"Husbands can get lost so easily," someone tells Jeanne Crain's character in the 1953 Fox thriller "Dangerous Crossing," and boy, do those words ever prove prophetic! Here, Crain plays Ruth Stanton, a wealthy heiress who departs on a honeymoon cruise after a whirlwind courtship. When her husband (Carl Betz, who most baby boomers will recognize as Dr. Alex Stone from the old "Donna Reed Show") disappears from the ship before they even leave the NYC harbor, Ruth becomes distraught...especially since no one on board, including the ship's doctor (sympathetically played by Michael Rennie), will believe the story that her husband ever existed! What follows is a tale of escalating suspense and paranoia, with no one on the ship seemingly worthy of Ruth's--or our--complete trust. While not precisely a film noir, "Dangerous Crossing" certainly does have its noirish aspects, and the scene in which Ruth searches the boat for her husband at night, in a dense mist, the only background sound being the intermittent blare of the ship's foghorn, is one that all fans of the genre should just love. Jeanne, very much the star of this film and appearing in virtually every scene, looks absolutely gorgeous, of course (the woman had one of the most beautiful faces in screen history, sez me), and her thesping here is top notch. She is given any number of stunning close-ups by veteran cinematographer Joseph Lashelle, who years before had lensed that classiest of film noirs, 1944's "Laura." In one of the DVD's surprisingly copious collection of extras, it is revealed that the picture took only 19 days to produce, at a cost of only $500,000; a remarkably efficient production, resulting in a 75-minute film with no excess flab and a sure-handed way of delivering shudders and suspense. Very much recommended.
65 Reviews
One of Cranes' better vehicles
reve-211 February 2000
Before I even saw the first scene of this very good mystery I was pretty sure that I would like it because it was adapted from a story by John Dickson Carr. In my opinion, he was the dean of mystery writers, specializing in the genre that gives us the stylish murder in the sealed room and similar types of "impossible" crimes.
This time, Ms. Crane is a woman who has been married for only a few hours. Her and her new husband are taking an ocean voyage for their honeymoon. But, the husband goes to see the purser, telling his wife that he will meet her in the ships' dining room. Since this is a Carr story the husband, naturally, disappears and most of the rest of the movie finds Ms. Crane trying to convince the ships' crew that her husband did indeed board the ship with her and has vanished. Of course, everyone claims to have not seen her husband board with her and she is thought of as a mental case. But, as the movie unfolds, the ships' doctor, played by Michael Rennie, begins to think that there may be truth to her story. From the start, it's obvious that at least one crew member is part of a nefarious plot and that Ms. Crane is in grave danger. But, which crew member, or members, are part of the plot? The movie is well paced and comes to a satisfying conclusion.
All in all, I found it to be most enjoyable.
This time, Ms. Crane is a woman who has been married for only a few hours. Her and her new husband are taking an ocean voyage for their honeymoon. But, the husband goes to see the purser, telling his wife that he will meet her in the ships' dining room. Since this is a Carr story the husband, naturally, disappears and most of the rest of the movie finds Ms. Crane trying to convince the ships' crew that her husband did indeed board the ship with her and has vanished. Of course, everyone claims to have not seen her husband board with her and she is thought of as a mental case. But, as the movie unfolds, the ships' doctor, played by Michael Rennie, begins to think that there may be truth to her story. From the start, it's obvious that at least one crew member is part of a nefarious plot and that Ms. Crane is in grave danger. But, which crew member, or members, are part of the plot? The movie is well paced and comes to a satisfying conclusion.
All in all, I found it to be most enjoyable.
Enjoyable thriller
n_adams130 April 2014
Well I understand by reading the reviews this film is not everyone's cup of tea. I however enjoyed it very much.
The lovely, vivacious Jeanne Crain plays, Ruth Stanton, now Ruth Bowman after a whirlwind courtship with Carl Betz set off for Europe on a luxury passenger liner for their honeymoon.
I love these old gem's which are not too long, full of thrills and mystery but at the same time, not too taxing on the brain.
Quick synopsis, Mr Bowman vanishes shortly after the ship sets sail and seemingly nobody is aware of his existence. Ruth, spends most of the film helped considerably by the ship's doctor, played admirably by Michael Rennie, searching for clues to his whereabouts.
Anyway without giving anything away the film reaches a very satisfactory conclusion.
Great way to spend a leisurely hour or so.
The lovely, vivacious Jeanne Crain plays, Ruth Stanton, now Ruth Bowman after a whirlwind courtship with Carl Betz set off for Europe on a luxury passenger liner for their honeymoon.
I love these old gem's which are not too long, full of thrills and mystery but at the same time, not too taxing on the brain.
Quick synopsis, Mr Bowman vanishes shortly after the ship sets sail and seemingly nobody is aware of his existence. Ruth, spends most of the film helped considerably by the ship's doctor, played admirably by Michael Rennie, searching for clues to his whereabouts.
Anyway without giving anything away the film reaches a very satisfactory conclusion.
Great way to spend a leisurely hour or so.
Carr-nival cruise
MikeMagi28 July 2011
"Dangerous Crossing" is based on a story (actually a radio play) by John Dickson Carr, the master of the locked room mystery. But there's no locked room and the mystery is more in the vein of Cornell Woolrich, arguably the "father" of film noir. As in some of Woolrich's best tales, the story begins with a sudden twist of fate. Moments after Jeanne Crain as a new bride boards a luxury liner on her honeymoon, the groom vanishes. No one has seen him. Their stateroom is listed as unoccupied. Even Michael Rennie as the sympathetic ship's doctor (who's clearly smitten by her) suspects that her missing husband is a figment of her imagination. Still, there are some very odd people skulking the boat's fog-shrouded decks -- and when the answer comes, it's ingenious. Thankfully, the movie was made in the early 1950s so there was no problem bringing it in at a swift 75 minutes. Today, it would be padded out to the requisite two hours and the suspense would escape like air from a punctured tire. Credit Joseph Newman with smart direction (including an opening dockside scene worthy of Michael Curtiz,) making maximum use of the sets Fox built to serve as the Titanic. In short, a thoroughly entertaining grade B thriller.
