Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueDock worker Tom Masterick is wrongfully convicted of a murder charge. His death sentence is commuted to a long prison term. When released as an old man, he vows to show that his alleged vict... Tout lireDock worker Tom Masterick is wrongfully convicted of a murder charge. His death sentence is commuted to a long prison term. When released as an old man, he vows to show that his alleged victim is still alive.Dock worker Tom Masterick is wrongfully convicted of a murder charge. His death sentence is commuted to a long prison term. When released as an old man, he vows to show that his alleged victim is still alive.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Tom Masterick
- (as Billy Hartnell)
- Sullivan
- (as Brefni O'Rourke)
Avis à la une
Admittedly, the premise of the story places you before a situation fraught with the possibility of erroneous interpretation by court: Tom Masterick (well played by William Hartnell) is a dedicated family man whose wife cheats and who loses his beloved daughter to adoption after he chases his wife's lover with a long knife in his hand and apparently kills him.
You can question several details: William Hartnell, the alleged killer, does age; the alleged deceased, John Slater, does not (could it mean that his life has remained intact while Masterick's was wasted?); how did the authorities allow a man called Fred Smith, like the alleged murdereed man, to open and own a pub under that very name?; the convenience of those developments that lead to Masterick rotting in jail for 15 precious years raises all manner of doubt.
However, ultimately, when presented with evidence that the supposedly murdered man is actually very much alive, the wheels of law find it very difficult to turn around to right the wrong, and use all manner of semantics, not to have to admit the error.
As the saying goes, better let a criminal free than place an innocent man in jail. I liked MURDER IN THE REVERSE? Very much, all logic holes notwithstanding, because of the issues it raises. In cinematographic terms, it is strictly competent.
Lovely to see the very young Petula Clark. 8/10.
Now Hartnell has been released on a ticket-of-leave. O'Rorke, risen to editor, assigns Jimmy Hanley to go interview the man. Hanley -- who seems thoroughly inept as a reporter, probably kept on staff because O'Rorke's daughter, now grown into Dinah Sheridan, is in love with him -- can't find him, because Hartnell is in O'Rorke's office, asking after his girl, and explaining he's going to find Slater.
It's a very nice little movie, a first feature for writer-director Montgomery Tully. Hartnell is excellent in a leading role, and his old-man make-up makes him look as he would during his run in Doctor Who. DP Ernest Palmer offers some nice, dark lighting. It's a good story about high-sounding principles running up against official indifference, and worth a look.
Fifteen years of hard labour transforms Hartnell from an energetic forty something into a white haired, pork pie hatted, aged man. Older, sadder, but much wiser and entirely consumed by the singular purpose of locating Slater to prove his innocence. In a world largely sold on the belief that his quarry is long dead, it's the ultimate needle in a haystack scenario.
Garnering support from enthusiastic, but chaotic reporter, Jimmy Hanley and his love interest Dinah Sheridan, he seeks clues which may smoke out the elusive Slater. It culminates in a final scene, involving a bunch of puffed-up, pompous, plum in the mouth barristers, all deeply in love....with the sound of their own voices, who pontificate, deliberate and generally waffle over cases from the past and each other's shortcomings. Their abject failure to confront and resolve the salient issue before them produces jaw-dropping results.
With its meager sets and sporadically starchy performances, 'Murder in Reverse' not only looks, but sounds dated. Nonetheless, it exudes an unquestionable period charm, an almost tangibly quaint allure. The tricky plot, the dramatic finish and its inscrutable aftermath leave a lingering resonance which remains long after the closing credits have disappeared over the horizon.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesOne of the rare times William Hartnell was cast as the leading man.
- GaffesIt is stretching credibility to suggest that Jill, who is about 8 years old when her father is sent to prison, should lose all memory of him, her mother, and her true identity in the intervening 15 years.
- Citations
[newly-released from Dartmoor prison and waiting for his train, Masterick gets chatting to two American soldiers]
American Soldier: I see you have a big prison here. We saw some of the boys working out in the moor yesterday. Tough-looking boys there were, too.
American Soldier: Any chance of getting inside and having a look around, sir?
Tom Masterick: Well, not unless you do a murder first, I'm afraid.
[the soldiers chuckle]
American Soldier: Have you seen inside, sir?
Tom Masterick: Yes. But then, you see, I *am* a murderer.
[the soldiers look horrified and turn away]
American Soldier: Come on, Joe. Let's go.
- Crédits fousWilliam Hartnell was credited by that name in the opening titles but was credited as Billy Hartnell in the cast list in the closing credits.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Corps et âmes (1949)
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Query?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Query
- Lieux de tournage
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 20 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.37 : 1