IMDb रेटिंग
7.5/10
15 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंThe wife of a rubber-plantation administrator shoots a man to death and claims it was self-defense, but a letter written in her own hand might prove her undoing.The wife of a rubber-plantation administrator shoots a man to death and claims it was self-defense, but a letter written in her own hand might prove her undoing.The wife of a rubber-plantation administrator shoots a man to death and claims it was self-defense, but a letter written in her own hand might prove her undoing.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- 7 ऑस्कर के लिए नामांकित
- 5 जीत और कुल 9 नामांकन
Elizabeth Inglis
- Adele Ainsworth
- (as Elizabeth Earl)
Victor Sen Yung
- Ong Chi Seng
- (as Sen Yung)
Zita Baca
- Undetermined Role
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Brooks Benedict
- Party Guest
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
William A. Boardway
- Trial Spectator
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
David Bruce
- Undetermined Role
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
James Carlisle
- Attorney
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
George Ford
- Party Guest
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
10garrard
In a career that spanned almost six decades, it would be hard pressed to cite one definitive Davis performance. There are so many, and with the number of Davis fans worldwide, it would be redundant to list them here.
However, Davis's performance as adulterer/"devoted" wife "Leslie Crosbie" has to rank as one of her finest. Davis does more in the short span of ninety-five minutes (the film's running time) than an actor of lesser skill could do in an entire career. Her "Leslie" is delicate, yet demanding, appealing yet repulsive, and submissive yet authoritative. The character dominates every inch of the screen and the actress makes full use of those trademark "eyes" of which Kim Carnes sang.
The supporting cast is equally as brilliant, with Herbert Marshall outstanding as her loving (but dim-witted) husband, James Stephenson, suave and determined, as Davis's lawyer, Victor Sen Yung (later to achieve fame as "Hop Sing" on TV's "Bonanza"), and Gale Sondergaard, magnificent in the speechless yet captivating role of "Mrs. Hammond."
And praise of this film is not complete without mention of its score. Max Steiner contributed one of film's greatest musical accompaniments. So powerful is this work that Laurence Rosenthal adapted themes in his score to the television version, starring the late Lee Remick.
However, Davis's performance as adulterer/"devoted" wife "Leslie Crosbie" has to rank as one of her finest. Davis does more in the short span of ninety-five minutes (the film's running time) than an actor of lesser skill could do in an entire career. Her "Leslie" is delicate, yet demanding, appealing yet repulsive, and submissive yet authoritative. The character dominates every inch of the screen and the actress makes full use of those trademark "eyes" of which Kim Carnes sang.
The supporting cast is equally as brilliant, with Herbert Marshall outstanding as her loving (but dim-witted) husband, James Stephenson, suave and determined, as Davis's lawyer, Victor Sen Yung (later to achieve fame as "Hop Sing" on TV's "Bonanza"), and Gale Sondergaard, magnificent in the speechless yet captivating role of "Mrs. Hammond."
And praise of this film is not complete without mention of its score. Max Steiner contributed one of film's greatest musical accompaniments. So powerful is this work that Laurence Rosenthal adapted themes in his score to the television version, starring the late Lee Remick.
From the opening sequence where we see Bette emptying her gun on this poor unsuspecting soul, you become riveted watching one of Ms. Davis' all-time flawless performances.
In a nutshell, this tells the story of what happens when first we practice to deceive. Bette claims she was attacked by a friend she has seen only casually until she was forced to "defend" herself against his unwanted advances. Initially, it looks like a slam dunk but when the case is taken to trial, more and more, Bette's lies get the best of her.
Not a sympathetic character for the most part. There is one chilling scene where she, totally exasperated with having to remember so many lies, makes a confession to her husband. It is a fascinating scene for while you recoil at her seemingly selfish attitude, there is this underlying, reluctant admiration you feel for this woman's brutal honesty.
Excellent supporting cast all around, most notably, Herbert Marshall as the poor unsuspecting (it appears many men fall under this category when dealing with the Divine Ms. Davis!)husband whose main goal is to support his wife. Now whether she deserves this loyalty is another ugly story.
Excellent mystery with certainly enough twists and turns to keep you totally engrossed in a very good story.
*Just watched it again last night (10/8/2006) - I'm tellin' ya guys - after 900 viewings, the movie still rocks!!!!