Good
AAdaSC20 July 2009
Ruth (Jeanne Crain) and John (Carl Betz) board a ship for their honeymoon. However, within 15 minutes of sailing, John has disappeared. Not only has he disappeared but there has never been any trace of him and there are no witnesses that have seen the couple together. The room that they originally booked into is now empty and only Ruth's suitcases seem to be located on board - in a different room! So begins the mystery. The film follows Ruth's attempts to locate her husband while we are introduced to a suspicious cast of characters. No-one believes her story and even the confidante that she finds in Dr Paul Manning (Michael Rennie) has his doubts. She receives a phone call in her cabin from John saying that they are both in danger.......
The film gets you involved from the beginning and you know that something sinister is occurring. The various characters are introduced to us - eg, stewardess Anna (Mary Anderson), single traveller Kay (Marjorie Hoshelle), steward Jim (Casey Adams) and a foreign passenger with a walking stick (Karl Ludwig Lindt) - and we are never quite sure what is in the back of their minds. Even Dr manning is not above suspicion. The fog horn that continually sounds adds to the tension in the night scenes and it is a well acted film by all.
The film gets you involved from the beginning and you know that something sinister is occurring. The various characters are introduced to us - eg, stewardess Anna (Mary Anderson), single traveller Kay (Marjorie Hoshelle), steward Jim (Casey Adams) and a foreign passenger with a walking stick (Karl Ludwig Lindt) - and we are never quite sure what is in the back of their minds. Even Dr manning is not above suspicion. The fog horn that continually sounds adds to the tension in the night scenes and it is a well acted film by all.
Danger on the luxury liner
TheLittleSongbird15 July 2020
Have always loved films with mystery and suspense, so 'Dangerous Crossing' immediately had me sold. Was also very encouraged seeing a lot of favourable reviews for 'Dangerous Crossing', as well as some that weren't so much. The setting sounded very atmospheric and a great location for this type of story. The cast was also a selling point, Michael Rennie is always dependable and Jeanne Crain impressed me hugely in 'Pinky', enough to make me want to see more of her work.
While 'Dangerous Crossing' didn't strike me as a great film and could have been better than it was, especially considering that its potential was hardly small in the first place, a lot works in its favour and far outweighs the not so good. And if asked as to whether to recommend 'Dangerous Crossing', my answer would be a solid if not quite enthusiastic yes. There are a lot better films of this type and there are also worse, if this is the sort of film that appeals to you there should be plenty to like even if it doesn't reach masterpiece level.
'Dangerous Crossing' has its flaws. The melodrama does get a little much in the latter stages and Crain's character as others have said is pretty one-dimensional and could have done with more subtlety in the writing.
Also found the ending somewhat abrupt, although to me it actually wasn't a predictable one. Although the use of the foghorn is creepy and leaves one feeling unsettled, it could have been used less and not emphasised as much as it was.
On the other hand, 'Dangerous Crossing' looks great. Very beautifully and atmospherically photographed with effective use of fog and the setting has class and creepiness. Although there are reservations with its overuse, the foghorn does give one the creeps. The dialogue on the most part is thoughtful and tightly structured until getting overwrought towards the end. The direction keeps the film moving at a crisp clip.
The story is intriguing and suspenseful generally, the mystery not routine or implausible. Rennie is admirably restrained and sympathetic and Crain does more than credibly and is fully committed in a difficult role of this nature to pull off. The rest of the cast are solid.
Concluding, good if not great. 7/10
While 'Dangerous Crossing' didn't strike me as a great film and could have been better than it was, especially considering that its potential was hardly small in the first place, a lot works in its favour and far outweighs the not so good. And if asked as to whether to recommend 'Dangerous Crossing', my answer would be a solid if not quite enthusiastic yes. There are a lot better films of this type and there are also worse, if this is the sort of film that appeals to you there should be plenty to like even if it doesn't reach masterpiece level.
'Dangerous Crossing' has its flaws. The melodrama does get a little much in the latter stages and Crain's character as others have said is pretty one-dimensional and could have done with more subtlety in the writing.
Also found the ending somewhat abrupt, although to me it actually wasn't a predictable one. Although the use of the foghorn is creepy and leaves one feeling unsettled, it could have been used less and not emphasised as much as it was.
On the other hand, 'Dangerous Crossing' looks great. Very beautifully and atmospherically photographed with effective use of fog and the setting has class and creepiness. Although there are reservations with its overuse, the foghorn does give one the creeps. The dialogue on the most part is thoughtful and tightly structured until getting overwrought towards the end. The direction keeps the film moving at a crisp clip.
The story is intriguing and suspenseful generally, the mystery not routine or implausible. Rennie is admirably restrained and sympathetic and Crain does more than credibly and is fully committed in a difficult role of this nature to pull off. The rest of the cast are solid.
Concluding, good if not great. 7/10
Danger on Board-Dangerous Crossing ***
edwagreen11 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Here we go again. It's a "Gaslight" like theme set aboard a ship. Newlyweds, who married after a 4 week romance, embark on the ship only for the groom to flee and leave Jeanne Crain alone and absolutely bewildered by his disappearance. Naturally, everyone on board thinks she is crazy and that is the objective of the conspirators in this diabolical plot.
Crain, as Ruth Bowman, is wonderful here. You feel her utter frustration, and react accordingly to her bizarre behavior. As the ship doctor who is sympathetic to her plight, Michael Rennie naturally falls for her in this rather taut thriller.
