andliff Behind Green Lights was released in February of 1946, and because of that I felt I would be bored or even frustrated by the acting and the story line. But that just wasn't the case. I really enjoyed the feeling the film gave me as I watched it, it just had the "old classic" feel about it. Most of the film takes place in the police station with the classic "everyone is smoking and wearing a suit". The film is black and white, and given what the film is about, it is very fitting and adds to the film. The opening scene starts with a small dialogue between two very important people of the film, Walter Bard and Janet Bradley. Janet just happens to be the daughter of a candidate running for mayor with the elections the following Tuesday. Not much is revealed in this opening scene but there's enough to wonder why the movie starts out with it. After some conversations at the police station, introducing some of press characters and other cops, the main event takes place; a dead body is found in a car right outside of the station. It's Walter Bard, dead, in his car by himself, with a gun wound. At this point you really start to get hooked by the many plot twists and endless possibilities of what could have happened, it keeps you guessing and just when you think you know what's going in it changes again. The lieutenant, Sam Carson, is really put into a tough situation as it is his job to find out what happened and who the murderer is. There are multiple suspects of who it could have been and multiple small sub stories of others' points of view helps you understand where these people are coming from and their motives, and truly demonstrating that the film hits the mark of the drama genre. As Lt. Carson starts to investigate and conduct more interviews with the possible "murderer", you really start to narrow it down. You start predicting that it is Janet or Nora, the victim's wife who is trying to get a divorce. I really liked the personal struggle of Lt. Sam Carson in doing what is right, even though he was enticed by one of the main newspaper owners to book one of the suspects in order to potentially corrupt an important mayoral election coming up for personal gain, recognition, and to avoid embarrassment for the police staff, but being a man of the truth and knowing what is right he made sure to do what it took to find the truth. He was fair with everyone and tried to get everyone's point of view. The film does a really good job of telling the stories and background stories for the characters without taking away from the main storyline. It does so to add to the story instead of take away or even distract from it. You realize that each person has their struggles and you start to see that each person is trying to do what's best for themselves or the ones they care about. One part that really demonstrated this was from the new lover of Nora, Arthur. Without giving away too much, he sees that Nora could be in real trouble and he does what he has to do to make sure that she'll be alright even if it meant he would be the one in big trouble. This makes it easy to relate to. I don't say that meaning everyone will be involved in a murder crime one day, but there will be times when our integrity will be questioned, when we have to make a decision to do what's right, when we may have to sacrifice for the ones we love, or even when a close friend gets in trouble. This film does a good job of telling an honest story of the characters' struggles. It goes beyond just your typical mystery. The director did a fantastic job of combining those genres into one great film, by connecting to the actors and the multiple plots twists which makes it easy to connect to.

dougdoepke Plot—a shady character turns up dead in front of a police station. Looks like the cops have their man, oops, woman, but then the corpse disappears and fingers begin to point in different directions.Okay time-passer from TCF. The format suggests a transition period between the comedic who-dun-its of the 1930's and the noirish police procedures of the late 40's. The two blend awkwardly here with an obstreperous group of crime reporters and antic characters providing the humor, and a no-nonsense police Lt. (Gargan) the procedure. Unfortunately, the moods contrast rather than complement, a tricky combo, at best. As other reviewers point out, the movie's standout aspect is influence peddling among city officials and police that suggests deals can be made without much regard for guilt or innocence. Perhaps the humorous side was intended to soften this harder message.Rather disturbing to see promising actress Landis just two years before her tragic suicide, one of Hollywood's more lamentable. Too bad her sparkling personality remains subdued in a rather dour role. Still, she remains a distinctive presence and not just for us guys. Unfortunately, tough guy Ireland is wasted in a supporting role. But with his distinctive looks, he's clearly on his way up.Anyway, the mystery's surprise solution is told in multiple flashbacks, so be prepared for the cut-aways. All in all, the movie's a journeyman piece of work, perhaps reflecting a coming change in post-war mood.(In passing—Like reviewer arfdawg, I was puzzled by the clumsily edited opening scene of Janet {Landis} holding a gun on Bard, which doesn't appear to fit with what follows. However, the scene is picked up later in flashback. My guess is the idea was meant to be a teaser. Unfortunately, it looks like dull scissors were used to cut it.)

arfdawg-1 Police lieutenant Sam Carson investigates a political murder after the victim is dumped at the door of police headquarters.I watched this movie on Cafe Noir and right in the beginning there was a splice and a piece of film missing. Didn't bode well since it seemed to be a critical scene that was chopped.In fact, the running time on Cafe Noir is 60 minutes even. This means 4 minutes were chopped off the movie! I wonder if that's the only print available. The quality was good. Bu it was missing 4 minutes!Anyway, I didn't especially like the movie. Thought it was slow and talkie.

Robert J. Maxwell This is about what you'd expect from a hastily written and produced murder mystery from 1946. The director must have had the producer looking over his shoulder, taking notes on time and expenses. But even at that, Otto Brower's direction displays a staggering lack of imagination. I'll give one example and let it go.Near the beginning, a cub reporter is being shown around the police station where most of the action is to take place. His fellow newspaperman walks him past the usual people who show up in police stations with complaints or being questioned for having performed some suspicious act, perhaps First Degree Lurking.The guide walks the new reporter down the hallway and they pass three sets of cops interviewing people who have business with the police. Each time they reach a new pair, the reporters stop and stand silently while the cop and the complainant exchange a few humorous words, then move on to the next pair, where the routine is repeated, as in a vaudeville skit. Whines one African-American, "She done run off with my car." Detective: "Nothing you can do, that car is community property." Complainant: "But she done took it OUT of da community!" What's irksome isn't the racial humor. That was common enough at the time and often was pretty funny. And it's not even that the lines themselves are no more than slightly amusing. And it's not that this routine -- the camera panning a police station in which civilians are being quizzed one after another -- is so thoroughly familiar. It's that the pair of reporters STOPS, and so does the camera, until each skit is completed, before moving on. All Herr Brower needed to do before the take was give a simple direction to the reporters, like, "You can slow down but keep walking." That would have strained no one's patience and made little demands on anyone's talent.The performances are good enough. William Gargan is bland as the nice lieutenant who is tempted to knowingly follow a false lead because of a hypothetical imperative. J. Farrel MacDonald -- a great bartender in the same year's "My Darling Clementine" -- is lost in a minor role. A villainous newspaper editor and a sleazy blackmailer look suitably slimy. An old Irish lady who sells flowers on the street isn't nearly as funny or charming as the writers had hoped. John Ireland dominates each scene he's in. The musical score is pedesterian. There is some nice photography by Joe MacDonald, including an outdoor shot (one of only two in the entire movie), in which a big car glides along a wet cobblestone street. A little touch of expressionism in the night. It's hardly worth describing the plot. An important newspaper wants an innocent young woman arrested for murder for political reasons; her father is running on the reform ticket or something. I may be getting it mixed up with the newspaper in "Boomerang." The Press Room is straight out of "The Front Page," including the oddball who wears a queer coat and is fussy about it. The resolution of the mystery appears suddenly out of a puff of smoke. The writers weren't breaking their backs on this one. A recently dead body gets mixed up with that of "a floater we found a couple of weeks ago", and the wrong bodies gets wheeled around under their sheets. At one point, a live but balmy escapee slips under the sheets too.You know what? Without too much trouble, the lines could have been rewritten as DELIBERATE gags, see. And you put Bob Hope and Mantan Moreland into the leads. And instead of Carole Landis, you use Dorothy Lamour. And you make the movie at Paramount. And -- voila! -- it's a successful comedy!