Kronzeuge gesucht

A man's wife runs out, because he bought a TV. 1957! Then she witnesses two men robbing the theater. She runs and is hit by a bus. The two bad guys spend the rest of the movie trying to kill the eyewitness. Again 1957. Then the husband takes three quarters of the movie to go to the police or hospital when she doesn't come home. One of the bad guys isn't really bad. Give me a break. By the end of the film I had completely lost interest. Why didn't they leave town? She only saw one hit the manager. She didn't see the shooting. Her husband is dumb and so is the plot. But one thing is true today. and that is hospitals are dangerous. Think! You're lying there sedated, and anyone could come in an kill you.

An adequately thrilling and reasonably well directed crime film, completed with an appropriately dark atmosphere clinging to it, the film does however unfortunately waste quite a bit of time on unnecessary supporting characters, and some of the acting feels a bit over-the-top. A few of the scenes also feel as if they are drawing out for too long too, as a number of them have little relevance to the story, but the film still holds up despite its drawbacks. The script and shot footage could have benefited from tighter editing, but as it is, the film is still effective for providing thrills and chills. It is worth a look.

Enjoyed this thriller though maybe for the wrong reasons. The plot was engaging enough but seemed to evolve slowly into a 'Carry on' type hospital farce with characters running hither and thither intertwined with a moustachioed and inept villain (all that was missing was a black cloak) along with a romantic and tasty night nurse. Very entertaining though and I found that the unintentional humour just added to the enjoyment.

Some of the patients seemed a bit too perky to be laid up in an emergency ward but their acting was good even if it was more suited to a comedy. Lots of improbable scenes but still worth a watch!

Fans of those black-and-white British crime dramas of the 50s and 60s will appreciate Eyewitness, and its a cut above most in that genre. Suspense is maintained well in a hospital setting, with generally capable performances all round. For 1956, this film doesn't shy away from showing violence, and has a good, sinister atmosphere.

Muriel Pavlow quarrels with husband Michael Craig and walks out.... and goes to the movies. After a while, she goes to phone home, but sees Donald Sinden and Nigel Stock robbing the theater's safe. They chase her into traffic, where she is hit by a car. "Good enough," says Stock. "Nonsense," says sociopathic Sinden. "We'd best go to the hospital and if she isn't already dead, smother her with a pillow. It will be jolly" -- or words to that effect.

It's a movie that is watchable to the end, but more because of what it attempts to do than because of what it succeeds in. The script shows some nice gender reversal in the relationship between Miss Pavlow and Mr. Craig for the era, and it's shot so dark for much of its length that the actual key events, of Mr. Sinden being menacing can't be seen -- only his calmly and rationally insane voice. It's a lovely idea, but doesn't quite work for a motion picture, alas.