Meurtre à crédit

Murder in Reverse, or Query, presents an interesting concept. It's a British film from 1945, directed by Montgomery Tully. Frankly, maybe due to the print I saw, it comes off more like an early '30s film.

William Hartnell plays Tom Masterick. His wife (Chili Bouchier) is having an affair with Fred Smith (John Slater). Masterick is accused of killing Smith, though no body was recovered. He is sentenced to 15 years, though he vehemently proclaims his innocence.

His young daughter Jill (Petula Clark) is adopted by newspaper publisher Sullivan (Brefni O'Rorke). As a cub reporter, Sullivan was responsible for Masterick getting a lighter sentence.

Now Masterick is released and determined to find Smith and prove he's alive. He's helped by his daughter (now Dinah Sheridan) who was too young when adopted to remember him, and her boyfriend, reporter Peter (real life husband Jimmy Hanley).

There are several plot holes, but one remains interested in whether or not Masterick will get justice. In the beginning of the film, Hartnell uses an East End accent and, when released, has a cultured voice.

As he states in the film, he learned a good deal in the prison library. Somehow he was divested of his accent. I think we are to realize he is a deeply changed man. Hartnell gives a sympathetic performance in a tough role.

Dandy ending. You won't know what's coming.

The name Montgomery Tully does not ring any loud bells with me as far directors' names go, but in MURDER IN REVERSE he strikes me as a capable crew handler to deliver a film that raises pertinent questions about the law, innocence, and compensation when man-made law has failed and meted out the wrong punishment.

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.

Dock worker Tom Masterick chases his wife's lover out of a pub one night, and is later convicted for his murder.

I've seen many, many films from this era, this genre, but there was something about Murder in Reverse that was a little different. It's an excellent storyline, it's very well produced, the acting is excellent. It's well paced, it doesn't drag out, it moves along quickly, and features some impressive scenes.

How lovely to see William Hartnell as the leading man, of course I will forever adore him as The First Doctor, but he was a super talent, he's rather captivating here. Poor Hartnell is once again wearing a wig. The scene where he gets to shout about his justice was excellent.

I'm so glad I've finally gotten to see this forgotten gem, I thoroughly enjoyed it, 7/10.

Fifteen years before the events of the movie, stevedore William Hartnell (in his last performance credited as "Billy Hartnell") was married to Chili Bouchier, with Petula Clark their daughter. His wife was carrying on an affair with John Slater. Hartnell found out the hard way, when Miss Bouchier left him for her lover. The men ran into each other in a pub, and Hartnell chased him into the docks with a big sword, then suffered a fugue state and forgot about it, until neighbors grassed him to the police. As they took him away, he thought he spotted Slater on the deck of a ship, but that didn't stop them from convicting him of murder. It was only through the intervention of then reporter Brefni O'Rorke that a capital offense was commuted to life imprisonment; O'Rorke also adopted Miss Clark.

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.

Yet another enterprising production from Louis H. Jackson's ill-fated British National Pictures is this extraordinary drama from the brief period when William Hartnell was commanding film leads.

During the course of the film Hartnell ages 15 years with the application of white hair which has the striking effect of transforming him into a dead ringer for Dr Who. Another later TV favourite is John Slater, looking exactly the same as he did during the seventies in 'Z Cars'. One of several other surprises is a fleeting glimpse of a very young Pet Clark who in a truly bizarre twist grows up into Dinah Sheridan (appearing opposite her husband Jimmy Hanley) without the latter ever becoming aware of the fact.