Let's be realistic.

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

The acting in this movie is really good.

There is an epilogue, appropriately enough from Kafka, because this is the story of a bureaucrat who is highly placed in the police hierarchy and can't seem to convince anyone that he's committed the murder of a whore he was having a relationship with. And in the end the family nonchalantly sweeps out the dead bug.Gian Maria Volonte is the recently promoted head of the homicide squad. At first I thought his performance was stereotypical. He struts around with a smirk, shouts orders, demands that the espresso coffee machine be removed, pursues and uses enhanced interrogation on demonstrators, communists, socialists, homosexuals, and kids with long hair. (This is 1970.) The hooker he's boffing turns out to be a police buff and loves to be "interrogated" harshly by Volonte. He makes her kneel, slaps her about, and talks her into revealing her most shameful secrets.But then, whimsically, she throws him over for someone else, claiming that he's not manly enough for her, that he's a baby who probably still wets the bed -- so he cuts her throat. He deliberately leaves clues to his identity all over the crime scene.So far, so routine. He's so ridden with guilt over his actions that he wants to be caught. In addition he's a stern representative of oppressive power hectoring the young. We've seen this before.But at about the half way mark things begin to get a little screwy. His colleagues believe that since he is a man of such prestige and power, all the clues must be coincidental and misleading, even the most obvious. When his prints are found on a liqueur glass, a subordinate "remembers" Volante taking a drink to calm his nerves. For what it's worth, this is called "normalization" in sociology, a process in which incidents that don't quite fit the expected narrative are reinterpreted in such a way that they do.As the story progresses Volonte's efforts to inculpate himself become more frenzied. He dismisses others who might be obvious suspects. He reveals himself as the murderer to a frightened plumber. Nothing works.By the end, he's confessed openly to his superiors and then gone home to await arrest. A dozen big wigs arrive and tear up the evidence, claiming that he must be neurotic because he's worked too hard. That scene seems to have taken place only in Volonte's imagination because eventually the same big wigs really DO arrive -- or seem to -- and he joins them in the lobby, presses a button, and an elevator we never knew was there begins to lift them all silently to an upper story. It's a surreal departure from the relatively realistic plot that we've been following.I found it a little annoying at times. I understand Volonte's role calls for bombast but, Cripes, what a lot of close ups of shouting faces. Everybody shouts at everybody else. Everybody walks quickly. It's exhausting to watch and listen to, except that Ennio Morricone's musical score is both subtle and apt. The first two thirds would have made a good B feature in Hollywood back in the 40s. That last third -- well, make of it what you will.

I first saw this movie in December 1969 in New York. Apparently it did not open in LA before the year ended and, as a consequence, won best foreign film for 1970 (Z won for 1969). In the 1990's sometime IFC aired the film and I was lucky enough to tape it and then transfer it to DVD.During the years following seeing the film, I would recommend the film to all my friends. What struck me when I had the chance to view it again was how well I had remembered the movie, every scene. Few, if any, movies ever made such a lasting impression from my first viewing and it still has that effect.Besides the great script and direction, what made it complete was one of the finest performances by an actor I've ever seen. It is up there with the greatest work of such as Olivier, O'Toole, Depardieu and Mastroianni, to name a few whose work was staggering.As to its unavailability, maybe someone should rattle IFC's cage asking them to air it again or maybe get TCM to air it.

