Crimen sin castigo

Elia Kazan's 1947 docudrama Boomerang dramatizes the courage and independence of a Connecticut States Attorney who stood up to political pressure and fought for dismissal of charges against a defendant accused of murder because he wasn't convinced of his guilt. The film (which I first saw as a boy) is based on an actual killing that took place in 1924 in which a popular parish priest was shot on a main street in Bridgeport, Connecticut in full public view. In spite of the public nature of the killing, the murderer escaped and no suspects were immediately apprehended. Using an unseen narrator to provide background information, the film achieves a hard-hitting realism, conveying the feeling that you are watching events as they unfold.

Produced by Louis de Rochemont, well known for films dramatizing real events such as "House on 92nd Street" and "13 Rue Madeline", performances are uniformly excellent, particularly those of Dana Andrews as Henry Harvey, the idealistic States Attorney, Lee J. Cobb as Police Chief Robbie Robinson, Arthur Kennedy as John Waldron, the ex-GI murder suspect, and Ed Begley as the corrupt Commissioner Paul Harris. The film stays fairly close to actual events with the exception that the States Attorney is shown as an unknown lawyer looking to make a name for himself not the nationally known former Mayor and candidate for US Senate.

Boomerang begins with a description of the crime and then in a flashback shows the priest asking his assistant to get help for his unstated problems and threatening to have him confined in a hospital. This thread is left hanging but Kazan tantalizes the viewer, suggesting without offering any evidence that the troubled assistant had a motive to kill the priest. When the investigation stalls, pressure is put on the police to come up with a suspect and Dave Woods (Sam Levene), a local newspaper reporter, runs a series of stories criticizing the City government for its inaction in hopes of achieving political power for the paper's owner.

After innocent people are arrested simply because they wore clothing that resembled what the killer is alleged to have worn the night of the murder, a disheveled veteran, John Waldron (Arthur Kennedy), is arrested in Ohio in possession of a handgun and returned to Connecticut. Several eyewitnesses pick out Waldron as the killer and the bullet is identified as coming from Waldron's gun. When Police Chief Robinson (Lee J. Cobb), finally extracts a confession after grilling Waldron for many hours, the case seems open and shut.

At the preliminary hearing, however, Harvey is guided by the legal code of ethics that the prosecutor's job is not to gain convictions but to see that justice is done and has doubts about the evidence, arguing against a conviction. Most of the film's dramatic moments take place in the courtroom but there is a back story involving municipal corruption, a theme that Kazan would visit again ten years later in "A Face in the Crowd".

The shocking turnaround by the States Attorney does not sit well with party official Paul Harris (Ed Begley) who invested his savings in a corrupt land deal and needs the present government to remain in power to buy that land from him. Fearing economic ruin, he threatens Harvey and insists the prosecutor try to convict Waldron whether or not he is innocent. The prosecutor remains steadfast, however, and the intense courtroom drama keeps us riveted until the surprising outcome is revealed.

In a small town in Connecticut, Father Lambert is a pillar of the community and, when a man shoots him dead and runs off the shockwaves are felt far and deep. The political pressure is on when the "people" start appealing to the Mayor to catch the man responsible. As always, the sh*t rolls downhill and State's Attorney Henry Harvey finds himself with a few weeks to avoid taking the blame for the failure to bring someone in. When the police bring back John Waldron from Ohio they break him and he signs a confession. Harvey prepares a strong case despite Waldron maintaining his innocence, meanwhile the political games around the case build.

Based on a true story, this film opens with a narration that "this could happen anywhere" etc in the way that films used to often do. Regardless of where it happened the story is still good. On one level this film is about the murder and it follows the court case of the man charged with the murder. This is interesting for the majority without ever really catching fire but the final 20 minutes in court provide one good scene (maybe not the famous court scene from JFK but it is still engaging to watch Harvey ripping his own case down from the top. Intertwined with this is an enjoyable criticism of political manoeuvring within the idea of "justice"; it isn't as sharp as I would have liked but I was surprised that it was there at all considering the period.

The cast are mostly good but it is Andrews that runs things here. He is a slow starter but he convinces when in a moral mire and works well as he pulls out the stops to producing a zippy and engaging conclusion. Aside from him no other performance really stands out that well – Begley is particularly disappointing as the material deserved more than he delivered. The cast does feature some famous faces including Cobb, Malden and Levene but it is Andrews show as he leads it well.