In a nutshell, this tells the story of what happens when first we practice to deceive. Bette claims she was attacked by a friend she has seen only casually until she was forced to "defend" herself against his unwanted advances. Initially, it looks like a slam dunk but when the case is taken to trial, more and more, Bette's lies get the best of her.
Not a sympathetic character for the most part. There is one chilling scene where she, totally exasperated with having to remember so many lies, makes a confession to her husband. It is a fascinating scene for while you recoil at her seemingly selfish attitude, there is this underlying, reluctant admiration you feel for this woman's brutal honesty.
Excellent supporting cast all around, most notably, Herbert Marshall as the poor unsuspecting (it appears many men fall under this category when dealing with the Divine Ms. Davis!)husband whose main goal is to support his wife. Now whether she deserves this loyalty is another ugly story.
Excellent mystery with certainly enough twists and turns to keep you totally engrossed in a very good story.
*Just watched it again last night (10/8/2006) - I'm tellin' ya guys - after 900 viewings, the movie still rocks!!!!
William Wyler directs Bette Davis in a fine screen adaptation of a Somerset Maugham story. The plot is sheer melodrama and has la Davis in all kinds of hot water, legal and personal, in British Malaya. Wyler's pretentious direction works better here than elsewhere, and this is one of his finest films. The combination of the director's grandiose desire to turn everything into high art meshes nicely with Maugham's journeyman but psychologically complex, basically mediocre tale. Add to this a bravura performance from his star, and the result is a highly watchable and intelligent movie.
The tropics are nicely evoked without without drawing too much emphasis to the fact that everything and everyone seems to be wilting in the heat. Wyler and his screenwriters have clearly done their homework, and along with the cast present a believable picture of the closed society that was the essence of British imperial rule. These people are more snobs than not, but they are often decent snobs, good friends to one another in a tight spot, and carry themselves with a kind of quiet dignity that seems to have died with the empire. There are some fine performances aside from Miss Davis', notably from James Stevenson as her lawyer, who yet seems to be her lover, but isn't; and Herbert Marshall, who may as well her lawyer but is in fact her husband. The moon figures prominently in the film, seeming to hover over the action, perhaps even dictating it, and giving the movie perhaps a stronger resonance than its civilized melodrama deserves.
The tropics are nicely evoked without without drawing too much emphasis to the fact that everything and everyone seems to be wilting in the heat. Wyler and his screenwriters have clearly done their homework, and along with the cast present a believable picture of the closed society that was the essence of British imperial rule. These people are more snobs than not, but they are often decent snobs, good friends to one another in a tight spot, and carry themselves with a kind of quiet dignity that seems to have died with the empire. There are some fine performances aside from Miss Davis', notably from James Stevenson as her lawyer, who yet seems to be her lover, but isn't; and Herbert Marshall, who may as well her lawyer but is in fact her husband. The moon figures prominently in the film, seeming to hover over the action, perhaps even dictating it, and giving the movie perhaps a stronger resonance than its civilized melodrama deserves.
In `The Letter' William Wyler takes a predictable plot and turns it into a brilliant film with the help of one of the grande dames of film. For hell hath no fury like Bette Davis with a revolver in her hand.
The film opens with Leslie Crosby (Bette Davis) emptying her revolver into a man on her front porch, shooting him twice after he hits the ground. She tells the police she was defending herself against his sexual assault. She seems to be headed for an easy acquittal until (surprise) an incriminating letter surfaces that suggests that she summoned the victim to her house with the clear intention of murdering him.
Can the evidence be suppressed? Will she be acquitted? Was she really in love with the victim? The answers to these questions are obvious to all but the most naïve viewer. Yet, despite the transparency of the plot, this film works for two reasons: Bette Davis and William Wyler.
Bette Davis is arguably among the best actresses of all time. She was originally signed by Universal Studios, who dropped her because she didn't have the looks to be a movie star. Still, Warner Brothers decided to take a chance on her in 1932, signing her to a seven-year contract that would produce two Oscars. She was nominated for best actress eleven times, winning twice (`Dangerous', 1936 and `Jezebel' 1939). She was nominated five straight years from 1939 to 1943. This performance was in the middle of that run. It is classic Bette Davis, utterly in command of every scene. Her portrayal of Leslie is superb, a duplicitous and cunning woman who could manipulate any man to do her bidding. It took another woman to humble her. This is Davis in her prime and it is awesome to see her at work. She could make a dog food commercial exciting to watch.
