Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

bensonmum2 The body of a private investigator, who also dabbled in a bit of blackmail, is literally dumped on the police department's doorstep. The case becomes politically charged when the prime suspect is determined to be one of the mayoral candidate's daughter. And to complicate things further, one of the city's newspapers may also be involved. Lt Sam Carson (William Gargan) has to get to the bottom of things. Problem is, he's fallen for his #1 suspect.I really enjoyed this little movie much more than I could have imagined. Behind Green Lights will never be confused with a noir heavyweight like Double Indemnity, but it's not unentertaining in its own modest way. The story is compelling enough and director Otto Brower keeps things moving throughout the film's (too) brief 64 minute runtime. Budgetary restrictions can be seen in the limited number of sets (there are really only two or three that matter), yet the film never feels confined or stagey as I've seen before with similar films. Again, a tribute to Director Brower. The film has the benefit of a nice cast. Gargan might not be the most engaging lead, but he's solid and gives a real workmanlike performance. His character falling for the main female character, Janet Bradley (Carole Landis), is certainly believable. Speaking of Landis, she also gives a nice performance. I'm not overly familiar with Ms Landis, but what a tragic figure. Supporting players, including Richard Crane of Rocky Jones "fame", Mary Anderson, and a very young John Ireland, are all strong. My only real complaint is with the doctor character. I'm not sure how this man, who could so easily be tempted to basically break the law, kept his job as a police medical examiner. It's just doesn't make sense. So, to summarize my thoughts, Behind Green Lights is an engaging little film that's aided tremendously by a nice cast.

dougdoepke Plot—a shady character turns up dead in front of a police station. Looks like the cops have their man, oops, woman, but then the corpse disappears and fingers begin to point in different directions.Okay time-passer from TCF. The format suggests a transition period between the comedic who-dun-its of the 1930's and the noirish police procedures of the late 40's. The two blend awkwardly here with an obstreperous group of crime reporters and antic characters providing the humor, and a no-nonsense police Lt. (Gargan) the procedure. Unfortunately, the moods contrast rather than complement, a tricky combo, at best. As other reviewers point out, the movie's standout aspect is influence peddling among city officials and police that suggests deals can be made without much regard for guilt or innocence. Perhaps the humorous side was intended to soften this harder message.Rather disturbing to see promising actress Landis just two years before her tragic suicide, one of Hollywood's more lamentable. Too bad her sparkling personality remains subdued in a rather dour role. Still, she remains a distinctive presence and not just for us guys. Unfortunately, tough guy Ireland is wasted in a supporting role. But with his distinctive looks, he's clearly on his way up.Anyway, the mystery's surprise solution is told in multiple flashbacks, so be prepared for the cut-aways. All in all, the movie's a journeyman piece of work, perhaps reflecting a coming change in post-war mood.(In passing—Like reviewer arfdawg, I was puzzled by the clumsily edited opening scene of Janet {Landis} holding a gun on Bard, which doesn't appear to fit with what follows. However, the scene is picked up later in flashback. My guess is the idea was meant to be a teaser. Unfortunately, it looks like dull scissors were used to cut it.)

arfdawg-1 Police lieutenant Sam Carson investigates a political murder after the victim is dumped at the door of police headquarters.I watched this movie on Cafe Noir and right in the beginning there was a splice and a piece of film missing. Didn't bode well since it seemed to be a critical scene that was chopped.In fact, the running time on Cafe Noir is 60 minutes even. This means 4 minutes were chopped off the movie! I wonder if that's the only print available. The quality was good. Bu it was missing 4 minutes!Anyway, I didn't especially like the movie. Thought it was slow and talkie.

Robert J. Maxwell This is about what you'd expect from a hastily written and produced murder mystery from 1946. The director must have had the producer looking over his shoulder, taking notes on time and expenses. But even at that, Otto Brower's direction displays a staggering lack of imagination. I'll give one example and let it go.Near the beginning, a cub reporter is being shown around the police station where most of the action is to take place. His fellow newspaperman walks him past the usual people who show up in police stations with complaints or being questioned for having performed some suspicious act, perhaps First Degree Lurking.The guide walks the new reporter down the hallway and they pass three sets of cops interviewing people who have business with the police. Each time they reach a new pair, the reporters stop and stand silently while the cop and the complainant exchange a few humorous words, then move on to the next pair, where the routine is repeated, as in a vaudeville skit. Whines one African-American, "She done run off with my car." Detective: "Nothing you can do, that car is community property." Complainant: "But she done took it OUT of da community!" What's irksome isn't the racial humor. That was common enough at the time and often was pretty funny. And it's not even that the lines themselves are no more than slightly amusing. And it's not that this routine -- the camera panning a police station in which civilians are being quizzed one after another -- is so thoroughly familiar. It's that the pair of reporters STOPS, and so does the camera, until each skit is completed, before moving on. All Herr Brower needed to do before the take was give a simple direction to the reporters, like, "You can slow down but keep walking." That would have strained no one's patience and made little demands on anyone's talent.The performances are good enough. William Gargan is bland as the nice lieutenant who is tempted to knowingly follow a false lead because of a hypothetical imperative. J. Farrel MacDonald -- a great bartender in the same year's "My Darling Clementine" -- is lost in a minor role. A villainous newspaper editor and a sleazy blackmailer look suitably slimy. An old Irish lady who sells flowers on the street isn't nearly as funny or charming as the writers had hoped. John Ireland dominates each scene he's in. The musical score is pedesterian. There is some nice photography by Joe MacDonald, including an outdoor shot (one of only two in the entire movie), in which a big car glides along a wet cobblestone street. A little touch of expressionism in the night. It's hardly worth describing the plot. An important newspaper wants an innocent young woman arrested for murder for political reasons; her father is running on the reform ticket or something. I may be getting it mixed up with the newspaper in "Boomerang." The Press Room is straight out of "The Front Page," including the oddball who wears a queer coat and is fussy about it. The resolution of the mystery appears suddenly out of a puff of smoke. The writers weren't breaking their backs on this one. A recently dead body gets mixed up with that of "a floater we found a couple of weeks ago", and the wrong bodies gets wheeled around under their sheets. At one point, a live but balmy escapee slips under the sheets too.You know what? Without too much trouble, the lines could have been rewritten as DELIBERATE gags, see. And you put Bob Hope and Mantan Moreland into the leads. And instead of Carole Landis, you use Dorothy Lamour. And you make the movie at Paramount. And -- voila! -- it's a successful comedy!