The Light Touch

Don't read the "Storyline" - it has too many spoilers.

Intriguing Characters & a Suspenseful Plot: I'm rating this movie a "10" in the hope of improving the ridiculously low 5.8 rating. It certainly deserves at least a 7. It's suspenseful, clever, and definitely enjoyable, especially if you don't know too much content ahead of viewing it. My husband & I both found "The Light Touch" to be well-acted, entertaining, and to have a worthy script. Some descriptions include "comedy" in the classification. Though there are some amusing lines, it's far from a "comedy." Interesting contrast in the cast of characters, to be sure!

Stewart Granger is an art thief in partnership with George Sanders. Granger has stolen a prized mdonna from a church, and Sanders is arranging to sell it. Tired of the small profits, Granger claims the picture was lost on a boat. He and Sanders look for an artist to make forgeries ..... excuse me, copies, and settle on Pier Angeli. As Granger evades Sanders, two sets of willing buyers, and local cop Joseph Calleia, he and Sra. Angeli get married. When she discovers what her husband does for a living, she is aghast.

It's filled with Sanders' casually delivered, dreadfully cynical remarks, Sra. Angeli's fresh, sweet charm, and some lovely camerawork by Robert Surtees. Writer-director Richard Brooks' script lacks the light touch; none of his movies were notable for subtlety. But working with the well-oiled MGM machine, he could turn out a good movie. He does so here, although Stewart Granger despised him. With Kurt Kaszner, Larry Keating, Rhys Williams, Mike Mazurki, Norman Lloyd, and Hans Conried.

Why do people feel the need to outline the plot, bandy about cast and crew names like they are insiders, mouth trade lingo and generally attempt to ape professional critics they have read or heard?? We can read all that stuff on the credits and from the places they lifted it. We have search engines on our computers too. I understand that real person reviews are solicited here, maybe with some sharing of things learned about the film. But, how about referencing the source so others can evaluate it on that basis. I think people mostly come here to find out what a regular viewer thought of the film.

On the film, I know it is not the best done by the actors. But I feel that when you like an actor, you like him/her in even a lesser movie. Enjoyed the combination of Granger and Sanders enough to want to watch and re-watch the movie just for that. To me, they have styles that are ever so delightful to watch in combo.

Thief Sam Conride (Stewart Granger) steals a painting from an Italian museum. He double-crosses his partner Felix Guignol (George Sanders) by faking its destruction in a boat fire. Their client Aramescue don't necessarily buy it. Sam comes up with a new scheme. They recruit innocent Anna Vasarri (Pier Angeli) to paint copies and sell them to unsuspecting customers who know about theft but don't know that it's supposedly destroyed.

This is a B-movie. It desperately needs a bigger star. Sam needs to be a slick charmer. Granger has an old-time leading man look with height. I don't notice his British accent. He seems more non-descript than anything. He had a long career, but I don't know much of his work. The premise holds some potential, but this can't exceed beyond its B-movie nature. I can see this being reworked with bigger stars in the two leads.

Richard Brooks wrote and directed this early example of the caper film. Stewart Granger plays a canny art thief who, with the help of an innocent Pier Angeli, tries to pawn off a reproduction to his client, Kurt Kaszner. The story is admittedly thin but there's some great repartee, especially amongst the troika of bad guys played by George Sanders, Norman Lloyd, and Mike Mazurki. And really, how can you go wrong with a threesome that sinister? Robert Surtees' cinematography is excellent and takes reasonable advantage of location work in Italy, Sicily, and Tunisia. All in all, its better than you might think (and certainly better than the other two reviews for the film indicate).