Under SciFiHistory.Net’s ‘Monsters Of A Sort’ category, I take a look at features that kinda/sorta dabble in sensibilities very close to (if not downright demonstrative of) film noir and/or the unconventional screen mystery. Despite maintaining a heavy (and near constant) diet of genre projects, I’m not always satiated by just Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror; so I do like – from time-to-time – to add a little substance from these other realms. It helps widen my perspective. It helps cleanse my palate. It keeps me fresh … and a ‘fresh me’ is good for all of you, my faithful readers.
Today’s distraction is titled Conflict.
Produced by Warner Bros., Conflict was originally released (in the United States) on June 30, 1945. The film was directed by Curtis Bernhardt, a storyteller who – in the 1930’s – escaped Europe as the Nazi menace was prosecuting Jews and fled to America. The man does have an interesting connection to Science Fiction: he directed 1933’s The Tunnel, a SciFi/Drama about the trials and tribulations of constructing an undersea tunnel from Europe to the U.S. From what I can surmise, the script – from Arthur T. Horman and Dwight Taylor – was the adaptation of an earlier work called “The Pentacle” attributed to Robert Siodmak and Alfred Neumann. The picture stars Humphrey Bogart, Sydney Greenstreet, Alexis Smith, Rose Hobart, and Charles Drake in prominent roles.
As per my usual format, the film’s synopsis appears below. My two cents on its construction and delivery follows.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“An engineer kills his first Wife, then woos her sister.”
Despite being a huge fan of the works of the late Humphrey Bogart, I’ll still admit that there are a great many projects his name was attached to which I haven’t had time to see. A good handful of them I have seen bits and pieces of over the years, but – when it comes to the whole shebang from start-to-finish – it might be that I’ve enjoyed about a dozen of them. (What can I say? Writing about film keeps me too busy most weeks to throw on something casual, so I take what I can get when I can get it.) I do make a serious effort, however, when I see something old getting rescheduled from any of the distributors I work with; and – lo and behold – the good people over at Warner Archive have opted to re-release one of the actor’s 1945 projects, Conflict, on Blu-ray.
Today’s distraction is titled Conflict.
Produced by Warner Bros., Conflict was originally released (in the United States) on June 30, 1945. The film was directed by Curtis Bernhardt, a storyteller who – in the 1930’s – escaped Europe as the Nazi menace was prosecuting Jews and fled to America. The man does have an interesting connection to Science Fiction: he directed 1933’s The Tunnel, a SciFi/Drama about the trials and tribulations of constructing an undersea tunnel from Europe to the U.S. From what I can surmise, the script – from Arthur T. Horman and Dwight Taylor – was the adaptation of an earlier work called “The Pentacle” attributed to Robert Siodmak and Alfred Neumann. The picture stars Humphrey Bogart, Sydney Greenstreet, Alexis Smith, Rose Hobart, and Charles Drake in prominent roles.
As per my usual format, the film’s synopsis appears below. My two cents on its construction and delivery follows.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“An engineer kills his first Wife, then woos her sister.”
Despite being a huge fan of the works of the late Humphrey Bogart, I’ll still admit that there are a great many projects his name was attached to which I haven’t had time to see. A good handful of them I have seen bits and pieces of over the years, but – when it comes to the whole shebang from start-to-finish – it might be that I’ve enjoyed about a dozen of them. (What can I say? Writing about film keeps me too busy most weeks to throw on something casual, so I take what I can get when I can get it.) I do make a serious effort, however, when I see something old getting rescheduled from any of the distributors I work with; and – lo and behold – the good people over at Warner Archive have opted to re-release one of the actor’s 1945 projects, Conflict, on Blu-ray.
You knew I couldn’t pass this one up.
An old habit of mine – especially when it comes to productions from the earlier days of Hollywood – is a like to read a bit of what’s been written about them on the Information Superhighway. If you know where to look, then there’s a wealth of reputable (and sourced) tidbits out there: not all of it is relevant critically, mind you, but I have found that knowing a certain factoid often explains a notable deficiency in the finished product – especially an actor or actress’ performance – so I’m apt to do a little digging.
Interestingly enough, there’s a nugget up on Wikipedia.org that suggests Bogart was somewhat reticent to take on the lead of the duplicitous wife-killer. (There’s no extensive explanation as to his particular reasoning, but it’s interesting trivia nonetheless.) Arguably, his career was on a high; and it stands to reason that he may not have wanted to put his chops to use in such a nefarious manner. My impetus to point this out is that, frankly, there’s no reservation that comes across to me that he didn’t give the part the very best of his skills and attention: he’s quite convincing at all times, though I’ll fault a less-than-stellar script for muddling some of his character’s motivations as the story rolls along.