What Davis was to acting William Wyler was to directing. (The two shared more than a professional relationship, and it was widely rumored at that time that they were romantically involved.) Wyler was nominated for best director twelve times winning three (`Mrs. Miniver', 1942; `The Best Years of Our Lives', 1943; `Ben Hur', 1960). Like Davis, he was also nominated for this film. Wyler's camerawork here is fantastic. In black and white films, lighting is critical, because the director doesn't have the luxury of relying on color to dramatize the images. Aided by veteran cinematographer Tony Gaudio, Wyler's use of lighting and shadows in this film is brilliant. It could serve as a primer for dramatic black and white cinematography. Gaudio was also nominated for an Oscar for this film, one of his six nominations in a forty-year career.
This film was nominated for seven Academy Awards, including best picture, but it was shut out. Despite a predictable story, I rated it a 9/10 on the strength of the acting, directing and cinematography. It is an excellent opportunity to see Bette Davis during her glory years in one of her many outstanding performances.
The film opens with Leslie Crosby (Bette Davis) emptying her revolver into a man on her front porch, shooting him twice after he hits the ground. She tells the police she was defending herself against his sexual assault. She seems to be headed for an easy acquittal until (surprise) an incriminating letter surfaces that suggests that she summoned the victim to her house with the clear intention of murdering him.
Can the evidence be suppressed? Will she be acquitted? Was she really in love with the victim? The answers to these questions are obvious to all but the most naïve viewer. Yet, despite the transparency of the plot, this film works for two reasons: Bette Davis and William Wyler.
Bette Davis is arguably among the best actresses of all time. She was originally signed by Universal Studios, who dropped her because she didn't have the looks to be a movie star. Still, Warner Brothers decided to take a chance on her in 1932, signing her to a seven-year contract that would produce two Oscars. She was nominated for best actress eleven times, winning twice (`Dangerous', 1936 and `Jezebel' 1939). She was nominated five straight years from 1939 to 1943. This performance was in the middle of that run. It is classic Bette Davis, utterly in command of every scene. Her portrayal of Leslie is superb, a duplicitous and cunning woman who could manipulate any man to do her bidding. It took another woman to humble her. This is Davis in her prime and it is awesome to see her at work. She could make a dog food commercial exciting to watch.
What Davis was to acting William Wyler was to directing. (The two shared more than a professional relationship, and it was widely rumored at that time that they were romantically involved.) Wyler was nominated for best director twelve times winning three (`Mrs. Miniver', 1942; `The Best Years of Our Lives', 1943; `Ben Hur', 1960). Like Davis, he was also nominated for this film. Wyler's camerawork here is fantastic. In black and white films, lighting is critical, because the director doesn't have the luxury of relying on color to dramatize the images. Aided by veteran cinematographer Tony Gaudio, Wyler's use of lighting and shadows in this film is brilliant. It could serve as a primer for dramatic black and white cinematography. Gaudio was also nominated for an Oscar for this film, one of his six nominations in a forty-year career.
This film was nominated for seven Academy Awards, including best picture, but it was shut out. Despite a predictable story, I rated it a 9/10 on the strength of the acting, directing and cinematography. It is an excellent opportunity to see Bette Davis during her glory years in one of her many outstanding performances.
From its explosive beginning to its hushed ending, this is Golden Age Hollywood story-telling at its best. Director William Wyler and star Bette Davis were lovers behind the scenes and it shows here in the masterful way he showcases her and also in the way she responds.
The story, set in colonial Malaysia, from W Somerset Maugham's novel, is expertly unveiled from that dramatic opening as, under a full moon, Davis's Leslie Crosbie commits the ultimate crime of passion and then throws herself on the legal skills of family friend James Stephenson to get her off. Her defence is self-defence against attempted rape and seems plausible until word is filtered to Stephenson by his duplicitous, self-serving native assistant of the existence of a highly incriminating letter written by the accused woman on the night of the murder, which puts a completely different reading on events.
