mine. Ruth Ford did more on stage, maybe, than on screen. William Gargan was handsome before he moved into character roles. And Hillary Brooke! Wow, what a performance she turns in here! Lyle Talbot is also on board. He's somewhere between his days as a leading man and his time with Ed Wood. He looks a bit pudgy here.

When we first meet the three principals, they're all wearing glasses. You see, they are scientists.

In a parking garage on her way home from work, Marshall accidentally backs her car into the inebriated Ford. And that's all the plot I'm giving.

Brooke is given a very meaty role. It seems like the typical best-friend part. She seems like a low-budget Eve Arden at first. But oh no! That changes. And she is up to every twist and turn of the plot.

The movie is a little bit soap opera, a little bit noir. But it's both highly entertaining on its on and a must-see for fans of the great Anthony Mann.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Compact B-noir enlivened by Anthony Mann's direction, 13 August 2000
7/10
Author: Robert Keser (rfkeser@ix.netcom.com) from Chicago

"You cannot escape the person you are," says plastic surgeon H.B.Warner, holding up a bony finger. Nevertheless, leading lady Brenda Marshall tries, which puts her in the postwar vanguard of stars doing identity switches [see Bogart in DARK PASSAGE and Stanwyck in NO MAN OF HER OWN]. The script also stirs in elements from A WOMAN'S FACE, plus a dash of mad-scientist hubris, then shakes it into a film noir cocktail.

Marshall plays a research chemist who tries an experimental anesthetic on herself ["nothing can go wrong"], but ends up disfigured, then takes on the identity of extortionist bad girl Ruth Ford. The switch involves several plastic surgery montages, but mostly results in a new coif, a dark rinse, and make-up adjustments.

The plot also plays out the popular postwar subtext of Send-Rosie-the-Riveter-Back-to-the-Kitchen: when scientific professional Marshall turns down a marriage proposal in favor of finishing her own work, she suffers for it at the hands of scheming Hillary Brooke, and then has to fight to get another chance at that marriage ring. This conventional message is somewhat at war with the subversive noir style, but this script includes: the unsuspected hostile motives of a friend, the nightmare chain of events, and the police station third-degree. The novelty here is the woman protagonist, who herself shifts into a femme fatale. In fact, the film centers on a trio of femmes fatales: Marshall and Brooke and Ford. The man involved is William Gargan, relaxed and charming, so hardly an homme fatal.

Republic's studio style-- aimed at simple feel-good entertainment, with invariably stodgy decor---was not exactly a natural home for noir. However, Anthony Mann delivers lean direction, with exceptionally fluid camerawork, some striking high and low angles, and smart playing from all [poor Marshall has to spend a good half-hour with her face wrapped up in bandages]. However, a few years later Mann worked out the situation-- two women tussling over a man--more pointedly, and with lots more shadows, in the superior RAW DEAL.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
A Must For All Fans Of Hillary Brooke, 3 December 2007
7/10
Author: ferbs54 from United States

Does there exist a male baby boomer who grew up watching reruns of "The Abbott and Costello Show" during the 1950s and early '60s who was able to resist falling in love with Hillary Brooke? With her sexy blond good looks and sweet demeanor, no wonder Lou and all the other guys had a major "thing" for her. Viewers may be surprised to learn, however, that before "The A&C Show," Hillary excelled at portraying so-called "bad girls," as the 1946 potboiler "Strange Impersonation" so amply demonstrates. Here, she plays the assistant to anesthesia researcher Brenda Marshall (herself so memorable in one of my Top 10 films of all time, the 1940 remake of "The Sea Hawk"), as well as the best friend from hell. Hillary sabotages one of Marshall's experiments, leading to an explosive fire and the disfigurement of her boss. She then goes about stealing Marshall's fiancé, leading to a twisty story involving betrayal, plastic surgery, murder, blackmail and identity theft. All this in a brief 68 minutes, and topped with a surprise ending that some may find cheap, but that surprisingly explains away the many plot loopholes, inconsistencies and implausibilities that have preceded it; an ending, in addition, that is wholly earned and was set up in the film's opening moments. Yes, this IS another B cheapie made on the quick by Republic Studios, but it certainly is fun. And need I even mention that it is a must for all fans of Hillary Brooke?

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Anthony "Not The" Mann, 5 March 2007
2/10
Author: andrewsarchus from Oakland CA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I'm a huge fan of Anthony Mann films in general and this one was one of the few offered on Netflix that I had not seen. Probably for good reason as it turned out. I agree with the reviewer who said this a noir plot (tragic consequences of kind acts, loss of identity, etc) with no noir visuals. Just two-shots of people talking. A "B" picture with no particularly outstanding merit in any category, including direction. The "scientist" talk and taking lab equipment back to one's home is pretty funny. The main guy scientist is such a schlub it is difficult to imagine these two females fighting over him. Also the main plot line, that of becoming another person, is a bit undermined by the fact that the same actress plays this "transformed" character all the way through. So if it obvious to us that this is the same person, why is it not obvious to the other characters in the film? Unless Mann was pulling some Bunuelian trick on us. But I doubt it. I guess it proves that everyone has to earn a living, even back then!