From the outside, it seems to friends and family that Richard (played by Bogart) and Kathryn Mason (Rose Hobart) were in marital heaven. On the eve of their fifth anniversary, they’re once again getting together with friends to commemorate their union despite the fact that, privately, the fabric of their consensual relationship has begun to fray. It would seem that Richard has been secretly coveting the attentions of Kathryn’s sister Evelyn Turner (Alexis Smith), and his wife can no longer stay quite about his wandering eyes. (Yes, it’s a bit surprising to this viewer because Hobart is such a dish!) In fact, Kathryn is downright aggrieved by it all.
Eventually, Richard conspires to murder his wife, an act that will understandably free up his time so that he can explore what he senses are reciprocal emotions from Evelyn though I’ll admit that there’s no significant indication of any in the film. She’s clearly torn by this turn of events – along with the expression of marital intent from another potential suitor, professor Norman Holsworth (Charles Drake) – but if she truly feels anything other than a stronger-than-normal familial attachment to her brother-in-law it’s never spelled out in the picture. Of course, that doesn’t impede Richard, and perhaps this is why he becomes so easily entranced with the idea that Kathryn has somehow survived her death and is toying with him in ways that grow more elaborate in the passing days.
What’s truly afoot is a rather involved game of cat-and-mouse between Mason, the police, and Dr. Mark Hamilton (Sydney Greenstreet), a family friend who has already deduced that Richard is the guilty party and sets up toying with him psychologically in hopes to break the man of his silence. Without going into all of the somewhat exhaustive details, Hamilton’s scheme is the kind of thing that only exists in movies; there’s no possible way authentic police would allow a private citizen to orchestrate such a detailed series of pranks to create doubt in Richard’s mind because none of it would likely hold up in a court of law. It’s theatrical trickery – and, yes, it grows more and more extensive as the story goes along – but it’s the kind of thing audiences usually lap up happily: we do so love it when the killer gets served his ultimate comeuppance, and that’s the point of it even with the required suspension of disbelief.
An old habit of mine – especially when it comes to productions from the earlier days of Hollywood – is a like to read a bit of what’s been written about them on the Information Superhighway. If you know where to look, then there’s a wealth of reputable (and sourced) tidbits out there: not all of it is relevant critically, mind you, but I have found that knowing a certain factoid often explains a notable deficiency in the finished product – especially an actor or actress’ performance – so I’m apt to do a little digging.
Interestingly enough, there’s a nugget up on Wikipedia.org that suggests Bogart was somewhat reticent to take on the lead of the duplicitous wife-killer. (There’s no extensive explanation as to his particular reasoning, but it’s interesting trivia nonetheless.) Arguably, his career was on a high; and it stands to reason that he may not have wanted to put his chops to use in such a nefarious manner. My impetus to point this out is that, frankly, there’s no reservation that comes across to me that he didn’t give the part the very best of his skills and attention: he’s quite convincing at all times, though I’ll fault a less-than-stellar script for muddling some of his character’s motivations as the story rolls along.
From the outside, it seems to friends and family that Richard (played by Bogart) and Kathryn Mason (Rose Hobart) were in marital heaven. On the eve of their fifth anniversary, they’re once again getting together with friends to commemorate their union despite the fact that, privately, the fabric of their consensual relationship has begun to fray. It would seem that Richard has been secretly coveting the attentions of Kathryn’s sister Evelyn Turner (Alexis Smith), and his wife can no longer stay quite about his wandering eyes. (Yes, it’s a bit surprising to this viewer because Hobart is such a dish!) In fact, Kathryn is downright aggrieved by it all.
Eventually, Richard conspires to murder his wife, an act that will understandably free up his time so that he can explore what he senses are reciprocal emotions from Evelyn though I’ll admit that there’s no significant indication of any in the film. She’s clearly torn by this turn of events – along with the expression of marital intent from another potential suitor, professor Norman Holsworth (Charles Drake) – but if she truly feels anything other than a stronger-than-normal familial attachment to her brother-in-law it’s never spelled out in the picture. Of course, that doesn’t impede Richard, and perhaps this is why he becomes so easily entranced with the idea that Kathryn has somehow survived her death and is toying with him in ways that grow more elaborate in the passing days.
What’s truly afoot is a rather involved game of cat-and-mouse between Mason, the police, and Dr. Mark Hamilton (Sydney Greenstreet), a family friend who has already deduced that Richard is the guilty party and sets up toying with him psychologically in hopes to break the man of his silence. Without going into all of the somewhat exhaustive details, Hamilton’s scheme is the kind of thing that only exists in movies; there’s no possible way authentic police would allow a private citizen to orchestrate such a detailed series of pranks to create doubt in Richard’s mind because none of it would likely hold up in a court of law. It’s theatrical trickery – and, yes, it grows more and more extensive as the story goes along – but it’s the kind of thing audiences usually lap up happily: we do so love it when the killer gets served his ultimate comeuppance, and that’s the point of it even with the required suspension of disbelief.
