Raetsonwe Redundant and unnecessary.

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Onlinewsma Absolutely Brilliant!

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

krocheav What a surprise this seemingly little remembered film turns out to be. For those who like their movies cloaked in dramatic irony, this should please. Terrific performances drive an intelligent (if sardonic) script by John Huston and Howard Koch. It's fueled by thought provoking situations that twist and turn like an angry sidewinder. Perhaps one of the best Lorre/ Greenstreet pairings of its time.Lorre has some especially profound dialog in a part quite unlike many others given to him. Director Gene Negulesco and prolific orchestral arranger Murray Cutter create some marvelous moods. Of special note is a scene between Lorre and Joan Lorring set under a foggy London pier. Take a close look, then listen to the atmospheric sound-scape created to bring his dialog to melancholy life!. Lorre has another unique scene in a park as he talks to a monkey in sign language. Many nice touches all the way through.Fitzgerald's character is also unlike any other I've seen her play. This woman is vindictively scary to say the least. Even Alan Napier has a major part to play as the deluded husband. It's not run of the mill entertainment and Warner's probably took it out of circulation early in its day. If you can enjoy a different approach to your entertainment (slightly less commercial but still very stylized) you should not be disappointed with this work. Won't be for all tastes but very good of its type. Unfortunately, TCM's Australian print is disappointingly blurry and in need of a better copy.KenR...............

Martin Teller A woman entices two strangers to her home to fulfill an unusual Chinese prophecy, granting a wish... in this case, a horse race ticket that they hope to be a winner. With a screenplay by John Huston and appearances by Lorre and Greenstreet, and a figurine as a major plot device, you might expect a MALTESE FALCON retread. But this is a very different story. I hesitate to call it noir, although it does have some of the visual stylization and explores some of man's darker impulses. But it's really more of a triptych character study. The three represent different moral stances: Fitzgerald is conniving and ruthless, Greenstreet does something wrong but at least has enough decency to be conflicted about it, and Lorre is simply a carefree drunk who trusts the wrong people. I didn't count the minutes, but it felt like Lorre got the most screen time, and deservedly so. I don't know if I've ever seen a better performance from him, certainly not a more likable one. He's a charming character with a thoughtful outlook on life. His story also has the benefit of wonderful turns by Peter Whitney and especially Joan Lorring, a very appealing actress I've never seen before, but I'm delighted to see appears in a few more noirs I intended to see. Greenstreet's and Fitzgerald's plot threads are interesting as well, and the way all they come together and resolve at the end is satisfying. It's a quirky film with a very good script, quite fulfilling.

maryszd An extraordinary dark film about three strangers who share a sweepstakes ticket. All their shabby personal secrets are shown in the course of the film. The instigator Mrs. Shackelford, a cold, manipulative, psychotic woman is brilliantly played by Geraldine Fitzgerald. Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet are well-cast as the other two ticket holders. Other reviewers have pointed out that that this film is a companion film to the Maltese Falcon. It's a better, more sophisticated film and more adult in its resolution. Although the film was made in 1946, it was intentionally set in 1938. This gives the film an air of foreboding; we know, but the characters don't, about the horrors of the world war that lies ahead of them. Peter Lorre, in particular is excellent as Johnny West, an alcoholic and small-time criminal who gets framed by one of his cronies. He even has a girlfriend (which I've never seen him with on screen before). And Fitzgerald is lethal as the crazed Mrs. Shackelford. My god, she's irritating in the way only narcissistic crazy people can be.

Charles Herold (cherold) Three Strangers is not a typical Hollywood film. Dark and philosophical, it introduces the viewer to three people, strangers to one another, and then follows their sad, desperate lives. While one reviewer on this site says it's a shame they don't make movies like this anymore, the fact is, they almost never made movies like this back then. This is far less neat and more philosophical than your typical 40s flick, a movie about strange twists of fate and the ways in which people fail to take responsibility for their actions.The cast is excellent, with Peter Lorre particularly impressive in one of the best performances of his career as an alcoholic who thinks too much and does too little. I was also quite taken by Joan Lorring's touchingly vulnerable performance as a girl in with the wrong crowd.Admittedly the ending ties things up in a neat little bow, yet for the most part this movie is far closer in spirit to the indie movies of the 1990s than to the film noirs of the 1940s it could be mistaken for.