Dalbert Pringle Not really knowing what to expect from The Small Back Room, I'm glad to say that I found myself pleasantly surprised by this 1949, British production. It was one of the best character studies that I've seen (from that era) in quite a long time.Set in 1943 (in war-torn London), this beautifully restored, b&w drama held my undivided attention from start to finish.Featuring a good cast (headlined by David Farrar) and impressive camera-work (there's lots of great close-ups), The Small Back Room's story concerns the professional and personal conflicts of Sam Rice, a troubled research scientist and bomb-disposal expert with a "tin leg" and a weakness for whiskey.This solid, intense (and somewhat depressing) story even contains a scene filmed at Stonehenge. As well, there's a rather strange & surreal sequence involving clocks and a distorted whiskey bottle that gets thrown into the mix which may puzzle some viewers.All-in-all - This WW2 drama was well-worth a view.

Theo Robertson The films of Michael Powell feature quite prominently in the list of greatest British films list . BLACK NARCISSUS , THE RED SHOES , THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP and A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH all feature there somewhere . This film called THE SMALL BACK ROOM is constantly ignored for some reason , perhaps the fact it's in black and white might have a lot to do with it but is certainly of the best films in Powell's resume Perhaps this fact that it is shot in black and white works in its favour ? In some ways it's a different take on film noir . David Farrar plays Sammy Rice a scientist working for the war office and finds himself besieged on all sides by marketing agents who want to win government contracts for new weapons even though these weapons are nowhere near as effective as the marketing men claim . What the film does brilliantly is taking us in to the tortured psyche of Rice who knows fine well that this will cost the lives of young men who have to fight the war against Nazi Germany with these weapons In film noir the protagonist is portrayed as a flawed anti-hero and in the case of Rice he's flawed both physically and mentally . He has a foot missing which has been replaced by a tin one that causes him pain which has led to an addiction for pain killers which don't work except to feed his addiction . Rice also has a sometimes addiction to alcohol and Powell shows his expressionistic influences by a quite breath taking sequence where Rice has to literally fight his addiction . The entire film benefits greatly from the cinematography of Christopher Challis that any director of film noir would kill for One other overlooked aspect to THE SMALL BACK ROOM that you would never get in an American movie is the " joint effort " portrayal of the allies . Churchill summed up allied victory as being won by " American money , British courage and Soviet blood " a somewhat simplistic sound bite but the fact is it was a broad coalition of many countries and of many brave young people who can claim the victory for defeating Nazi Germany and it's nice to see a film open with a British officer finding himself surrounded by servicemen from America , Poland and France . Believe me you wouldn't get that in a 21st Century American film THE SMALL BACK ROOM remains one of the best films Powell made . Like the cosmopolitan coalition who beat the Nazis there's a lot of factors as to why it's a good movie . If you're expecting a war film then that's not what you're going to get because it's a journey through the psyche of a tortured man with the burden of a world at war on his shoulders and the film is good at portraying this on screen and contains some excellent cinematography

paul-1983 I have often sought out black and white films from the British cinema and was not disappointed when I came across The Small Back Room. Now possibly one of my favourite films of all time, the very good, simple underlying plot is overtaken by the principal characters, played by David Farrar and Kathleen Byron. An excellent supporting cast, including Michael Gough, Jack Hawkins and Leslie Banks enables the viewer to pull the curtains on a rainy afternoon and to lose themselves in a world that is not quite the 1943 in which the film is set and in in some ways is much later than the 1949 in which it was made. The relationship between Sammy and Susan is a deep and powerful, but secret one and is more curious when one has time to reflect and put it into its (early or late) 1940s context. The fact that they keep their feelings from their colleagues is endemic of the times but is a little curious nonetheless. A friend who knows about such things immediately latched onto the way that another male character fixes his intense gaze upon Sammy Rice to the extent that it now makes me a tiny bit uncomfortable in a non-21st century way. Keep watching this film and you will see more and more interplay between people that implies a further raft of professional and social relationships that the film never actually explores or explains. My verdict: Catch a stinking cold and take a day off work. Curl up on the sofa with a hot drink and lose yourself in a world that you will want to keep coming back to.

alan-morton Quite apart from its wartime themes, this is the best introduction I know to the world of office politics and power broking. Fans of Ricky Gervais are advised to give this little film a viewing. It has enough story lines to keep everyone happy and the cast is mighty fine at playing a variety of individuals. It's hard to think of a better supporting-role performance from Jack Hawkins, and anything with Kathleen Byron in it always has to be watchable.I've only just read the novel of the same name, on which it's based (still in print and available, and strongly recommended by the way). Comparing the two, it's easy to see how so much of the film derives from the novel; but this is far more than a film of the book. Powell and Pressburger have done a superb job of focusing and concentrating the novel's strengths.