La huella fatal

Richard Mason (Humphrey Bogart) kills his wife Katherine on a remote hill road. With a good alibi he feels it is the perfect crime and plays the role of the concerned husband as the police follow up a missing persons report. However things begin happening that convince Richard that his wife is very much alive.

This is not a classic Bogart role. He is quite good as the murderer who begins to unravel as his crime begins to catch up with him, he quite convincingly gets increasingly frantic during the film as things keeping happening that couldn't happen unless his wife was alive. However it isn't as strong a role as some of his classics. The strongest performance is Sydney Greenstreet as Doctor Hamilton who supports Bogart through his loss.

The story requires on two mysteries to keep your interest - one, is his wife still alive or is he being played by someone with an ulterior motive? and two - will he get away with the murder? As a mystery it doesn't quite grab you as much as it should. The two mysteries are not enough to drive you until the end but are quite entertaining - especially where Bogart believes he is losing his mind when someone plays games with him. But it's not that great a mystery - we know that either she's alive or she's not - the options are limited so the solution doesn't exactly come out of left-field! The ending is therefore not great, although it is clever, in particular finding out the mistake that Bogart made in his otherwise perfect crime. But it's all a bit of an anti-climax and you feel that you suspected as much the whole way through.

A reasonable mystery film but it doesn't have the tension or mystery that it needed to keep it's audience on a knife's edge for the duration

Film-noirs/mysteries have always fascinated me, and there are numerous good films to classics. Ones that are impeccably made, tautly scripted, well acted, entertaining and suspenseful. Another interest point is the always seldom less than watchable Humphrey Bogart, one of film's most iconic stars (and deservedly too), evident in particularly one of the greatest screen performances in 'Casablanca'. Sydney Greenstreet is also always dependable and a bright spot in much of his work.

Would never have heard of 'Conflict' if it had not appeared in my recommended for you section, and although it is not a great film as such there are no regrets having watched it. It's good fun and has an appropriate darkness and engrosses, even if it doesn't surprise. It has been compared here to 'The Two Mrs Carrolls', a relatively similar film made in the same period and also starring Bogart, and can see why. Do agree though that this is the much better film, having not cared for the rather bizarre 'The Two Mrs Carrolls'.

Bogart holds 'Conflict' together with ease and intensity and the main reason to see it, the role suits him very well even if it's not one of his best. Greenstreet is every bit as great, subtle and also typically imperious. The exchanges between them blister, with them gelling so well despite being polar opposites. The film is nicely directed and never felt dull. The music serves its purpose well.

'Conflict' is a good looking film, with suitably brooding and stylish photography in particular. The script is taut enough and while the story is flawed it has two diverting enough mysteries that keeps one on their toes, a nice dark tension in its mood and a few suitably unsettling sequences.

Some suspension of disbelief is needed though, as the film does get contrived and silly at times, and neither mystery has enough surprises. The conclusion especially is very obvious and also felt anti-climactic.

Also felt to a lesser extent felt that Alexis Smith came over as rather detached in her role.

In conclusion, good fun and fans of Bogart should find enough to enjoy. 7/10

This movie and the above named movie were both made in 1945 (though The Two Mrs. Carrolls was released two years later), both starred Humphrey Bogart and Alexis Smith, and both had a plot involving a man who had murdered his wife. In fact, they are so similar that I had mixed the two films together in my mind. However, I recently watched both films just a few nights apart and found Conflict to be the better of the two films, though neither are great films. However, considering that an okay Bogart film of the 1940s is still very watchable, this shouldn't discourage you from seeing the film. The problem, I'm sure, for many is that both films are so against type for Bogey that you may feel turned off by his character. Plus, the plot is awfully hard to believe. BUT, if you suspend belief and just watch it for its entertainment value, this is a good film--particularly for the fine supporting performance by Sidney Greenstreet.

Conflict stars Humphrey Bogart as architect Richard Mason, not in love with his wife (Rose Hobart) and infatuated with her sister Alexis (Evelyn Turner) Events soon take a sinister turn, when Richard hatches a plot to murder his wife on a remote mountain road. Just when he thinks he has committed the perfect crime, things start to happen which plant seeds of doubt in his mind.

Sydney Greenstreet gives a fine performance as a psychologist friend of the Masons who offers useful insights into the criminal mind and gives you food for thought as he voices his opinion on the human psyche.

With good performances all round, this is an atmospheric mystery which will keep you guessing to the end.

Sidney Greenstreet was only in motion pictures for nine years, but he left a mark as large as his physical presence. He was lucky to be taken through his initial appearance in films (he was past 60)by one of the great modern film directors (John Huston). And after THE MALTESE FALCON he was lucky enough to appear in a second film by Huston (ACROSS THE PACIFIC) co-starring his "Maltese Falcon" friends Bogart and Mary Astor. With that build-up he was set. Unfortunately, he also had been set in the role of villain, and for as long as he was connected to Warners Brothers (which was most of his whole career) he was usually playing villains. There would be exceptions: He was in comedies like CHRISTMAS IN CONNECTICUT, THE HUCKSTERS, PILLOW TO POST. But most of his films were dramatic, with him playing the villains. Sometimes his villains were sympathetic, or the type the audience secretly cheered on (his Superintendent Grodman avenges himself and a wrongly hanged man in the course of the film THE VERDICT). Sometimes he destroyed a truly evil figure (usually Zachary Scott), like in THE MASK OF DEMETRIOS.

Because of THE MALTESE FALCON and the Warner Brothers connection, Greenstreet and Bogart found themselves teamed together, frequently with Peter Lorre or Mary Astor in these films as well. In most of them Greenstreet played a villain or a semi-sinister figure (his role in Casablanca is not a total villain in the film). But CONFLICT is a real exception. It was the only time Greenstreet and Bogart were in a film together and Bogart is the villain, while Greenstreet is the man who solves the murder. It is good reverse casting (reminding us that Bogart's period as a supporting actor in the 1930s was one where he played villains against Edward G. Robinson or James Cagney). Greenstreet is excellent as the the man who uses psychological warfare to crack the killer's conscience. And it is so subtly done we never know what was the cause of Greenstreet's discovery of the truth - it all comes down to an issue of horticulture...so to speak.