At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

***SPOILERS*** Racially charged and explosive crime drama that takes place in and out of County Hospital and spills over into the surrounding area with Sidney Poitier in his first staring role as Doctor Luther Brooks who puts both his life and career on the line in the movie. Dr. Brooks in trying to save the badly wounded armed robber Johnny Biddle's, Dick Paxton, life ended up killing him with a spinal tap in trying to find out why he's not responding to treatment.Johnny's brother Ray, Richard Widmark, who was also wounded in the shootout with the police who has no use for Dr. Brooks anyway, because he's black, goes ballistic in accusing Brooks in purposely murdering his brother because of the racial epitaphs that he, Ray, hurled at him ever since he and Johnny were admitted into the hospital emergency ward. All this racial tension starts to boil over when Ray's friends from Beaver Canal plan to start trouble by attacking the black section in town in response to a black Dr. Brooks murdering a white man,wounded career criminal Johnny Biddle, and being allowed to get away with it!Dr. Brooks who suspects that Johnny died from a busted, that resulted from the shoot-out with the police, brain tumor desperately wants to have his body autopsied but needs a family member like Ray and his mute brother George, Harry Bellaver, to authorize it which their dead set against! It's when Dr. Brooks and his good friend and boss at County Hospital Dr. Dan Wharton, Stephen McNally, go to see Johnny's widow Edie, Linda Darnell, for her to authorize her husbands autopsy they not only find out that she's been divorced from Johnny for over a year but like her brother in law Ray has no interested in helping Dr.Brooks because of his racial background.Richard Widnmark really wins the movies acting honors as the racist and mentally unbalanced Ray Biddle. Ray who's hatred for blacks is so intense, with his brother Johnny's death at the hands of black Doctor Brooks not helping any, that it passes the line of just plan garden variety racism and becomes psychotic. Even Ray's racist friends in Beaver Canal after they got their clocks cleaned, when they were attacked by stick and pipe wielding blacks at the Beaver Canal junkyard, backed off from their racist attitudes against Dr. Brooks leaving Ray on his own in avenging his bother Johnny's death. That's when it was finally discovered, when Dr. Brooks in getting the autopsy on Johnny claimed that he in fact murdered him, that Johnny did in fact die from a brain tumor not by Dr.Brooks murdering him! ***SPOILERS*** Breaking out the hospital's criminal emergency ward with the help of his brother "the Dummy" George Ray now plans to murder Dr. Brooks by tricking him into going to Dr. Wharton house where he'll be waiting to ambush him. It's non other then Edie who had a sudden change of heart in seeing just how crazy her brother in law Ray is who tried to tip off Dr.Brooks in what was waiting for him there! The last few tense and heart wrenching moments in the movie made all the hurt and abuse, both physical as well as mental, that Dr.Brooks went through more then worth while for him. After taking a bullet from the badly wounded, from his failed escape attempt, and crazed Ray Biddle Dr. Brooks put his feeling behind him and treated Ray's near fatal leg wound until help finally arrived telling the stunned racist, who expected that Dr. Brooks would let him slowly bleed to death, "Don't cry white boy! Your gonna live!"

Kudos to Hollywood for making this movie. Here it's no holds barred as blacks ans whites go at each other, no mincing words here. The sparks fly and the fists are flying too as mistrust mixed with innuendo provides the catalyst for violence. Although at times stagy, the story swiftly moves along as the a community goes spiraling downward toward anarchy. Richard Widmark gives an outstanding performance as a race-baiting hoodlum whose target is a black doctor, played by Sidney Poitier whose performance is excellent. This movie effectively shows what happens when a community is divided and how things can get quickly out of hand when there is no third-party to smooth things over. This movie represents Hollywood's wake up call to the United States to get its act together and avoid the carnage of sectarian violence.