Authority, Order, Power, these are Law's three pillars. Law protects citizens and defends them against crime. Law is made of values and incarnated by men. Those men serve Law, serve citizens and the mission's nobility lies on the fact that it applies to anyone. That's the basis of democracy and the strength of Law. No one is above it. Therefore, in a fair system, anyone can be theoretically suspect. But, the weakness of Law is that it paradoxically implies the use of its main dual medium : repression and punishment which are, after all, the only way to protect the good citizens ... as potential victims. So let's say to make it simpler that Law has two arms, one holding a shield to protect the good citizens and the other holding a sword to punish the bad ones.One man, called Il Dottore, is holding the sword. He was the former Head of Homicide Squad and leads now the Political Bureau of the Italian Security Court. His speech in the beginning of the film, clearly announces him as a man with palpable fascist tendencies, although the overuse of the word 'fascist' kind of weakens its meaning. This man, incarnated by Gian Maria Volonte, exults the value of a powerful state above any consideration of individual rights. The state must be powerful, authoritarian and any ideas that threaten Law and Order, should be mercilessly fought. It's too simplistic to call this 'fascism', some would say fascism was born in Italy, which would explain that the ideas of a man like Il Dottore could be impregnated by a certain fascist vision but they'd be forgetting that Italy is also the country of Machiavelli, and the whole plot of this psychological political thriller could be considered as a deep, Machiavellian character study.Il Dottore is fascist in his beliefs and Machiavelian in his acts, two contradictions that totally cancel each other out and makes him more of a very interesting pathological case of egomania. The man wants to prove that the very system that maintains Law and Order, Police and Justice, is flawed because it ensures the existence of citizens beyond suspicion. This man wants to denounce the main obstacle, the thing that makes his job ethically useless. The mission sounds noble... except that the way he chose to prove his point is the act of a maniac. A crime to denounce, to make the point he himself incarnates, that there are some citizens above suspicion. So high above this suspicion that they can leave clues to denounce themselves without never being worried. Because people believe in men who incarnate order. Power's aura seems more efficient than its use. Power relies on its own abuse.And that's the theme of the film. What is power? Il Dottore incarnates it with such charisma and virile magnetism that whatever comes off his mouth sounds like the truth. If he says he's guilty, it can't be anything but irony or sarcasm. The simple thought that he could be guilty of the crime he committed sounds like a blasphemy. Indeed, the power is a deified notion. And like the power of God is perceived in our everyday life, the same goes for Law. Order is real, and can't be based on abstraction. The paradox is that an abstraction is not palpable enough to be respected. Fear of punishment controls people more than interests, as said Machiavelli. Therefore, it is no surprise that socialism is considered as an escapism from individual interests and therefore can understand only one language : repression. Il Dottore handles the questioning of the left-wing activists just as if he had personal reasons to fight them, because they're the most likely people to legitimate the use of repressive violence. Indeed, it is personal. Jealousy, weakness, humiliation, power is represented by men, who are flawed. This is a brilliant character study of a man using power as an artifice to disguise his weaknesses. He's the Law but he's a citizen, he's power and he's powerless. His interactions with his victim totally deconstruct the character, and extinguish the aura and prestige he incarnates for his men. With this woman, his authority is like the toy the little boy proudly shows. Power allows him to run a red light or share some gross crime-related experiences, so voyeur it sounds childish. They're big children but they have the power. So, whom the power belongs to ? Women? Anarchists? Who's the leader? the system ? No, what leads the world is only human judgment ... The truth is in its appearance and this is what guides human perception.Il Dottore denounces these fallacious perceptions in such an original way, we also can't believe this man has this status and is so respected, which makes us question the legitimacy of some our leaders ... after all, men are men, and behind every great man, there's a woman, and who really knows how these so-called great men behave with these women? Gian Maria Volonte gives us a hint through an extraordinary performance. In the cinematic world of character studies, Il Dottore is a living paradox highlighting our own weaknesses as men who believe in a system of powers, or our owns for the luckiest ones. His charisma makes him all the more pathetic in some key scenes and his pathos more admirable in some others. Elio Petri's investigation is a fascinating political thriller whose introspectively paranoid feeling is sublimated by Ennio Morricone's score."Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion" is an intelligent masterpiece denouncing the paradoxical nature of Law where the holders of the sword tend to fight those who hide themselves behind the shield while the shield protects only those who use the sword. Gian Maria Volonte is the soul of this contradiction.

Does anyone know why the 1970 film "Indagine Su Un Cittadino Al Di Sopra Di Ogni Sospetto" has never been available on videotape or DVD? This film is the ONLY winner of an Oscar in the "Best Foreign Film" category that is STILL unavailable for home viewing - 36 years after its release! Since art house and second run theaters almost never show it these days, this effectively means that it is impossible for film buffs to view it. I think it is a shame that such an excellent film should be "buried alive", because it definitely has merit. Aside from garnering an Oscar, the film features: an intriguing plot, an interesting score by Ennio Morricone, superb acting by Gian Maria Volonte. What gives? Is there some megalomaniac millionaire out there who buys the copyrights to films, locks them in a vault and thus blocks all attempts to transfer the fims to video for pepetuity? Look how long we waited before Richard Attenborough's "Oh What a Lovely War" finally became available.