The picture is interesting because more people appear who seem to be part of the plot to drive Crain crazy. Are they?
Crain, as Ruth Bowman, is wonderful here. You feel her utter frustration, and react accordingly to her bizarre behavior. As the ship doctor who is sympathetic to her plight, Michael Rennie naturally falls for her in this rather taut thriller.
The picture is interesting because more people appear who seem to be part of the plot to drive Crain crazy. Are they?
cool shipboard mystery!
sam6617 August 2001
This movie is a nice, tense little b/w thriller, set aboard a transatlantic passenger liner headed to England. Jeanne Crain plays a new bride; her husband immediately goes missing after boarding the ship in New York, leaving her in a state of panic as she can not convince the ship's crew or passengers that he even exists. Suspicions rise as a hint of her mental unstability comes to light, and bits of her past are made known. Questionable characters lurk around every dark corner of the ship during the fog-enshrouded crossing, offering an atmosphere of doubt and danger. Jeanne Crain portrays the sheltered, distressed young woman with an ideal sensitivity, and Britsh actor Michael Rennie is especially effective as the ship's doctor who treats her with thoughtful compassion. I enjoyed the shipbound suspense of this movie, particularly the scenes where the young lady tries to conduct her own investigation, searching the darkened decks in spite of her overwhelming fear and despair. The cast is good, the direction tight, and the mystery unravels without any dead spots to cool your interest. As a side note, did any actor ever look better in uniform than tall Michael Rennie?
Guaranteed Not To Disappoint
seymourblack-118 January 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This low budget mystery thriller is intriguing right from the start and becomes incredibly tense following the unexplained disappearance of one of its main characters. The atmosphere steadily becomes more threatening and the presence of a number of rather suspicious-looking individuals soon fuels a profound sense of paranoia that continues to grow until the story's denouement finally provides some important explanations for what's transpired.
Newly-married Ruth Bowman (Jeanne Crain) and her husband John (Carl Betz) seem in good spirits at the start of their honeymoon on the ocean liner "S.S.Monrovia" as John carries Ruth over the threshold of their cabin B-16. After the stewardess who was arranging flowers in their room leaves, John tells Ruth that he's going to leave some cash with the Purser for safekeeping and arranges to meet her in the ship's main-deck bar in 15 minutes. When he doesn't turn up as arranged, Ruth visits the Purser who tells her that he hasn't seen John. She then returns to cabin B-16 which she finds locked and is told by the steward that B-16 hasn't been booked by anyone for this voyage. The Purser is then called and confirms from his passenger list that Ruth's reservation (which had been made in her maiden name) was actually for cabin B-18. At this point, she becomes very confused and distressed and so the ship's doctor is called.
The good natured Dr Paul Manning (Michael Rennie) makes some enquiries and everyone he speaks to, including the stewardess Anna Quinn (Mary Anderson), deny having seen John. In view of the circumstances, Manning takes Ruth to see Captain Peters (Willis Bouchey) who arranges for the ship to be searched but also doesn't seem to believe her story. His scepticism increases when the search proves to be fruitless and it emerges that Ruth doesn't have a passport, a ticket or even a wedding ring in her possession.
Ruth is surprised when she receives a telephone call from John who tells her that they're both in danger and that she should trust no-one. This only increases her anguish and the presence of a sinister-looking elderly gentleman with a cane, a steward whose manner is rather strange and a wealthy divorcee who tells her that "husbands can get lost so easily", only add to her discomfort and her reliance on Dr Manning to solve the mystery of what's happened to John and also to discover the reason for his disappearance.
"Dangerous Crossing" is well-paced, skilfully directed and claustrophobic and the whole production is held together by the radiant Jeanne Crain who's at the centre of everything that happens. Her ability to convey the degree of Ruth's torment without going over the top is very impressive and Michael Rennie does well as the handsome doctor who's unwittingly closer to the solution to the mystery than he could ever be expected to realize. With its fine supporting cast, superb cinematography and unsettling atmosphere, this is an enjoyable thriller that's both gripping and guaranteed not to disappoint.
Newly-married Ruth Bowman (Jeanne Crain) and her husband John (Carl Betz) seem in good spirits at the start of their honeymoon on the ocean liner "S.S.Monrovia" as John carries Ruth over the threshold of their cabin B-16. After the stewardess who was arranging flowers in their room leaves, John tells Ruth that he's going to leave some cash with the Purser for safekeeping and arranges to meet her in the ship's main-deck bar in 15 minutes. When he doesn't turn up as arranged, Ruth visits the Purser who tells her that he hasn't seen John. She then returns to cabin B-16 which she finds locked and is told by the steward that B-16 hasn't been booked by anyone for this voyage. The Purser is then called and confirms from his passenger list that Ruth's reservation (which had been made in her maiden name) was actually for cabin B-18. At this point, she becomes very confused and distressed and so the ship's doctor is called.
The good natured Dr Paul Manning (Michael Rennie) makes some enquiries and everyone he speaks to, including the stewardess Anna Quinn (Mary Anderson), deny having seen John. In view of the circumstances, Manning takes Ruth to see Captain Peters (Willis Bouchey) who arranges for the ship to be searched but also doesn't seem to believe her story. His scepticism increases when the search proves to be fruitless and it emerges that Ruth doesn't have a passport, a ticket or even a wedding ring in her possession.
Ruth is surprised when she receives a telephone call from John who tells her that they're both in danger and that she should trust no-one. This only increases her anguish and the presence of a sinister-looking elderly gentleman with a cane, a steward whose manner is rather strange and a wealthy divorcee who tells her that "husbands can get lost so easily", only add to her discomfort and her reliance on Dr Manning to solve the mystery of what's happened to John and also to discover the reason for his disappearance.
