DVD Review: The Wrong Man
Published July 05, 2007
Alfred Hitchcock was the consummate Hollywood director in that his films had high production values, big name stars, were immaculately composed and scored, usually by Bernard Herrmann, as in this film. Yet they also tended to lack heart, or real human emotion. They were all basically plot-driven vehicles that usually had twist endings, that stretched the bounds of the reasonable. In a way he was the M. Night Shyamalan of his day, except that he was a far superior filmmaker in every way. Every so often, however, he would try his hand at a different style of film, like Mr. And Mrs. Smith, Jamaica Inn, and Under Capricorn.
Perhaps his most successful such ‘oddball’ film was 1956’s black and white social realism film The Wrong Man, starring Henry Fonda. It was manifestly influenced by the spate of European films that indulged in the Neo-Realistic style of such masters as Vittorio De Sica, Federico Fellini, and Roberto Rossellini. It was also based upon a real life case of mistaken identity in 1953 which nearly put an innocent man in prison.
This film’s veracity was so important to Hitchcock that he did not dare make one of his comic cameo appearances within the film; rather we only see him opening the film on a dark soundstage, and in shadow, as he intones the setup. Yet, in a sense, the film is more of a classic film noir, based in reality, than a Neo-Realistic film, based in Hollywood, even as it is shorn of the usual Hitchcockian plot twists and MacGuffins.
The film was penned by Angus MacPhail and playwright Maxwell Anderson, and was based upon Anderson’s non-fiction novel called The True Story Of Christopher Emmanuel Balestrero, which preceded Truman Capote’s non-fiction novel In Cold Blood by a decade. It is a very good film, yet it never quite soars into greatness, for a number of manifest reasons.
First off is that the film never probes deeply enough into the laziness, ennui, and corruption of the New York Police Department, which was all too eager to pin a series of crimes on the first suspect they stumbled upon. The film displays their bumbling idiocy in full, and while it is not the flat-out criminality that engulfs the officers of the later film Serpico, Hitchcock never seizes the dramatic opportunity to widen his film into an indictment of ‘the system’, which was so manifestly incompetent in this and so many other pre-Miranda Warning cases.
Look at how ‘bad suspects’ were treated by the cops, played by Harold J. Stone and Charles Cooper — arrested without their rights being read or told of the crime they are accused of. They are not allowed to contact their family, who fear the worst, interviews are conducted without written or taped records, witnesses are subtly coerced into identifying the ‘real’ suspect in a lineup, and are paraded past witnesses in the stores, whose expectations and willingness to ‘help’ the law are exploited, etc. Then, later, when on trial, we learn the cops have outright lied, claiming Manny admitted he was in debt to bookies.
- DVD Review: The Wrong Man
- Published: July 05, 2007
- Type: Review
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Video: Thriller, Video: Suspense and Mystery, Video: Drama, Video: Crime, Video: Classics
- Writer: Dan Schneider
- Dan Schneider's BC Writer page
- Dan Schneider's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
The stories are plot-driven. Hitchcock was not dep. You won't find the great characters of a Fellini nor Bergman in his films.
Even Kurosawa, who was more action-oriented, developed characters. Hitch was technically great, but skin-deep.
Granted, The Wrong Man was one of Hitchcock's more forgettable films. But that doesn't negate the fact your review of it is way off base in a number of areas. The movie was made in 1956, yet you cite it as being unrealistic in that the police didn't advise the suspect of his rights. Miranda warnings weren't put in place until 1966, a full decade after the movie was released. Comparing The Wrong Man to Serpico is like comparing Charlie Chaplin to Woody Allen, with whom you're obviously enamored. Fellini and Hitchcock are likewise apples and oranges. If you don't know the fundamental difference between film noir and "neo-realism", you have no validity as a critic. Your Eurocentric bias merely betrays you as a person who has no working knowledge of what makes a film work or fail. Hitchcock understood that film is a visual medium, and utilized its visual nature to wordlessly leave it to the viewer to draw his own cathartic conclusions. Fellini, Bergman, Rosellini--all have acknowledged their debt to Hitchcock.
Please--if you're going to review film, get a basic knowledge of it as a storytelling medium.
Ray: I state, 'which was so manifestly incompetent in this and so many other pre-Miranda Warning cases.'
I am aware of the Miranda warning's date, as stated above. Were you aware that, pre-Miranda, NY state required the reading of a state's rights for defendants? That was my reference, since it was set in NYC.
'Comparing The Wrong Man to Serpico is like comparing Charlie Chaplin to Woody Allen, with whom you're obviously enamored. Fellini and Hitchcock are likewise apples and oranges.'
Here is what I wrote, 'The film displays their bumbling idiocy in full, and while it is not the flat-out criminality that engulfs the officers of the later film Serpico.' I am comparing the officer's actions, not the film itself. It's a simple matter of reading what is written.
'If you don't know the fundamental difference between film noir and "neo-realism", you have no validity as a critic.' Film noir is not character- but plot-driven. This is clearly Neo-Realistic in intent. In the DVD, even, it is stated Hitchcock was deliberately aping the Italian Neo-Realists. But, one need only see the film to see that. It is not a film where the crime is first, but the social message. Have you even seen the film?
'film is a visual medium, and utilized its visual nature to wordlessly leave it to the viewer to draw his own cathartic conclusions'
Every tool of the visual art serves one purpose- the telling of the story- aka the plot and the characters. Without the story, all else is window dressing.
Keep reading, you may learn something yet of film.
'Fellini, Bergman, Rosellini--all have acknowledged their debt to Hitchcock.'
And learnt from his flaws.
The word you're looking for is "learned", not "learnt". There is no such word as "learnt" in modern English. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to know that, wrapped as you are in lengthy dissertations that have nothing to do with the merits of film. I was hoping your review of "Colossus: The Forbin Project" was a misdirected view of what constitutes science fiction. It's become increasingly apparent, however, that you are so immersed in a stringently narrow view of what film is about that you like the sound of your voice. You're full of indignation, but you signify nothing.
Actually, you are right that learnt is the older version, but you are wrong in knowing it's not acceptable.
Of course, from someone who reads, 'The film displays their bumbling idiocy in full, and while it is not the flat-out criminality that engulfs the officers of the later film Serpico,' then writes, 'Comparing The Wrong Man to Serpico is like comparing Charlie Chaplin to Woody Allen,' and cannot discern I am comparing the officer's actions, not the film itself, it's to be expected.
Leave wordplay to the pros.
Look, there's a bird. Ain't it pretty? Now, just wipe that drool off your cheek.
It's a conspiracy against you, Ray.
Hitch is chuckling.
"deus ex machina ending" . . . lol
No laughs needed if you've watched the film and understand the term.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/66116)
I think your characterization of his films as having "tended to lack heart, or real human emotion" is completely off-base, the real stories aren't the capers and heists and twists, they're the characters and interactions between the characters. The rest is just his "maguffin."