Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

SmugKitZine Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Noelle The movie is surprisingly subdued in its pacing, its characterizations, and its go-for-broke sensibilities.

Kittyman If ever a film deserved to be remastered, this is it. The commercially released copy I watched was in bad condition. There were numerous lines and widely oscillating sound levels. That is too bad, for I thought it was an excellent, and overlooked, film. Here's why I'd recommend it: the acting (with one exception) was very good; the plot was innovative, believable, and tight; and the pace never lagged. Raymond Burr had a tendency to overact. Here, however, as in his subsequent (and similar) Perry Mason role, his underplaying was perfection. Angela Lansbury, whose range is even greater than that of Bette Davis, nailed it as a bad girl. (It foreshadowed her later acclaimed portrayal as Eleanor Shaw Iselin in The Manchurian Candidate). As district attorney, John Dehner, who was always reliable, also did well. And Lamont Johnson, as Lansbury's other man, came across as likeable and naive. But, unfortunately, Angela's husband, Dick Foran, seemed over-matched. I thought his performance was weak, with little nuance. Ironically, this is a problem which could have been resolved easily. Foran and Denver Pyle (who was very effective in a minor role as lead detective) should have been asked to switch roles.Now, as to the major criticisms of other reviewers' that sacrificing your own life to destroy another is absurd. They are both right and wrong. Absurd it may be, but infrequent it is not. In a relationship, particularly when one is a man and the "dumpee," he is likely to shift into a "you lose," or threat orientation. Here the object is to destroy the other--by, for example, killing his children if he loses custody of them in a divorce. Yes, he dies, or spends the rest of his life in prison, but his ex.-spouse loses. And that's his goal.Considering how he was portrayed, I don't see what Raymond Burr's character did as all that unusual. He had a strong bond with Foran (who had saved his life on Iwo Jima). He was betrayed by Lansbury, the woman he loved. He was dumped by her. And he had a strong belief in justice (as testified to by the district attorney). So for Pete's sake, won't someone please remaster this thing?

Cristi_Ciopron A refreshing and well written movie to enjoy, with obviously cool and superior acting, not only from the couple of leads (he got 2nd billing), Foran has a supporting role, everything in a genre now perhaps less used, the cool urban suspense movie, which is the bourgeois side of the age's trend (no low lives, thugs, gangsters, and it requires both strong plot and acting), cool enough and enough dramatic, set, like another very good one, 'Jordon', in a bourgeois milieu, with the leads aware that they are giving signature roles, it uses the device of a recorded confession from a broken man, and for a time there follows a courtroom drama, enlivened by excellent performances, with Burr wholly convincing as an attorney, the plot seems very simple, with the twist being the murderess' love for the painter, so that the lawyer's vindictive jealousy comes across as petty and mean, the widow makes up for her 1st murder, by a 2nd one, but this time out of love and care, which shows that the lawyer's claim that the painter would be another, 3rd fall guy, is false, he expects her murderous burst precisely out of her love for the young painter, so that while the lawyer remains in the sphere of the vindictiveness, she ascends to proving her love, albeit by losing, presumably, her own life; the whole is less about what the director does, than about what the movie itself does to you.There are semitones of eeriness in the scenes with the three characters (the lawyer, the widow, the painter), the menace, the lawyer's game. The sets give a deep joy.Burr looked intelligent and shrewd; Angela L., chilling for a while, then humane, more so than her defendant. Far from being convinced that the woman doesn't love the painter, he's sure that she does, and uses even this to get his revenge. Her second murder proves that she genuinely loves the painter; her love is intense, she kills the lawyer, to keep the painter, which ingratiates her to us. She cares about being with the painter. So, it's she who gets the upper hand. Why did the unsparing lawyer claim she doesn't care for her lover? Foran (a legend of the unpretentious westerns) is the murdered husband; Lamont Johnston plays the 3rd man, the painter.

bkoganbing Please murder me is a nice noir thriller on which the influence of Billy Wilder's classic Double Indemnity is clearly felt. It also is a film that could have been a lot better had their been no Code in place and with better casting of the lead. The issues here are straight out of Tennessee Williams.Raymond Burr is a respected defense attorney, upright and honest, but not as shrewd as the one he would shortly start playing on the small screen. His best buddy is Dick Foran who took a bullet for him in World War II and married Angela Lansbury in that order.Lansbury has apparently lost that zing in her marriage and shoots Foran and then gets Burr to get her off on self defense. He's got it bad for Lansbury, always has. But she's picked out hunky young artist Lamont Johnson for herself. That zing is where Tennessee Williams comes in. As for the casting I'd have rather seen someone like Gloria Grahame or Jennifer Jones in the lead here. Of David Selznick would never let his wife into a cheap independent like this one. Still Grahame or Jones would have been believable as a woman who Burr humiliates and destroys himself for.Not bad, but not Angela Lansbury.

MartinHafer This is a small film, in that the stars weren't big-name stars of the day. PLEASE MURDER ME stars Raymond Burr (just before he made it big as Perry Mason), Angela Lansbury and Dick Foran--all capable actors, though hardly starring actors of the day. Despite this lack of star power and an apparent small budget, it's not a bad film--especially when there is a twist and the plot quickly changes about midway through the movie.The film begins as Burr is sitting in his office in the darkness--dictating to a tape recorder that he's about to be murdered. Both the lighting and the idea of a man talking about his impending demise are very much in keeping with a Film Noir piece--as is the direction the film goes in the second half. As for the first half, it starts off with Burr telling his best friend that he has fallen for this friend's wife and wants to marry her! Oddly, instead of punching Burr in the face, the guy says he'll get back with Burr in a few days. However, after a few days, his wife shoots him--claiming he was trying to kill her. Did she do this in self-defense and what will her lawyer (Burr) do? While some of this is a bit predictable, it certainly all isn't and makes for a nifty little film. It's not 100% believable, but given that it's so entertaining, why worry about this? If you are interested in seeing it, it's in the public domain and can be downloaded for free from the IMDb site.By the way, look for Denver Pyle in a small role as a detective testifying in court. It's interesting because Pyle lacks his usual heavy Southern accent and he seems quite at home playing a man living in the big city.