"Dangerous Crossing" is well-paced, skilfully directed and claustrophobic and the whole production is held together by the radiant Jeanne Crain who's at the centre of everything that happens. Her ability to convey the degree of Ruth's torment without going over the top is very impressive and Michael Rennie does well as the handsome doctor who's unwittingly closer to the solution to the mystery than he could ever be expected to realize. With its fine supporting cast, superb cinematography and unsettling atmosphere, this is an enjoyable thriller that's both gripping and guaranteed not to disappoint.
Not a wasted frame
christopher-underwood20 July 2008
Wow! What a great little noir. Apparently made utilising sets from 'Titanic' and 'Gentlemen Prefer Blondes', films made the same year, this is a great example of fast (three weeks shooting) low budget film making. Not a wasted frame, this spooky, thrilling mystery, looks good all the time and many shots are exceptional. Lots of shadowy, foggy or against the light close-ups and a sensational sequence in the ballroom. All menace and subterfuge as we begin to feel that Jeanne Crain's character is surely going to break down despite the restrained and reassuring Michael Rennie, who doesn't even get a kiss. The film races along and has your attention all the time. Set on an ocean liner we do not get the dark streets and lamplight shadows but Newman certainly makes the most of what he's got; the drone of the foghorn, the swirling fog itself and a slew of fellow travellers Crain is not too sure about. And nor are we! Splendid.
Marry in haste, repent in leisure thriller
bmacv4 March 2002
Dangerous Crossing blends two hoary plot lines: the one where somebody suddenly disappears and whose very existence comes into question; and the one where a young woman marries a stranger about whom, to later chagrin, she knows absolutely nothing.
Newlyweds Jeanne Crain and Carl Betz board an ocean liner for a honeymoon cruise to Europe. He then promptly vanishes. Crain, reacting with swooning spells and hysterical outbursts, comes under the doting care of ship's doctor Michael Rennie, who's forever "prescribing" her things like shuffleboard or Champagne. (His cheekbones, meanwhile, threaten to pop right through his skin.)
Just about everybody writes Crain off as delusional, maybe even suicidal. But we know the groom's still on board; he phones her up late at night. The reason they can't find him despite searching every nook and cranny is....
Dangerous Crossing has its nice touches: Joseph LaShelle's fog-shrouded cinematography gets the accompaniment of a fog horn booming out its doom-laden basso ostinato figure. But too much of the movie hangs on Crain. For a few years in the late 40s she hovered on the brink of major stardom but never quite got there; the fact that she can't quite bring off this (admittedly one-dimensional) role perhaps explains why.
But the film's crucial failing lies in not filling out the "back" story: Who are the newlyweds, how did they meet, what are their individual agendas? The few hints and asides thrown our way don't sufficiently set up the perfunctory ending -- it comes as kind of a cheat. There's nothing left when the movie wraps up but the old adage "Marry in haste, repent in leisure."
Newlyweds Jeanne Crain and Carl Betz board an ocean liner for a honeymoon cruise to Europe. He then promptly vanishes. Crain, reacting with swooning spells and hysterical outbursts, comes under the doting care of ship's doctor Michael Rennie, who's forever "prescribing" her things like shuffleboard or Champagne. (His cheekbones, meanwhile, threaten to pop right through his skin.)
Just about everybody writes Crain off as delusional, maybe even suicidal. But we know the groom's still on board; he phones her up late at night. The reason they can't find him despite searching every nook and cranny is....
Dangerous Crossing has its nice touches: Joseph LaShelle's fog-shrouded cinematography gets the accompaniment of a fog horn booming out its doom-laden basso ostinato figure. But too much of the movie hangs on Crain. For a few years in the late 40s she hovered on the brink of major stardom but never quite got there; the fact that she can't quite bring off this (admittedly one-dimensional) role perhaps explains why.
But the film's crucial failing lies in not filling out the "back" story: Who are the newlyweds, how did they meet, what are their individual agendas? The few hints and asides thrown our way don't sufficiently set up the perfunctory ending -- it comes as kind of a cheat. There's nothing left when the movie wraps up but the old adage "Marry in haste, repent in leisure."
Taut mystery
rollo_tomaso30 June 2001
This taut atmospheric mystery-at-sea gets great performances by Jeanne Crain, Michael Rennie, Max Showalter, and Carl Betz. The pacing is fast, and the characterizations are well-crafted. I have seen this movie six times, and I never tire of it. Everything is handled so professionally. I highly recommend it.
Decent B thriller
Prof-Hieronymos-Grost18 April 2008
After a whirlwind romance of only four weeks Ruth Stanton has married her dream man John Bowman and is about to set sail on a luxury liner for her honeymoon. Once aboard her husband promptly disappears after a visit to the purser's office. Ruth is distraught, only trouble is nobody has seen her husband, she has no id or ticket for the cruise and those aboard believe she is quite mad. She is befriended by the ships doctor Paul Manning, who is also unsure as to her state of mind, but he sets out to help her find her man. Ruth gets a telephone call from her missing man who tells her to trust no one and that they are both in danger from unknown sources, is he real or is she mad? Dangerous Crossing is one of the latest releases in the Fox Noir series, with b movie specialist Newman at the helm it's a pacey 76 mins and although its not, it plays much more like an espionage film, where nobody can be trusted aboard the fog bound liner. Jeanne Crain overacts a little as her character becomes ever more demented but in true Hollywood fashion its nothing that a classic slap in the face doesn't cure. If you're observant you will spot the clues as to the husbands disappearance early on, but I still found it a pleasant way to pass an afternoon.
Hysterical woman goes overboard
em8907200215 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not sure who's worse: the people who write this rubbish, the actors who sign-up to perform it or the people who watch it and think it's great stuff.
The plot is generic; it's been seen time and time again. One spouse marries the other for her or his money and then tries to do away with her or him, and the plan always backfires.
Let's be clear; this is weak story where the main character gives an overly dramatic performance and the secondary characters are little more than cardboard cut-outs.
