Strong and Moving!

Gripping story with well-crafted characters

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

The star reporter, who works for the Tribune, stands by as big story after big story is reported by the competition. When he uncovers big public corruption he bows to social pressure and agrees to sit on his scoop.

Plot-- A woman injured in a car crash that's killed her two companions relates her story in flashback to a reporter. It concerns a corrupt Asst. DA, an escaped convict, plus competing racketeers, all of which leads to murder.No one expects Oscar bait from the likes of poverty row Lippert. But as 40's thick ear, this is a pretty good one. The characters are more than one dimensional, the photography often imaginative, along with a lightning bit of jazz piano from Bob Rogers whose fingers defy gravity. Russell Wade may get top billing, but it's really Edmond MacDonald's movie. His Assistant DA may be a heckuva schemer, yet he gets pushed around as much as he does the pushing. Seems like no one's in control of much of anything, a nice departure from the usual. In fact, the only uncompromised character, reporter Mitch (Wade), is only incidental to the plot. It's not goodies vs. baddies; it's mainly clashes of self-interest getting thrashed out. Yes, the twists, turns, and pop-up names are sometimes hard to follow. Then too, I'll be darned if I know why a guy (Mitch) or gal goes walking alone in the woods at night, especially when they hear noises. Still, the effect's a perennial nail-biter. Anyway, pedestrian director Berke distinguishes himself from his usual, while the battery of craftsmen doing the visuals also come through. All in all, the results are better than expected from the likes of Lippert and an obscure cast of principals.

I expected little from William Berke's 1947 Shoot To Kill. In fact, my expectations were so low, I left the DVD until late at night. I was just about to retire, but thought I'd take a quick look at the opening sequence. The movie hooked me straight away. Not only was Berke's direction way more polished than his norm, the movie was most atmospherically photographed by Benjamin Kline. Deft writing by Edwin V. Westrate also helped, and the actors were great too, especially Edmund MacDonald (who reminded me of a young Citizen Kane), heroine Luana Walters, reporter Russell Wade, gangster Robert Kent, the boogie-woogie piano player Gene Rodgers, and is-he-honest-or-is-he district attorney Charles Trowbridge (in noirish close-ups, giving the best performance of his lengthy career).

The film opens with a high speed chase at night. the cops are chasing after someone. Shots ring out. The car the cops are chasing crashes ejecting the passengers-a notorious criminal as well as the newly elected DA and his wife. Only the wife survives. A reporter and friend of the gravely injured wife sneaks into her room in the hospital and asks her to tell him what happened, she does.Cheaply made film noir with a cast that is mostly unfamiliar faces. Not a bad film as such, its just that the film seems to confuse motion of a twisty plot as the same thing as motion of characters you care about. I don't blame the cast for making this less than engaging, I blame the writer who is constantly changing who the principle characters are as a way of keeping you interested. Is anyone good or bad? Its not really clear until the final fade out. Only the dueling mob bosses seem to be constant, the result is that they play more as cartons rather than real people. As I said its not bad, its just that you end up watching it to see how the twists go rather than because you're engaged with the characters. You probably could spend your time better elsewhere.