Also, the script introduces a narrative hook – the question of whether evil can be removed from the mind of the thinker – early on yet never really does much with it. By trade, Mason is an engineer while Hamilton is a practicing psychologist; and the two have more than a single exchange about how a construct both works and serves a fundamental purpose. In Mason’s line of work, it’s how a project ultimately gets designed, built, and survives; without it, there’s nothing standing once the construction is said and done. Similarly, Hamilton points out that he cannot effectively remove an impure thought or motivation without the risk of mental collapse of his patient because so much resulting activity ends up getting tied to that element of the foundation. The script then manages to detail this relationship; and yet – in the big finish – we end up knowing what the two already told us ninety minutes before … so why bother? It would seem that the hook was better than the delivery.
Still, performances are quite good.
As I said above, you’d never know that Bogart wasn’t interested in the affair with his time spent on the screen. It doesn’t exactly simmer, but he rather admirably hits all of his marks, showing that his slowly cracking resolve will likely serve his undoing. Greenstreet is always good, holding his own against his costar while balancing out his ‘jolly old self’ moments alongside some secret skullduggery. Hobart isn’t long in the picture, and yet she, too, manages to hold her ground in those early exchanges with Bogart. While good, Turner’s character just needed better material to work with: this noir(ish) Thriller never gives her all that much to do but walk around wide-eyed – happily or sad – and there’s a gaping hole of murk behind who she is, what she wants, and whether or not she ever imagined Richard would be more than an in-law or an outlaw as far as she was concerned.
Conflict (1945) was produced by Warner Bros. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights-and-sounds to be exceptional from start-to-finish. There are a few fade-in tricks that get employed two or three times suggestive of some psychological efforts on Dr. Hamilton’s part, but they don’t convey anything beyond the initial crack in Mason’s resolve. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, there are some classic cartoons, a few WB shorts, and the audio of a radio play adaptation of the film to enjoy, but there’s nothing of significance that probes the film … and, yes, it would’ve been nice to have a little something.
Recommended.
As a huge fan of the Bogart catalogue, I’m a tad disappointed to admit that I didn’t enjoy Conflict (1945) a bit more. While the main plot – that of a man so desperate to pursue the illicit promise of a love affair with his sister-in-law that he’d murder his wife – is the kind of subject matter film noirs have explored to great delight, the picture never quite figures out what to do with its cast of supporting players well enough to have them seem like something greater than pawns in motion on a screenwriter’s chess board. Bogart and Greenstreet deliver some great exchanges, but there’s just not much memorable in here beyond the occasional flickers. Though I expected more, I got just enough for my attention; and the somewhat hokey conclusion feels more like a Columbo ‘Movie of the Week’ moment than it does a big, theatrical finish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Conflict (1945) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
Still, performances are quite good.
As I said above, you’d never know that Bogart wasn’t interested in the affair with his time spent on the screen. It doesn’t exactly simmer, but he rather admirably hits all of his marks, showing that his slowly cracking resolve will likely serve his undoing. Greenstreet is always good, holding his own against his costar while balancing out his ‘jolly old self’ moments alongside some secret skullduggery. Hobart isn’t long in the picture, and yet she, too, manages to hold her ground in those early exchanges with Bogart. While good, Turner’s character just needed better material to work with: this noir(ish) Thriller never gives her all that much to do but walk around wide-eyed – happily or sad – and there’s a gaping hole of murk behind who she is, what she wants, and whether or not she ever imagined Richard would be more than an in-law or an outlaw as far as she was concerned.
Conflict (1945) was produced by Warner Bros. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights-and-sounds to be exceptional from start-to-finish. There are a few fade-in tricks that get employed two or three times suggestive of some psychological efforts on Dr. Hamilton’s part, but they don’t convey anything beyond the initial crack in Mason’s resolve. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, there are some classic cartoons, a few WB shorts, and the audio of a radio play adaptation of the film to enjoy, but there’s nothing of significance that probes the film … and, yes, it would’ve been nice to have a little something.
Recommended.
As a huge fan of the Bogart catalogue, I’m a tad disappointed to admit that I didn’t enjoy Conflict (1945) a bit more. While the main plot – that of a man so desperate to pursue the illicit promise of a love affair with his sister-in-law that he’d murder his wife – is the kind of subject matter film noirs have explored to great delight, the picture never quite figures out what to do with its cast of supporting players well enough to have them seem like something greater than pawns in motion on a screenwriter’s chess board. Bogart and Greenstreet deliver some great exchanges, but there’s just not much memorable in here beyond the occasional flickers. Though I expected more, I got just enough for my attention; and the somewhat hokey conclusion feels more like a Columbo ‘Movie of the Week’ moment than it does a big, theatrical finish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Conflict (1945) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
RSS Feed