This is definitely a relic in it's portrayal of men and women. The main character is portrayed as a hysterical idiot devoid of any ability to reason. Seemingly her abandonment issues fuel a desperate need to cling to any man within arms length: father, husband, doctor. This antiquated characterization of woman is absurd in today's world. Likewise, the male characters are patronizing or worse. In one scene, the woman just gets slapped across the face by the doctor; was that standard medical practice in the 1950s? After all, who needs silly medication or talkie-talk therapy when a good belt across the kisser resolves any disorder; please.
The plot is generic; it's been seen time and time again. One spouse marries the other for her or his money and then tries to do away with her or him, and the plan always backfires.
Let's be clear; this is weak story where the main character gives an overly dramatic performance and the secondary characters are little more than cardboard cut-outs.
This is definitely a relic in it's portrayal of men and women. The main character is portrayed as a hysterical idiot devoid of any ability to reason. Seemingly her abandonment issues fuel a desperate need to cling to any man within arms length: father, husband, doctor. This antiquated characterization of woman is absurd in today's world. Likewise, the male characters are patronizing or worse. In one scene, the woman just gets slapped across the face by the doctor; was that standard medical practice in the 1950s? After all, who needs silly medication or talkie-talk therapy when a good belt across the kisser resolves any disorder; please.
Better to just spend the honeymoon IN the state room and have food brought up!
Poseidon-321 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Using a formula that's tried and true, this ship-bound mystery is a tidy little movie with a reasonably satisfying conclusion. Crain plays a newlywed who boards a luxury liner with her husband of less than 24 hours Betz. They are just off a whirlwind courtship and elopement and happily board the ship, heading directly to their state room. Betz goes to the purser's office to stow some money, asking Crain to meet him in the bar in 15 minutes, but then seemingly vanishes into thin air. Furthermore, none of the crew can recall ever having seen him to begin with, including a stewardess (Anderson) who clearly did! Crain, who has already recovered from some emotional problems just prior to marrying Betz, begins to unravel as she struggles to prove that not only is her husband missing, but that he ever existed in the first place! An assortment of crew members and fellow passengers act as red herrings, alternately helping and hampering her in her quest. Chief aid comes from a kindly doctor played by Rennie, who can't be sure how much of what Crain is telling him is based on fact. Crain is lovely in the film, though her acting limitations are demonstrated at times. Her opening sequences are especially bad as she affects all sorts of forced expressions and twitchy head movements, over indicating everything she says, does and thinks. However, as her character calms down and as the tension heightens, her work fits into the movie better. Rennie is appealing, but maintains the appropriate amount of mysteriousness in order to keep his own potential as a suspect in place. Hoshelle (perhaps best known as a decade-long wife to Jeff Chandler) is interesting as a friendly, but somewhat severe acquaintance of Crain's. The film kicks off with an impressive tracking shot and maintains a decent amount of atmosphere throughout. It's always frustrating (intentionally so) to go along on a journey like this with a character, but the film manages a few less stressful interludes along the way. It benefits greatly from the impressive shipboard interiors left from the studio's version of "Titanic". It's highly doubtful that such sets would have been made specifically for a smaller film such as this (and likely that this film was green-lighted in order to take advantage of them.) The concept of someone suddenly disappearing without a trace has been a staple of stories and, later, films since at least the late 1800's and has appeared in movies as recent as "The Forgotten" in 2004. One memorable episode of TV's "The Big Valley" had Victoria Barkley frantically trying to find out what happened to her daughter Audra when she woke up in a hotel without a shred of evidence that her daughter had shared the adjoining room. If the film has any significant faults, it is that a) it makes it clear that Anderson has seen Betz and so there is never any doubt that she's lying (the others can honestly say they don't recall him) and that b) the villain would rather do away with Crain and end up with an accomplice rather than settle for what he/she has, which appears to be pretty good! Still, at a trim 75 minutes and with a nicely appointed veneer over it, this is not a bad way to kill some time.
Darned good mystery/noir, but no...not at the level of Hitchcock (why does it have to be?)
vincentlynch-moonoi29 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
First off, there are two things that annoyed in this film. Jeanne Crain wore a mink coat for much of the film. Just seems odd that in a crisis she'd be running around the ship in a mink. And, she was too borderline hysterical for much of the film...although I guess in a way that played into the plot. But I prefer my screen actresses to have enough guts to pull themselves together as they work to solve their mysteries. I don't attribute either of these annoyances to Jeanne Crain (who in my view can do almost no wrong), but rather to director Joseph Newman...and perhaps to the time of the film -- 1953 -- when women were supposed to be helpless without a husband and every woman wanted a mink coat (at least they all did on "Queen For A Day"!).
Aside from those two annoyances, I very much liked this film, and that it was filmed on the same sets as "Titanic" (Clifton Webb and Barbara Stanwyck), which was made the same year.
Now, in regard to the plot, if you read message boards on IMDb about this film, dismiss them. Those mentioned are almost all because the viewer either didn't pay attention to parts of the film or because they ignored certain factors. For example, one of our reviewers asked if Betz wouldn't be recognized when he claimed the estate. No...he was acting for a relative who would claim the estate! Actually, except for the two concerns I had at the beginning of my review, this film had a pretty good plot. I agree with another poster that Hitchcock could have done even more with this story...but, Hitchcock wasn't the director. Admittedly, there are a couple of places where just one or two more lines of dialog could have made things clearer.
