GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

ClassyWas Excellent, smart action film.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

PresidentForLife Many reviewers here call this a "hidden gem," but to me it's hidden for a good reason. Yes, the lighting is interesting, sort of noir Victoriana - the backgrounds are busy but dramatic and distinctive. But the plot is slow and convoluted, and it lacks the crisp narrative style of "Laura," to which some compare it. Poor Claude Rains, who is good in anything, is paired with so many actors who tower over him that his small stature is rather jarringly accentuated in many scenes. Not a total washout, but not a masterpiece either.

robert-temple-1 Claude Rains here stars in an excellent thriller directed by Michael Curtiz, famous for his CASABLANCA of five years before. Rains plays a character who is a successful writer of murder mysteries and who also reads them aloud on the radio. (He records rehearsals of these in advance in his own home on large 78 rpm discs, a technicality which features in the story and also provides several dramatic moments where people break them in order to destroy evidence.) He was appointed guardian of an orphan girl whose parents had been very rich, and he lives in great style in her inherited house. As the film commences, she has been reported killed in an accident while travelling abroad, but not long afterwards she turns up, still alive and saved in a lifeboat at sea, to everyone's surprise. She is played by 25 year-old Joan Caulfield. Before she turns up, however, a mysterious man arrives at her house in the middle of a party given by Rains and his co-denizens of the house, his feckless vamp of a niece, poisonously played by Audrey Totter with the ferocity of a raised cobra, and her drunkard husband, played by Hurd Hatfield. The stranger is excellent played by 31 year-old Ted North (using the screen credit of Michael North). North is extremely effective and it is strange that this was his last film appearance, having appeared in 21 titles. His sudden (and unexplained) departure from the screen just when he was at his most handsome and intriguing was a great loss, as he has tremendous presence and could have gone on to have a remarkable career. Almost nothing seems to be recorded about him other than a list of his roles and that he was born in Kansas in 1916. In the film, North claims that he is the husband of Caulfield, who is still thought to be dead. He says he married her just before her death. In fact, he has really come to investigate the mysterious death a short time before in Caulfield's house of Rains's secretary, Roslyn. At first, Rains and co. believe North has turned up wanting to claim all of Caulfield's money, but he says no, he has millions of his own, and all he wants is the oil portrait of her over the fireplace. Having allayed their monetary fears, he is invited to stay, and the others uncomfortably have to admit that he is, in a way, a member of the family. When Caulfield returns, she is suffering from amnesia about the most recent events and says she cannot remember North. Did she really marry him? Maybe she did, maybe not. In any case, while she is thinking about it, at least she finds him attractive. She had once been in love with Hurd Hatfield, but that was before he became a lush. These Hollywood household complications where substantial numbers of weird people inhabit the same house amidst tensions and unending dramas (a formula carried to its ultimate limits many years later in the TV series DALLAS) all have a samey feel about them. Somebody usually gets killed, there is always someone up to no good who conceals his or her criminal intentions. And that is certainly the case here. Did Roslyn really hang herself from the light fixture in the ceiling? Or was she murdered? Perhaps Rains can figure it out. After all, he writes murder mysteries, doesn't he? His mellifluous voice and urbane manner sweeps all before it, and he wholly dominates the film. But is he really Caulfield's dear old Uncle Grandi (short for Grandison)? Or is he a villain beneath all that sophistication? Or is it the scheming Audrey Totter who must be watched for what she will do next? Or is North up to no good? So many potential red herrings are swimming in every direction. It is what is called in England 'a rattling good yarn'. And for those like myself who find the self-invented Claude Rains fascinating (he was a cockney from Clerkenwell whose speech as a youth was incomprehensible, but whose elocution lessons turned him into one of the most mellifluous and spell-binding actors of his generation), this film is one of his many amazing cinematic tours de force. Also, Michael Curtiz holds back on none of the intrigue and makes a tremendous Hollywood-style success of it all.

brendangcarroll In 1947, Michael Curtiz set up his own production unit at Warner Bros. The deal he struck saw this versatile director being allowed to choose his own projects and not merely be assigned films as a house director, while at the same time enjoying the full production facilities of the studio. This film was the first project of what was sadly a short-lived arrangement, chiefly because box office returns on this film were so disappointing.The script peppered with snappy one-liners and wisecracks particularly for Audrey Totter and Constance Bennett, was by Ranald MacDougall from an adaptation by Curtiz' wife Bess Meredyth of a dime novel by Charlotte Armstrong. MacDougall had previously done the witty screenplay for the superb noir classic, MILDRED PIERCE in 1945 (also directed by Curtiz) and his gift for tart dialogue made the role of Eve Arden in that film especially memorable.It is likely that Curtiz envisioned the story of THE UNSUSPECTED as the perfect vehicle for Claude Rains, an actor he had worked with frequently before (The Adventures of Robin Hood, Four Daughters, The Sea Hawk, Casablanca etc) and who was renowned for his distinctive, memorable voice. Victor Grandison is a famous radio star because of the hypnotic power of his voice in relating his celebrated true life crime stories and it would be difficult to imagine another actor in the role, save possibly for Basil Rathbone.The story is complex and not entirely believable, and has several plot holes. The most serious concerns the first murder. If Grandison is able to catch an earlier train because he has used a recording of his broadcast and not performed "live", surely his so-called alibi would have been exposed by colleagues at the radio station - especially his secretary (Constance Bennett)? This is never explained.No matter. What makes this thriller so eminently watchable are the delicious ingredients lavished on the telling - especially the superb art direction by Anton Grot who would have undoubtedly story-boarded the many memorable images as was his practise - and the distinctive camera-work of Woody Bredell.Between them, Grot, Curtiz and Bredell bring a Germanic, expressionistic style to almost every scene and there are some amazing trick shots that must have taken days to light properly. Check out the remarkable scene near the end where, as kindly Grandison reassures his niece that all will be well, a wine glass with fizzing content is in close-up and sharp focus and we then realise it has been poisoned by Grandison.Add to this virtuosity of film making, a beautifully atmospheric score by Franz Waxman, a fascinating cast and a star turn by Claude Rains and this overlooked gem is in a class of its own.I have never understood why Curtiz is so under-rated. I would know his style within a few shots. His fluid camera, always roving and engaging with the action and the characters, makes CASABLANCA the classic it is and is why we always feel we have really been to Rick's café.THE UNSUSPECTED is so enjoyable because of Curtiz holding our interest through sheer visual flair and bears frequent repeat viewing. Its weaknesses are quite forgivable when one considers its many pleasures.

handyguyny This is from the director and screenwriter of Mildred Pierce -- but don't let that get your hopes up. The plot and dialogue have to be experienced to be believed. And except for Rains, having fun hamming it up, the cast is dreadful. It barely makes sense, and is utterly unbelievable at any rate.The Rains character kills off one character after another, and no one around him seems to suspect a thing, despite the fact that he gives himself away in his ridiculous radio scripts, allegedly true crime tales that he reads plummily with a live orchestra in the background.Curtiz keeps it all watchable, although it could be shorter. He does provide a nice touch or two, as when the camera moves toward the dark front of a radio speaker and the shot dissolves to a train tunnel.Michael North, as the bland hero, and Audrey Totter, as a sharp-tongued floozy, provide stiff and amateurish line readings that are somewhat entertaining in themselves. Hurd Hatfield is more convincing in the less than inspired part of a weak, drunkard husband. Joan Caulfield mystifyingly gets top billing over Rains.Was this really an 'A' picture at Warner Bros.? It's campy fun, but nowhere near the classic Macdougal and Curtiz had recently produced with Joan Crawford.