NO WAY OUT is one of the best films about race prejudice that Hollywood ever made. One of the reasons this is so is because of the crude, evil and unflinching language used throughout the movie. If the movie were made now, it would most likely be sanitized--and that's a shame, as the vileness and stupidity of racism is diminished when film makers censor their message in order to avoid offending people. This movie is patently offensive--and because of that, it succeeds in telling a story that really packs an emotional wallop.Sidney Poitier plays a young doctor who was unfortunate enough to treat two brothers who are thieves on the jail ward of the hospital. Unfortunate, because one brother dies (through no fault of the doctor) and the other is such an insane racist (Richard Widmark) that he is sure the doctor killed his brother--though it's only because Poitier is black that he believes this. In Widmark's view of the world, blacks are garbage and he gives this doctor nothing but hatred and disrespect. Even when it is proved that Poitier did NOT kill this patient, Widmark is determined to get revenge...one way or another. There's a heck of a lot more to the plot than this, but I'll hold back so I won't spoil the suspense. And, speaking of suspense, this is one of the tensest films I've seen in some time--it kept my interest every minute.Some performances are worth noting. First, Stephen McNally plays one of his rare performances as a nice guy. Usually, he played heavies--gangster types. Here, he plays a fine human being--and I was shocked to see this. Second, Richard Widmark really did a great job. I know in real life he was a very liberal man and a champion of causes such as race relations. Yet, you'd never know it based on this venomous performance--he is one of the nastiest, if not the nastiest, racist I've seen on film. He gave a very ugly face to white supremacy--and showed just how sick racism is. As for Poitier, he was just great--as you'd naturally expect. I was just surprised that this was his first Hollywood type role--he seemed like an experienced vet.I think, however, the biggest stars of the film are the screen writers (Joseph L. Mankiewicz and Lesser Samuels) and director (Mankiewicz once again). The screenplay was simply amazing--convincing, taut and believable. The direction was also first-rate--something you'd expect from the same guy who brought us classics like ALL ABOUT EVE and A LETTER TO THREE WIVES. One scene in particular that I loved was when the flare was fired. That long pause as everyone was just frozen before the race riot began was brilliant--many directors wouldn't have used the pause and would have missed this chance to build the tension.A great film.

Note the constant siren sounds in the background, clear warning signals to underscore the movie's social message. Despite a number of flaws, this is the kind of hard-hitting racial drama that disappeared following the Hollywood purges of the early 1950's. The Cold War intimidation of liberals is not yet evident in this 1950 production, while it's probably a measure of the movie's significance that studio head Darryl Zanuck personally produced it.There's a revealing scene early on that's arguably the film's most telling. There hospital chief Moreland explains the political facts of life to head doctor Wharton who just wants to do right. No, Moreland explains, an autopsy to head off a potential race riot can't be done because the politics of funding simply override other considerations, even a possible riot. This is the film's one effort at rooting race problems in some segment other than poor whites and besieged blacks. In my book, putting the blame on the working-class and the poor takes the easy way out. The struggling white neighborhood of Beaver Canal is easily parodied through the conflicted Darnell and the vicious Widmark as though that's where the basic problem lies.Of course, the stuff of melodrama often comes from potential for violence. And racial violence often comes from working-class neighborhoods where frustrations are generally highest. Thus the movie's melodrama focuses on Beaver Canal and its violence, while Darnell's character implies that once she escapes the neighborhood's negative influence, she'll become the instinctually good person she's always been. Similarly, Poitier's implied salvation comes from moving up in social class and leaving the anger of the ghetto behind. Thus, the solution for both lies in escaping the intolerance of their working- class origins, and entering the white middle-class world symbolized by Doctor Wharton. In effect, racism is thus reduced to class, specifically to the racial hatreds bred in the working class, while the solution comes from escaping that class. Now, there are strong elements of truth in this picture, as true today as in 1950. The problem is that as an anatomy of racism the film leaves out a key overriding element, namely how the other social classes benefit from racial division, particularly the wealthy investor class who then confronts a work force weakened by racial rivalry. Now, I don't expect a well- intentioned melodrama like this to take on a complex social-economic question like that. But it is worth pointing out how the movie reduces a knotty societal problem to the simplifications of working-class brutality and resentment. Such material can produce riveting melodrama like No Way Out, but can also be misleading in the picture it presents.The film itself is highly charged and well paced, with a fine cast and a thoughtful screenplay within the limitations. Poitier especially presents a dignified and handsome appearance not seen since the days of Paul Robeson. The blowzy Darnell always excelled at tough broad roles, and I like the way the script implies that Widmark's hold over her is both a sense of common origins and a former illicit affair. Thus, when she relapses with Widmark into typical Beaver Canal racist talk, a realistic point is made about not turning your back on where you come from. It's this clash between her altruistic instincts and her Beaver Canal origins that makes her both sympathetic and the film's pivotal character. Widmark's got a thankless role. Nonetheless, when he hysterically pleads at film's end for someone to care about him, he makes a good point even though he puts it in purely personal terms. Instead, the plea could have been put in equivalent social terms. As a matter of fact, when has the nation's power structure ever given a darn about the Beaver Canals of America. Widmark could have said that he sees everyone else advancing (like Poitier's doctor) except his own part of town, the white working-class part, and had a telling point, more relevant in today's economy than 60 years ago. As a result, white resentment gets focused downward on black advances instead of upward on those political and economic interests that make it so difficult for all colors to advance together.Despite the limitations, the film remains a compelling drama of racial conflict. Of course, looks change along with fashions and attitudes. But don't be fooled. The underlying social dynamics have changed very little.