Jeanne Crain is as lovely here as ever...and just as good an actress...I just wish the director hadn't wanted her to be quite as hysterical (although that gets her locked in her cabin, which is essential to the story). I enjoyed Michael Rennie; here he is the ship's doctor. Rennie is good here...good as the good guy, although there is a moment when you suddenly think he's in on the crime. Max Showalter was a staple at 20th Century Fox at the time this film was made, but often (as here) he's simply used as a way to advance the plot, rather than getting into any character development. However, he was a dependable character actor. Despite having a key role, we see little of Carl Betz (as in "The Donna Reed Show"); he does his job as the bad-guy-husband. Mary Anderson as a stewardess was fairly good, although I kept trying to place some other role she had played in another film (but I never succeeded). Willis Bouchey, here as the ship's captain, is always a welcome presence in any film; another very capable character actor. Yvonne Peattie as Miss Bridges Though not perfect, this is darned good film noir mystery, and I recommend it for any one who likes the genre, and especially for fans of Jeanne Crain.
Aside from those two annoyances, I very much liked this film, and that it was filmed on the same sets as "Titanic" (Clifton Webb and Barbara Stanwyck), which was made the same year.
Now, in regard to the plot, if you read message boards on IMDb about this film, dismiss them. Those mentioned are almost all because the viewer either didn't pay attention to parts of the film or because they ignored certain factors. For example, one of our reviewers asked if Betz wouldn't be recognized when he claimed the estate. No...he was acting for a relative who would claim the estate! Actually, except for the two concerns I had at the beginning of my review, this film had a pretty good plot. I agree with another poster that Hitchcock could have done even more with this story...but, Hitchcock wasn't the director. Admittedly, there are a couple of places where just one or two more lines of dialog could have made things clearer.
Jeanne Crain is as lovely here as ever...and just as good an actress...I just wish the director hadn't wanted her to be quite as hysterical (although that gets her locked in her cabin, which is essential to the story). I enjoyed Michael Rennie; here he is the ship's doctor. Rennie is good here...good as the good guy, although there is a moment when you suddenly think he's in on the crime. Max Showalter was a staple at 20th Century Fox at the time this film was made, but often (as here) he's simply used as a way to advance the plot, rather than getting into any character development. However, he was a dependable character actor. Despite having a key role, we see little of Carl Betz (as in "The Donna Reed Show"); he does his job as the bad-guy-husband. Mary Anderson as a stewardess was fairly good, although I kept trying to place some other role she had played in another film (but I never succeeded). Willis Bouchey, here as the ship's captain, is always a welcome presence in any film; another very capable character actor. Yvonne Peattie as Miss Bridges Though not perfect, this is darned good film noir mystery, and I recommend it for any one who likes the genre, and especially for fans of Jeanne Crain.
Will Rennie relieve Crain's heartburn ?
kalbimassey3 August 2020
This worthy 1953 noir transfers the action from the familiar urban landscape to a large luxury liner, fleetingly depicted on screen by stock footage of the Queen Mary.
Even before land is out of sight newly-wed Crain is distraught over the mysterious disappearance of her husband. Her frantic attempts to locate him are greeted with the brick wall treatment. His name does not appear on the passenger list and nobody recollects seeing him board the vessel. Consequently she finds herself accused of being delusional and unstable.
Suspicious characters are in no short supply: The gaunt, sullen steward, who appears to play every scene with a mouth full of lemon juice, the butter wouldn't melt stewardess and the curt, dismissive captain. Also thrown into the mix is the eerie tapping stick of the man with the pronounced limp, (That's L- I -M- P pronounced limp) who emerges variously from the shadowy bowels beneath the decks and through the thick, swirling mist, which seems to permanently engulf the ship.
Owing to these adverse conditions, the foghorn blares relentlessly. It's a wonder anyone on board managed a wink of sleep amidst that incessant racket. Personally, I'd have been at the front of the queue demanding a refund, or at the very least free beer for the entire voyage !
The above, however, is an observation rather than a criticism. Clocking in at 75 minutes, this is a taut, economical, well-crafted mystery, with a few subtle plot twists, which require a second viewing to be fully appreciated. A well above average' B' movie and a pretty decent sea movie, which poses just one question. Did Crain's repeated desperate cries of 'No! no! no!' during the ballroom scene inspire Neil Young to write 'Last Dance' on his 'Time Fades Away' album?
Even before land is out of sight newly-wed Crain is distraught over the mysterious disappearance of her husband. Her frantic attempts to locate him are greeted with the brick wall treatment. His name does not appear on the passenger list and nobody recollects seeing him board the vessel. Consequently she finds herself accused of being delusional and unstable.
Suspicious characters are in no short supply: The gaunt, sullen steward, who appears to play every scene with a mouth full of lemon juice, the butter wouldn't melt stewardess and the curt, dismissive captain. Also thrown into the mix is the eerie tapping stick of the man with the pronounced limp, (That's L- I -M- P pronounced limp) who emerges variously from the shadowy bowels beneath the decks and through the thick, swirling mist, which seems to permanently engulf the ship.
Owing to these adverse conditions, the foghorn blares relentlessly. It's a wonder anyone on board managed a wink of sleep amidst that incessant racket. Personally, I'd have been at the front of the queue demanding a refund, or at the very least free beer for the entire voyage !
The above, however, is an observation rather than a criticism. Clocking in at 75 minutes, this is a taut, economical, well-crafted mystery, with a few subtle plot twists, which require a second viewing to be fully appreciated. A well above average' B' movie and a pretty decent sea movie, which poses just one question. Did Crain's repeated desperate cries of 'No! no! no!' during the ballroom scene inspire Neil Young to write 'Last Dance' on his 'Time Fades Away' album?
Breathy melodrama with familiar plot...still, it works a little foggy magic
moonspinner5510 March 2010
Wealthy young bride on ocean liner leaving New York City disrupts the lives of everyone on-board ship with curious story of a missing husband whom nobody recalls seeing. His name isn't on the passenger list, and two eyewitnesses don't remember the guy, so perhaps the lady's delusional or making the story up? Could be: Jeanne Crain's voice-over is reminiscent of Olivia de Havilland's for "The Snake Pit", while her hysterical manner clearly suggests instability. Luckily for Crain, this melodrama (based on the uncredited radio play "Cabin B-13" by John Dickson Carr) is tightly wound and occasionally surprising, despite going down roads we've traveled before. Though the narrative is familiar, the new cast of characters is intriguing, and most of the acting is solid. Crain (with Donna Reed's hair) isn't a smart heroine; she's stubbornly unstable--fainting, screaming, and at one point causing stoic ocean-medic Michael Rennie to give her a firm slap. A craftier central figure in place of a victimized wifey might have made for a stronger picture, but this one isn't half-bad. Nice direction from Joseph M. Newman, well-paced and enjoyable. *** from ****
The One and Only Jeanne Crain
JLRMovieReviews18 March 2010
Jeanne Crain has never looked lovelier in this classy looking suspense movie that will leave you in knots. Costarring Carl Betz, from The Donna Reed Show, as Jeanne's husband and Michael Rennie as the ship's doctor, it concerns newlyweds who go on a cruise for a honeymoon. But this movie wastes no time on pleasantries. Carl promptly disappears and Jeanne spends the whole movie consumed in finding her husband. No one will believe her when she insists she's not alone, because no one else remembers seeing him on board. A tour de force by Jeanne Crain, as she is practically going out of her mind with worry.
(This was remade in the early 90s as a Lindsay Wagner TV-movie, which was called Treacherous Crossing.)
Miss the original, and not only do you miss one good movie, but you miss seeing Jeanne Crain, one of the sweetest and most beautiful stars ever in films, who rightly held a place in not only GIs', but all mens' hearts and second only to Betty Grable in receiving the most fan mail.
Jeanne Crain, you are not forgotten.
(This was remade in the early 90s as a Lindsay Wagner TV-movie, which was called Treacherous Crossing.)
Miss the original, and not only do you miss one good movie, but you miss seeing Jeanne Crain, one of the sweetest and most beautiful stars ever in films, who rightly held a place in not only GIs', but all mens' hearts and second only to Betty Grable in receiving the most fan mail.
Jeanne Crain, you are not forgotten.
Fog Horns Drove me Nuts
whpratt116 September 2008
This story starts off with a newly married couple who are going on a cruise liner and Ruth Stanton Bowman, (Jeanne Crain) is the bride who is very happy until her husband disappears and there is no record of him being aboard the ship. This horrible news to the bride caused her to go crazy driving the entire crew to go around in circles to try and help Ruth. There is a haunting sound of a ship's fog horn going on constantly giving the film a very mysterious effect. Michael Rennie and Jeanne Crain gave outstanding performances along with many other famous veteran actors. You will have a hard time trying to figure out how the film will end, except the Fog Horns finally stopped.
classic B noir
VicCarson23 December 2005
A great example of B director James M Newman at his short lived feature film peak (1949-1953).
Newman (1909-) had a steady Hollywood career being an assistant director on 17 mostly mainstream musicals and dramas whilst in his twenties.
These included Americana such as "Another Language" (1933); musicals such as "Going Hollywood" (1933) and "Rose Marie (1936); comedy such as "Riptide" (1934)and classic dramas "Dinner at Eight" (1933) and "David Copperfield" (1935) for which he was nominated for an Oscar in the short lived category of Best Assistant Director.
However, it was directing shorts in the "Crime Does Not Pay" series where Newman really cut his teeth in the noir game.
His "Buyer Beware" installment from 1940 is pretty well the best short noir from the period.
Checkout the hugely underrated B noir "Abandoned" (1949) where Newman elicits an incredible performance from a young Raymond Burr.
Also worth seeking are the horse-racing drama "The Great Dan Patch" (1949) and the crime noir "711 Ocean Drive" (1950)starring Edmond O'Brien.
"Dangerous Crossing" is up there with the best of the low budget B noir classics. It possesses all the required elements. Characters in shadows and shadowy characters! Femme Fatales-but we keep having to guess which femme is the fatale! Newman later moved to television and became a director for the early "The Twilight Zone" (1959) and "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour" (1962) and finished his career with an episode of "The Big Valley (1965).
Newman (1909-) had a steady Hollywood career being an assistant director on 17 mostly mainstream musicals and dramas whilst in his twenties.
These included Americana such as "Another Language" (1933); musicals such as "Going Hollywood" (1933) and "Rose Marie (1936); comedy such as "Riptide" (1934)and classic dramas "Dinner at Eight" (1933) and "David Copperfield" (1935) for which he was nominated for an Oscar in the short lived category of Best Assistant Director.
However, it was directing shorts in the "Crime Does Not Pay" series where Newman really cut his teeth in the noir game.
His "Buyer Beware" installment from 1940 is pretty well the best short noir from the period.
Checkout the hugely underrated B noir "Abandoned" (1949) where Newman elicits an incredible performance from a young Raymond Burr.
Also worth seeking are the horse-racing drama "The Great Dan Patch" (1949) and the crime noir "711 Ocean Drive" (1950)starring Edmond O'Brien.
"Dangerous Crossing" is up there with the best of the low budget B noir classics. It possesses all the required elements. Characters in shadows and shadowy characters! Femme Fatales-but we keep having to guess which femme is the fatale! Newman later moved to television and became a director for the early "The Twilight Zone" (1959) and "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour" (1962) and finished his career with an episode of "The Big Valley (1965).
A bit familiar and a bit overwrought, but still quite good.
planktonrules12 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
In 1950, the film "So Long at the Fair" debuted. It was the film about a brother and sister who went to the Paris Exhibition--only to have the brother disappear. Even more odd, no one seems to have remembered seeing him and soon the authorities seem to think she is losing her mind. Only three years later, a very, very similar film is released and "Dangerous Crossing" is essentially the same film but with a very different ending. I know that a few other similar films have been released--so clearly "Dangerous Crossing" won't get points for originality.