Overall a good film from Kazan with a solid case at the core while also having enjoyable threads about political game playing (which in fairness was probably stronger than I thought, but I've been into The Wire recently so in this area everything pales by comparison).

This is a pretty good, taut, realistic, gritty film-noirish film from the camera lens of Elia Kazan. Kazan gives us the story of a Connetticut district attorney bumping the legal establishment in Hartford by NOT railroading a suspect who he knows to be innocent despite exhausting pressures to prosecute from local elected officials, businessmen, police, etc... The film, as previously noted, has a semi-documentary feel to it - all due to Kazan's expertise behind the camera. Whilst the story certainly is engaging, the acting is all high-level here with Dana Andrews doing a fine job as Henry L. Harvey the attorney faced with an ethical dilemma. Andrews acting range is not too wide but he delivers here and is more than ably assisted by men(and women) like Ed Begley as a businessman gone bad, Jane Wyatt as his lovely wife(Andrews's wife that is),Arthur Kennedy as the suspect with seemingly little to say, and a couple of Kazan would-be regulars - Lee J. Cobb doing a phenomenal job as a decent yet hard-headed police chief and Karl Malden as a police detective. Kazan shows us the story from many angles and has the benefit of having a real story as the basis of his film. We see the angles of different political opponents, a jealous/crazy girlfriend, local people who saw the crime of a priest being shot, and the journalists who try to scare up any angle they can. Some scenes are quite jarring like the confession scene. Arthur Miller, the great American playwright is seen briefly in a scene of suspects being lined-up. He was Kazan's close friend.

Boomerang! (1947)

In some ways this is an intensely well made and satisfying film, and when you have Dana Andrews in the lead role combined with Elia Kazan directing, and throw in first rate character actor Lee J. Cobb, you have something worth watching.

It's nice early Kazan, but it stumbles at times, and never lifts off, never gels. Here's why.

First of all, it's based (very closely) on fact, and sometimes the facts are dramatic but not necessarily good drama. Hamlet, if it were straight documentary truth, would probably shock more and enchant less. And so here, we start with a horrifying crime which takes the viewer quite by surprise. Then, in a continuing voice-over documentary style, we are launched on a huge manhunt. Facts are gathered, suspects suspected, policework unleashed, all acted and congealed very intelligently. A large twist occurs (with something of a stutter, dramatically), and then we are in a different kind of drama, a courtroom battle, with Andrews playing the unlikely role of prosecutor looking for the actual truth in a case rather than a conviction.

And then the court battle ends, and the movie sort of drizzles to a stop. And you might well say (as I did), "How like life." Or something equally unexciting. It's not a like a neo-realist hyper real movie, using amateur actors and so on. No, it's just an adapted true life crime story that might have been something more. For two sides to this coin, I'd first mention Kazan's own "On the Waterfront" which uses a real life kind of scenario but turns it into a dramatic masterpiece. And then some harder hitting reality movie like "The Phenix City Story" (1955) shows what a dramatic version of the truth, unchanged, might look like.

Of course, Kazan and crew are experts, and this is no dud. Andrews, if he is your taste, is in great form, really, within his shifting role. And the supporting cast does wonders, as cops, and as regular people, which this movie is ultimately about. Recommended, yes, but with expectations in line with, uh, reality.

Very good drama, employing documentary elements, about attorney Homer Cummings' pursuit of justice on behalf of a man wrongly accused of the murder of an episcopalian minister. Cummings went on to become Attorney General of the U.S.

Given the sloppy cases put on by prosecutors today with the only goal in mind being a win, given the intense political influences often in play in bringing cases to trial, Boomerang comes off like a fable about the way justice should work. Harvey, the prosecutor in this case (actually Cummings) refuses to bend to political pressure and rely on sloppy police work to win an indictment in the case of the accused man, beautifully portrayed by Arthur Kennedy.

The interrogation techniques shown in this film were pre-Miranda, but I believe interrogations like this still exist.

Elia Kazan did his usual great job of directing this stark drama and the cast is uniformly excellent: Dana Andrews, Jane Wyatt, Kennedy, Ed Begley, Lee J. Cobb, Karl Malden, and Sam Levene.

Toward the end of the film, Dana Andrews opens a book and reads a quote stating in part that the role of the prosecutor is to see that justice is done. In my experience and observation, it appears that most prosecutors have never read this statement. Maybe that's why Homer Cummings became U.S. attorney general and they haven't.