Two of a Kind

The dialog is splendid, so is the acting, Lizabeth Scott more sparkling with her beauty and intelligence than ever, Edmond O'Brien is always a reliable ace card, and Alexander Knox for once is the bad guy, but what is all this really about? Is it a criminal comedy, an aborted noir without any crime, a satire on all the films of racketeering business, a twisted romance with too many lovers and relationships involved with each other, and yet it is fascinating all the way, and in the last 15 minutes things start to happen for real, everything being turned upside down, when all the cards of the game suddenly are exposed and everyone finds himself a loser. It's a witty intrigue with a lot of twists to the tricky and intelligent set-up, which seems absolutely perfect, until someone changes his mind. It looks really bad from a moral point of view all through, but by an odd turn honesty upsets the racket and love conquers all. In all its criminal intrigue with a perfect perspective of a noir, it is actually a comedy of romance heavily spiced with all the elements of a very crooked noir design, but with a very satisfactory outcome.

Edmond O'Brien, Lizabeth Scott, Alexander Knox, and Terry Moore star in "Two of a Kind" from 1951.

Brandy Kirby (Scott) and an attorney, Vincent Mailer (Knox) for a wealthy man, William McIntyre find the perfect person in Lefty Farrell (O'Brien) to pretend to be the long-lost son of McIntyre's. He will then inherit $10 million, and since McIntyre and his wife are old, there won't be long to wait until he inherits.

Brandy seduces Lefty into taking the job. In order to do it, he has to lose part of his little finger, as the McIntyre's son did. A friend of Brandy's (MooreO who is the McIntyre's niece, introduces him to them when she sees his finger and asks questions. It's looking good that Lefty will be accepted as the son and inherit a fortune.

I had a few problems with this noir. The writer tried to lighten it up with the presence and perky acting of Terry Moore, which was way out of place and came off as overdone.

Lefty is supposed to be a real charmer and a chick magnet. I'm sorry, Edmond O'Brien? Good actor but hardly oozing with sex and good looks. Under contract at that time were William Holden and Glenn Ford. I doubt many women would have turned them down.

Lizabeth Scott, one of the noir queens, looked great in her gorgeous clothes and shorter hair and, with that smoky voice of hers, was very effective. Knox really didn't have much to do. O'Brien was good as usual but for me, wrong for the part.

Without the Moore character and better casting of Lefty, the film would have been stronger. Instead, it was just passable.

This is an uneasy blend of mystery, suspense, and comedy. I am always dubious about mixed genre films, and I believe this could and should have been better as a straight film noir. However, it is still a good film and for all like myself who admire Lizabeth Scott and enjoy watching her films, it is a must. She was most famous for playing Dusty four years earlier, opposite Humphrey Bogart, in the stunning film noir DEAD RECKONING (1947). She was one of the best femme fatale actresses in film noir, though she could also show a warm, kindly, humorous and smiling layer underneath, as we see here. That entitled her to be 'redeemed' from her wicked ways from time to time in films. It is always nice when a femme fatale can be redeemed, but it does not happen very often, in life or on film. Scott is entrancing here as usual, and is the main reason we keep watching. The male lead is Edmond O'Brien. I wonder how Scott really felt when she repeatedly flung herself (with excessive force, I felt) into O'Brien's arms and began giving him passionate kisses. She does it often here. Doth the ladye embrace too muche? O'Brien was a very fine actor, and it was Ida Lupino who seems to have realized this most enthusiastically, for she daringly cast him in the lead for her provocative film THE BIGAMIST (1953, see my review), which was a triumphant casting coup. O'Brien also won an Oscar and an Oscar nomination in other films. But he was no handsome hunk, was podgy and a bit sweaty. It all goes to show how talent can overcome lack of looks. Terry Moore plays a dotty young niece in this film, with wide-eyed insistence and a very broad interpretation. She is meant to be the comedic character, and despite the ridiculous nature of her role and the absurdity it adds to the plot, she manages it nicely. In fact, one wants to give her an indulgent hug. So it all sort of works. Henry Levin directs this mixed pudding of a film and delivers a watchable product. Oh yes, I almost forgot the story. An elderly couple lost their child at the age of three on a street in Chicago and have never found him. Their unscrupulous lawyer and his girl friend Lizabeth Scott want to 'find' a man who will play along, pretend to be the long lost son (that's O'Brien), and inherit ten million dollars which they will then all split between them. But of course things turn out not to be that simple. After O'Brien is accepted as the son, things begin to unravel. As to what then happens, I ain't sayin'.

A 1951 film noir involving a lengthy grift being pulled on a rich couple. Lizabeth Scott starts the film off looking for a particular military man who's fallen off the grid who was aces as a soldier but his demeanor left something to be desired. Tracking the man down, played by Edmund O'Brien, at a bingo hall, Scott entices him w/the long con; an elderly married couple (who's wife is in a bad way) had lost their son & although presumed dead they hold out hope he may turn up whereby he'll leave him 10 million dollars in his will which Scott & her partner, played by Alexander Knox, will then split. The first hurdle, which O'Brien agrees to, is to chop off a part of one of his fingers (which he does when Scott slams a car door on it!) since the boy had this happen to him when he was younger & then settle into the machinations of the game, meeting the parents & laying out the possibly excruciatingly long stretch to see if the caper will come through w/O'Brien sticking around since he & Scott have connected romantically while Knox (revealed to be the couple's lawyer) bides his time waiting in the wings. I never bought the hook for this film & frankly O'Brien isn't quite convinced as well as his determination to complete the deal starts to waffle towards the film's end leaving the viewer w/a perplexed 'huh' on their face as we see if this long bet will pay out.

Two of a Kind is directed by Henry Levin and written by James Edward Grant, James Gunn and Lawrence Kimble. It stars Edmond O'Brien, Lizabeth Scott, Terry Moore, Alexander Knox, Griff Barnett, Robert Anderson and Virginia Brissac. Music is by George Duning and cinematography by Burnett Guffey.

Plot has O'Brien, Scott and Knox try to con a rich old couple that their son, who disappeared when he was three, has resurfaced in the older body of O'Brien. Thus they hope to get the $10 million inheritance due to the heir upon the death of the parents…

It all starts so very well, Scott's sultry blonde hunts out O'Brien's shady player to do a major con and he falls for her feminine whiles hook line and sinker, even agreeing to have his little finger mangled in a car door for the con cause. Sadly this is where the picture falls apart and unfurls in a lightweight manner.

Interesting possibilities are ignored, such as Moore's sprightly niece character who likes to straighten out bad men (it ends up playing as something that should be in a Cary Grant screwball) and a murderous plot that threatens to make the ending more lively (by this time the O'Brien/Scott pairing has become sickly nice), to leave us with what turns out to be a quite repugnant ending.

Guffey's black and white photography is crisp but just like the film itself, it really isn't noir at all. Levin and the cast try hard, but saddled with an unadventurous screenplay it rounds out as a minor B movie of little substance. 5/10