In the case of "Dangerous Crossing", a brand-new wife (Jeanne Crain) soon is separated from her husband (Carl Betz) on a cruise ship. And, oddly, he doesn't return and no one seems to be able to find any evidence that he existed. For most of the film, this is handled pretty well. However, Crain's part isn't written very well. At one point she swoons--and swooning is a STUPID cliché. People rarely faint in real life--yet in movies women pass out right and left--especially when they hear shocking news or a monster is nearby! Late in the film, Crain (who is still convinced she isn't crazy) begins screaming and acting 100% crazy! This seriously undermines her character--and this was simply a case of overdoing it. Still, despite all this, the film is entertaining and worth seeing--mostly because the story idea is captivating. Worth seeing--but certainly not without flaws.
In the case of "Dangerous Crossing", a brand-new wife (Jeanne Crain) soon is separated from her husband (Carl Betz) on a cruise ship. And, oddly, he doesn't return and no one seems to be able to find any evidence that he existed. For most of the film, this is handled pretty well. However, Crain's part isn't written very well. At one point she swoons--and swooning is a STUPID cliché. People rarely faint in real life--yet in movies women pass out right and left--especially when they hear shocking news or a monster is nearby! Late in the film, Crain (who is still convinced she isn't crazy) begins screaming and acting 100% crazy! This seriously undermines her character--and this was simply a case of overdoing it. Still, despite all this, the film is entertaining and worth seeing--mostly because the story idea is captivating. Worth seeing--but certainly not without flaws.
A very atmospheric mystery thriller.
Sleepin_Dragon26 May 2023
Newlyweds Ruth and John Bowman embark on a wondrous cruise, however soon after they set off, John vanishes, and leaves behind no trace, Ruth knows full well he's on board, but people question her very sanity.
I thoroughly enjoyed this wonderful mystery film, a device that was used several times over in films and TV shows from the time, the missing partner, whether they actually existed or not, in this instance it is used to perfection.
Very well paced, it passes by very quickly, at no point does it lull or feel slow, almost every moment and action have meaning.
I'd put it in the film noir bracket, although I suppose it's questionable whether it is or not, but it has all of the hallmarks,
There are some terrific scenes, that moment where Ruth wanders around in the fog trying to trace the phone, the horn blaring in the background, it's sinister, it's unsettling, it is intensely atmospheric.
Some quality acting throughout, a whole host of talent, but credit to Jeanne Crain, she was quite brilliant I thought.
9/10.
I thoroughly enjoyed this wonderful mystery film, a device that was used several times over in films and TV shows from the time, the missing partner, whether they actually existed or not, in this instance it is used to perfection.
Very well paced, it passes by very quickly, at no point does it lull or feel slow, almost every moment and action have meaning.
I'd put it in the film noir bracket, although I suppose it's questionable whether it is or not, but it has all of the hallmarks,
There are some terrific scenes, that moment where Ruth wanders around in the fog trying to trace the phone, the horn blaring in the background, it's sinister, it's unsettling, it is intensely atmospheric.
Some quality acting throughout, a whole host of talent, but credit to Jeanne Crain, she was quite brilliant I thought.
9/10.
lots of fog, a little Donna Reed Show, some Gaslight thrown in
blanche-27 July 2005
Jeanne Crain was under contract to Twentieth Century Fox in the '40s and '50s and, as a pretty ingénue, made some big films. In fact, the studio wanted Joseph Mankiewicz to give her the role of Eve in "All About Eve." Not considering her much of an actress, Mankiewicz refused to use her in the film. He was right and he was wrong. She wasn't much of an actress - but her youth, prettiness, and sweetness would have made her a great foil for Bette Davis, would have made Margo seem even more unreasonable, and her jealousy, given Crain's vibrant looks, would have even been more understandable. Where Crain would have been less effective is after Eve is found out - that's where Baxter's rightness for the role kicked in.
All that being said, Crain is the star of "Dangerous Crossing." She plays a woman on a honeymoon cruise who can't seem to find her husband. If she had a husband, that is. Elegant Michael Rennie is the ship's doctor who half believes her and wants to help. It's actually a very good, suspenseful movie, and if you've seen Fox's "Titanic," you'll recognize the ship.
Carl Betz of "The Donna Reed Show" plays the missing husband. Crain doesn't do paranoid very well, employing a lot of stock "crazy" mannerisms in her closeups. It would have been interesting to see what she could have accomplished with a strong director and a powerful cast surrounding her. Ah, what might have been.
All that being said, Crain is the star of "Dangerous Crossing." She plays a woman on a honeymoon cruise who can't seem to find her husband. If she had a husband, that is. Elegant Michael Rennie is the ship's doctor who half believes her and wants to help. It's actually a very good, suspenseful movie, and if you've seen Fox's "Titanic," you'll recognize the ship.
Carl Betz of "The Donna Reed Show" plays the missing husband. Crain doesn't do paranoid very well, employing a lot of stock "crazy" mannerisms in her closeups. It would have been interesting to see what she could have accomplished with a strong director and a powerful cast surrounding her. Ah, what might have been.
Sea minus
miriamwebster11 January 2010
A sea-going version of Hitchcock's The Lady Vanishes, only it's the new husband (Carl Betz of The Donna Reed Show fame) of luxury-liner honeymooner Jeanne Crain who turns up missing. . .that, and anything resembling a satisfactory solution to what is an otherwise engaging (if extremely talky) B programmer. Intriguing lead-in immediately sets the pace for what's-really-going-on-here suspense piece but ultimately endless chatter, redundant action and a ketch of illogical red herrings run this one aground. (Film buffs may recognize one of the supporting actresses wearing Celeste Holm's jeweled-necked gown from All About Eve.) As cruise ship thrillers go, sea minus.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