Was the above comment useful to you?

STRANGE IMPERSONATION (Anthony Mann, 1946) ***, 23 January 2009
7/10
Author: MARIO GAUCI (marrod@melita.com) from Naxxar, Malta

The third noir from director Mann – after THE GREAT FLAMARION (1945; which I haven't seen) and the minor but not unentertaining TWO O'CLOCK COURAGE (1945) – also has some very welcome horror/sci-fi trappings that should endear it to fans of those kind of movies as well. Lovely blonde, bespectacled scientist Brenda Marshall (who, in real life, was Mrs. William Holden at the time) keeps postponing her marriage to colleague William Gargan because of her all-important experiments in anaesthesia, until one night her jealous assistant Hillary Brooke contrives to overdo the mixture causing an explosion in the vicinity of Marshall (who is out cold) that leaves her facially scarred. More treachery from the two-faced Brooke manages to bar Gargan from visiting the hospitalized Marshall which leads to their breaking off the engagement. A slight traffic accident on the night of the explosion has also put a blackmailing woman and a snooping lawyer in Marshall's path but, seeing the former fall to her death from the apartment window after a tussle, gives her a new lease on life which enables her to change identities with the dead woman and perform plastic surgery (courtesy of surgeon H.B. Warner). Adopting the facial features of the blackmailer (including shedding her glasses and dying her hair black), she introduces herself to Gargan and Brooke as her own school-friend from chemistry class and is soon employed by the former as his personal aide! In the meantime, Brooke starts looking into this intruder's past and, confronting Marshall with her contradictory findings, is shocked when her new rival reveals she is the old one in disguise, after all. On the other hand, the obnoxious lawyer is still on Marshall's trail and, in fact, almost gets her convicted for her own murder when Brooke refuses to corroborate her story about who she really is! The climatic interrogation sequence is where Mann lets all the expressionistic stops out…until the unexpected (and unwarranted) end revelation that it has all been the heroine's nightmare!! That the film succeeds as much as it does in spite of the meager cast, inexistent production values and cop-out finale is a tribute to the mastery of a film-maker who is just finding a firm footing in a genre he will be making his own in the following year or two.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Imposter, 4 September 2006
4/10
Author: jldmp1 (jldmp1@aol.com) from United States

Two things (and only two things) are worthy of notice here. The first is the simple noir construction - that of a manipulator who toys with the protagonist - here, to take over her role. Nora has no way out of the 'machinery', so the only escape is through a deus ex machina sort of release. Similar to the more harrowing (but ultimately, just as goopy)"The Big Clock".

The second is the 'skeleton' of this movie, similar to the deconstructed anatomical model - it serves as a rough blank upon which much improved storytelling conventions have been added. This has been 'reconstructed' in the guise of "Angel Heart", "Johnny Handsome", "Abre Los Ojos/Vanilla Sky" and countless others.

Otherwise, this is pretentious - poor acting, dull camera work, generic musical score, and shallow science...a B movie, pretending to be something well beyond its reach.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
A flawed noir film, 22 October 2007
3/10
Author: robert-temple-1 from United Kingdom

This film's chief recommendation is a superb performance by Hilary Brooke, who plays a mini-Iago, a woman so unremittingly wicked, scheming and grasping that Brooke's intense portrayal of her should really have been lifted from this B picture and inserted into an A picture. The film's main weakness is this: primarily, the entire plot depends on two women (Brenda Marshall and Hilary Brooke) being so infatuated with the leading man that they will stop at nothing to 'have him', but the casting for that part is William Gargan, who is wholly ludicrous. No one would 'have to have' Gargan, who is goofy-looking, weak, altogether lacking in any semblance of romantic charm, and frankly just a joke in the part. Two women fighting to the death over that blob of vaseline is ridiculous. The other fatal weakness to this film is an appalling plot development towards the end, which I shall refrain from revealing, but it is terminal to taking this film seriously. How could Anthony Mann have directed such an inferior work when only two years later he would produce the masterpiece 'Raw Deal' (1948)? It all goes to show that with a weak script and a hopeless leading man, everything can readily collapse into a heap of rubble. This film could have been something, but for reasons which we will never know, it was gutted from within. After all, the basic plot is strong and powerful if it had been allowed to happen without interference, and with the right leading man to make it believable. What a missed opportunity this was!

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Drugged, 13 October 2004
Author: tedg (tedg@FilmsFolded.com) from Virginia Beach

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Spoilers herein.

This film was from a period in which the definitions of and borderlines between genres was changing, perhaps the most in the history of film. This experiment is a 'safe' noir, where the viewer is returned to the fuzzy familiar world of the happy ending.

In other words, this movie is one thing that disguises itself as something else, something darker, more mysterious and less 'scientific' (meaning in this case, logical).

And the story is the same thing. Would be pretty interesting if their were at least one other element that was done well.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user comments
Your vote history