Chicago Confidential

"Chicago Confidential" is an excellent crime film and much of the reason is the taught script and the acting of Brian Keith, a man who was an excellent movie actor but who is known much more for his light television faire.

Organized crime is trying to take over the unions in Chicago. But instead of just muscling in, this group using some muscle...but brains as well. Instead of just killing the honest leaders of the union, they kill one and frame the other for his murder. It's evil...but also very clever...so clever that the honest District Attorney (Keith) falls into their trap and convicts an innocent man. Later, however, he learns that he might have been used by the mob and the DA springs into action to uncover the truth.

Keith is great and the script is very good. But there is one glaring logical problem...why would the DA put himself into such dangerous situations without a police escort?! Even when the DA is attacked and killed by these crooks, he STILL seems to be on a one-man crusade...which is not logical at all. But, despite this, the film is never dull and is well worth your time.

Chicago Confidential (1957)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Boring, low-budget crime drama about racketeers forcing their way into unions. In this case, a D.A. (Brian Keith) swears to bring them down by ends up locking away an innocent man (Dick Foran) and with the help of his girlfriend (Beverly Garland) they try to get the real killer. CHICAGO CONFIDENTIAL is trying hard to be dark, cool and serious but it pretty much fails on all three levels. To be honest though, this here really isn't any worse than the countless "B" crime pictures that were released around this time as they all feature the same limitations. Some of those are obviously the budget but I think a good director and cast can turn this into a benefit. That really doesn't happen here and what we're left with is just one clichéd scene after another and it all boils up to a climax that you'll see coming from a mile away. What made this film so hard to get through was the Dragnet-like voice overs that narrate the entire film. I always found this routine to be rather cheap and pathetic for a number of reasons but the biggest one is that it really tells the viewer that they're too stupid to understand what's going on. That's what happens the majority of the time but this film goes a step further by not even bothering to have the action in the film do anything and instead we're just told what should be happening with the narration. The plot of this film is so weak because it seems they didn't try to have anything happen in front of our eyes and instead we're told everything. Keith, Garland and Foran are fun to watch but even they can't save this film. Elisha Cook, Jr. plays a drunk who holds some key evidence.

I'm really glad that crime movies of the B or lower grades are showing up. Hence the six stars. But this movie felt flat. It never drew me in.

It's one of those in which an unseen narrator tells us about the crime that was sweeping big cities and the police/government officials/fill in the blank who were wiping it out.

Brian Keith could be a fine noir hero but his performance feels uninspired. The movie boasts some great actresses of the tough-girl school. They too seem underused.

The narration is almost a self-parody. It is so stern and humorless it presages the announcer on "Laugh-in" and some later intentional funny movies.

I didn't buy this movie. Not sure why. But thanks for bringing it out of the vault, anyway. And keep 'em coming!

The "Confidential" part was meant to piggy-back on the popular appeal of the lurid magazine of the same name, while the labor racketeering theme tied in with headline Congressional investigations of the day. However, despite the A-grade B-movie cast and some good script ideas, the movie plods along for some 73 minutes. It's a cheap-jack production all the way. What's needed to off-set the poor production values is some imagination, especially from uninspired director Sidney Salkow. A few daylight location shots, for example, would have helped relieve the succession of dreary studio sets. A stylish helmsman like Anthony Mann might have done something with the thick-ear material, but Salkow treats it as just another pay-day exercise. Too bad that Brian Keith's typical low-key style doesn't work here, coming across as merely wooden and lethargic. At the same time, cult figure Elisha Cook Jr. goes over the top as a wild-eyed drunk. Clearly, Salkow is no actor's director. But, you've got to hand it to that saucy little number Beverly Garland who treats her role with characteristic verve and dedication. Too bad, she wasn't in charge. My advice-- skip it, unless you're into ridiculous bar-girls who do nothing else but knock back whiskeys in typical strait-jacketed 50's fashion.

Unlike with the City that Never Sleeps, I didn't recognize a single Chicago location, unless you count still photographs. I think this was made in LA, and I'm bummed because I watched it to see old footage of my city.

It's well acted, and well structured, but the story hinges on a plot point, and some pseudoscience, that are so loopy they would be camp, if it were not for how straight everyone plays it, like a police procedural. If you get a kick of how old science plays out in old movies, or dated, or incredibly fictional science, that might be fun for you.

Plus, the State's Attorney re-examines something on the flimsiest possible basis. We're all used to that, every time someone says they have a hunch in movies, sure. But this is more like "someone who is biased yelled at me," and "leave no stone unturned to the point of being ridiculous."

So, this is a well acted, well structured movie that hinges on a couple of incredibly goofy plot points.

However, it's a blast to see Jack Lambert in this. I always think of him as the Lee Marvin who never made it big. He's similarly born to play toughs.