Crisis

Even someone who's been keeping track of old movies for many years can be forgiven if this one slipped under the radar. Surgeon Cary Grant and his wife are vacationing in a South- or Central-American paradise when they are abducted by government forces. Seems the country's dictator (Jose Ferrar) has a brain tumor but is afraid to leave the country due to revolutionary activity. Grant is pressured into performing the operation. Only problem is, the guerrillas have captured his wife, threatening to kill her if Ferrar survives the operation. But the letter informing him of this never reaches Grant.... Supporting cast includes Leon Ames, Ramon Navarro (Ben-Hur of the silent era) and Signe Hasso as Ferrar's wife, an Evita Peron clone. This is a tense and often intelligent drama (and slightly out of Grant's usual debonair range) that doesn't merit the obscurity it seems to be buried in.

Fans of Cary Grant should see this under appreciated film. It proves that Grant could indeed act - and that he has far greater range than his standard light comedy fare would indicate.

This is not a great movie, but it is a very well made movie. It has high production values. The film features three of the major "Latin Lovers" from the Silent era - Gilbert Roland, Ramon Novarro, and Pedro De Cordoba.

Jose Ferrer and Signe Hasso play a Latin American Dictator and his wife. They are the weakest points in the production - Ferrer insists on "Acting" through every scene. His performance comes across as very dated and unbelievable. Hasso, normally a fine actress, comes across as wooden and barely lifelike.

The weakest point in the production is the script. It insists on being very "politcal" and this detracts from the enjoyment value. Yet, because of this political viewpoint, it treats Latinos with much more respect and consideration than other movies filmed during this era.

"Crisis" is a study in how a strong supporting cast can make a movie complete. While Grant and Ferrer give powerful performances, they are enhanced by even better performances by Signe Hasso and Ramon Navarro. The latter two, with subtle, understated characterizations, round out a thoughtful script and cast. The story is compelling -- medical/ethical conflict, interwoven with a political drama which doesn't attempt to sway. It does provide a backdrop which doesn't interfere but enhances.

Most IMDb critics claim that this is unlike any other Cary Grant role, but I think his performance is remarkably reminiscent of "Notorious." Agent Devlin was more romantic, to be sure, but Dr. Ferguson is also a cool, calm, rational, and duty-bound man in a political maelstrom: he's a surgeon, vacationing in a banana republic whose tumor-stricken dictator shanghais him. The result is a trenchant dramatic character, which Grant does very well, supported by Ramon Novarro and Gilbert Roland, who always add quality to a movie. And I'd single out two other performers:

The Spanish composer Vicente Gómez graces only one scene, in a café, but he plays a soulful guitar solo that I wanted much, much more of.

And then there's José Ferrer as the dictator. He almost steals every scene, especially when he watches Grant's amateur surgical team drill into a fake human skull, rehearsing for the surgery awaiting the dictator himself tomorrow. When the rehearsal is done, Ferrer is sweating visibly and fumbling with a cigarette. He makes it easy for you to project yourself into that makeshift O. R. with the student surgical team-- you with a brain tumor and a captive surgeon who makes no effort to hide his antipathy.

But Grant holds his own. "Tell them never to use that instrument on the brain again," he says to his translator. "It might suck a piece right out of the brain." Ferrer hears, of course, and through his sweat he asks, "How did it go?" Grant drops the stitched-up skull in a garbage pail and says, "Oh, it went quite well. But you died."

This is Richard Brooks' first directorial effort. Examining the work half a century after it was made, the film presents a director who knows how to get the most from his actors through the written word and the way it is spoken. Three actors sparkle: Cary Grant, Jose Ferrer, and Signe Hasso.

Compare Cary Grant's acting in the Hitchcock vehicles and in this. Grant presents a maturity in his speech patterns that do not show up under Hitchcock's direction. I think much of the quality of the performances is probably due to the director who took his first film seriously--probably a lot more than he did in his later career.

All in all, this is a curious film--quite unusual in several ways compared to the average Hollywood products in the Fifties. Is it only a question of humanism winning over all evils? Or more?