And so the threat of blackmail leads to a secret bargain with the slain man's widow, played in inscrutable, indeed mute fashion by Gale Sondergaard, an imposing, haunting presence in her every scene, unwillingly dragging Stephenson into a shady bargain which compromises his professional ethics, but out of friendship for Davis's doting, unsuspecting husband, Herbert Marshall, he eventually allows himself to be drawn into effectively acting as Davis's accomplice.
Although the trial outcome is assured, there's still a price to be paid by Bette however when Marshall learns that the financial price for buying the letter was far higher than its importance had been made out to him before, leaving him penniless and unable to fulfil his dream move to Singapore. Aah, but at least he has the love of his innocent wife to fall back on...or so he thinks...
The only inconsistencies in the story for me were the two prices Davis had to pay in the end, which I can only attribute to the Code's requirement that no crime, certainly a capital crime like this, can be allowed to go unpunished. That said it does pave the way for Davis's memorable final walk in shadow to her ultimate fate which impressively closes the film.
There can't be many better-lit films than this, Wyler's use of light and shade is absolutely masterful. He also gets a great lead performance from Davis, who holds onto her steely, ice-cool demeanour right up until Marshall, also very good in his very supportive role, asks her the question which causes her facade to shatter. James Stephenson, a name previously unknown to me and who sadly died just after the film's release, is likewise excellent as the couple's conflicted legal adviser and was deservedly Oscar-nominated for his work. Mention should also be made of Max Steiner's brooding soundtrack which adds much to the stifling atmosphere throughout.
This film is a rare combination of a rattling good tale, expertly directed and convincingly played all adding up to a tense and gripping melodrama.
The story, set in colonial Malaysia, from W Somerset Maugham's novel, is expertly unveiled from that dramatic opening as, under a full moon, Davis's Leslie Crosbie commits the ultimate crime of passion and then throws herself on the legal skills of family friend James Stephenson to get her off. Her defence is self-defence against attempted rape and seems plausible until word is filtered to Stephenson by his duplicitous, self-serving native assistant of the existence of a highly incriminating letter written by the accused woman on the night of the murder, which puts a completely different reading on events.
And so the threat of blackmail leads to a secret bargain with the slain man's widow, played in inscrutable, indeed mute fashion by Gale Sondergaard, an imposing, haunting presence in her every scene, unwillingly dragging Stephenson into a shady bargain which compromises his professional ethics, but out of friendship for Davis's doting, unsuspecting husband, Herbert Marshall, he eventually allows himself to be drawn into effectively acting as Davis's accomplice.
Although the trial outcome is assured, there's still a price to be paid by Bette however when Marshall learns that the financial price for buying the letter was far higher than its importance had been made out to him before, leaving him penniless and unable to fulfil his dream move to Singapore. Aah, but at least he has the love of his innocent wife to fall back on...or so he thinks...
The only inconsistencies in the story for me were the two prices Davis had to pay in the end, which I can only attribute to the Code's requirement that no crime, certainly a capital crime like this, can be allowed to go unpunished. That said it does pave the way for Davis's memorable final walk in shadow to her ultimate fate which impressively closes the film.
There can't be many better-lit films than this, Wyler's use of light and shade is absolutely masterful. He also gets a great lead performance from Davis, who holds onto her steely, ice-cool demeanour right up until Marshall, also very good in his very supportive role, asks her the question which causes her facade to shatter. James Stephenson, a name previously unknown to me and who sadly died just after the film's release, is likewise excellent as the couple's conflicted legal adviser and was deservedly Oscar-nominated for his work. Mention should also be made of Max Steiner's brooding soundtrack which adds much to the stifling atmosphere throughout.
This film is a rare combination of a rattling good tale, expertly directed and convincingly played all adding up to a tense and gripping melodrama.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe first scene that William Wyler filmed was the famous opening shot in which Leslie shoots Geoffrey Hammond. This sequence, which lasted two minutes on screen, took an entire day to film, and that was before even a single word of dialogue was spoken. The studio expected him to shoot at a rate of 3-4 script pages a day, but the opening shot reflected a mere paragraph on page one.
- गूफ़The motor vehicles throughout are all left-hand drive. In Singapore traffic drives on the left, and all vehicles there are right-hand drive.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनAlso shown in computer colorized version.
- कनेक्शनEdited into Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- La carta
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $16,455
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 35 मि(95 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें