Dark Passage

The POV camerawork, the plastic surgery, the dream sequences, the supporting characters, even all the implausible coincidences; they all help to create a strange and interesting atmosphere in the first half. Then, once Bogart gets the bandages off, it turns into an underwhelming murder mystery with a very unsatisfying conclusion (seriously, did anyone understand the killer's motives?). A good film, but only in patches.

This is great stuff. So many noirs, even the really good ones, are hard to separate from one another. The POV gimmick sets Dark Passage apart and it also serves the film.

Agnes Moorehead is one of several very good supporting actors in a movie filled with interesting characters. The Bogart/Bacall chemistry is wonderful, of course, and when the characters finally kiss, it's like a huge relief. Bacall does some nice acting here; you can see her lips tremble slightly as the kiss winds down to its conclusion, and she is overcome with the sadness of Bogart's departure. It's quite terrific. Score inflated slightly for the Bogart-Bacall factor.

Great chemistry between Bogart and Bacall, unfortunately there's not enough of it! Bogart's not in it for the first half (well, he is, but you don't see him) and Bacall disappears for most of the second half. An uneven but generally satisfying film noir. The POV stuff gets old quick.

Unbelievable that the studio agreed to make the film knowing that we wouldn't see the main character's face for over an hour into the picture. The POV was incredibly well done, especially when it's on Bacall *drools*. The ending wasn't as great as the rest of the film and Bogie's confrontation with the killer at the end felt like a cop out, but still a great movie - it just has its flaws.

I really liked the POV camera style to start this, I can see how it could be annoying to some, but it and most of the cinematography (San Fransisco was captured really well) was high class. Lots of nice twists in the plot, and it kept me guessing right until the end (which was fairly abrupt, admittedly). I thought that it captured the non-trusting, chaotic mood of post WW2 America really well too.

The POV scenes wear out their welcome rather quick and what's up with that abrupt ending? Bacall is stunning as usual and the bit parts are all played very well, particularly the cabbie and the small-time hood.

M: 83/100 Mike Neat and kind of gimmicky first-person film for much of the first half, which turns into the standard wrong-man chase later. Kind of dull climax and ending, but the film is fun to watch.

The first half was intense and thrilling; it boasted brave and innovative camerawork and premise, along with inspired casting and an enthralling script. The second half, however, just seemed to play out on the wealth of the first, and turned into something of a silly/mundane murder mystery. It lost its suspense. I may have added a few points for being introduced to Lauren Bacall *melts*.

Interesting camera work from the beginning.

Nothing amazing. The first half hour or so is notable for mostly being POV from Bogart's perspective but besides starting the movie off in a memorably off-kilter fashion, it's gimmicky and it doesn't accomplish too much. Bogart and Bacall had phenomenal chemistry but it's strangely not taken advantage of, as we don't see Bogart at all for quite a while and Bacall is offscreen a lot when we do.

A well done film with an interesting film technique of only seeing through Humphrey Bogart's character's eyes for the first 40 minutes.Lauren Bacall came off as a little stiff and at times unfocused.The story is where this picture really comes up short.It never really had any tension to it and the story is wrapped up a little to hastily.

IT WAS HUMPHREY BOGART??? Anyway, the first person POV was great symbolically though I don't want to use my whole review to talk about that. Aside from that, great acting... not as amazing as some other Bogie and Bacall movies obviously but still thrilling. Ending was kind of rushed like others were saying. Still very entertaining.

The first half hour blew me away, I was watching it with big fascination. Truly great! However it runs just a tiny bit flat after a while, but it kept me interested throughout the film. The ending was kinda cute too

While a few aspects are contrived it does have some nice twists on convention. It's a very fun noir and Bogart carries it well.

Classic Bogart/Bacall film noir. The experimental first-person perspective used for the first half of the film is one of the most interesting aspects.

Quite entertaining, with a good dose of unintentional hilarity. Agnes Moorehead's demise is simply classic. And how on earth does one murder someone by beating them to death with a TRUMPET??? Lauren Bacall is fabulous.

Despite some interesting aspects , the camera positioning, Bacalls performance -the plot is too complicated and unconvincing and ultimately disappointing.

Fantastic direction! Bacall gives a great performance, as does Agnes Moorehead. And ending I didn’t expect and some great suspense throughout.

The gimmick damages the film by robbing it of it's greatest asset, the casting of Bogart and Bacall. The best reason for casting them in a film together is their very natural chemistry and the film restricts that by separating them for most of the running time. Beyond that, everything in the POV shots is just a little awkward and stilted, and the film lacks energy up until the point that this gimmick breaks. It's by no means a bad film, but it's the least of the four these two made together.

too forced scenario

I can't hide my admiration for Dark Passage (1947). One of the key pictures that made me fall in love with classic movies. And because of its inspiration I've since been busy watching five decades of films in one decade, and it's been a long wait to arrive in 1947 and be able to watch is again! Still magical. Much due to the Humphrey Bogart/Lauren Bacall effect. The tension and clever techniques used to build this thriller works so flawless for me. One of my absolute favorite movies!

Amusing and entertaining, though the second half is better than the first.

Bogart, Bacall and Moorehead all in the same film can only be a good thing, and indeed it is here. I am always drawn to Moorehead's on screen presence. There is a disturbing darkness to this film - the plastic surgery scene is genuinely spooky - that makes for engrossing and scary viewing. The use of first-person perspective for the first 30 minutes or so works really well (to me it's not gimmicky) to build a sense of 'everyone is against me, except for Bacall'.

I like the gimmick, but it wraps up a little too clean.

Beautiful scenery of San Francisco in a quintessential film noir. The first person point of view loses its effect since you already knew Humphrey Bogart was the star. A bit fortuitous that his benefactor is a wealthy single attractive Lauren Bacall. They went out of their way to show his innocence when it might have been more suspenseful if it was left up in the air. Fav scene: running into the small time crook again.

The first person POV is a neat gimmick but it's never really used to full effect - I'd even argue the second half, where the POV is dropped, has more creative shots. It's a shame the murder mystery plays out almost entirely in two exposition-heavy confrontation scenes - with better laying out of hints, it could have packed a mean punch.

The first part shot from the protagonist POV worked remarkably well. And while the directing and acting keeps being on par after that, the story starts to drag a bit.

Great story, fantastic acting. Makes wonderful use of lightning and music to add to the moods. I couldn't believe how well they pulled off the POV hour.

I watched this when I was too young to appreciate it. Should rewatch

The risk in the 40s to headline a movie with Bogart and do their best to not show his face until halfway into the film got it attention for sure, I can't imagine this being done today for a major studio production. Unfortunately this didn't work for me, aside from the great cinematography in the opening and POV, I always had Bogart's face in mind the shock didn't pay off, and most of the dialogue came off as awkward expositional monologues done sitting down straight into the camera.

The use of the first-person camera drew a bit of attention to itself, but it accomplished an important narrative purpose. The idea of the film is an interesting one--a man had to transform himself to exist outside of prison. Though innocent, his dalliance with the system left him permanently marked, leaving him only with the option of marking himself further to find anonymity and life. The chemistry between the two leads is quite good--Bacall really carries the film.

Em honra de Lauren Bacall: A forma que Daves conta a história é absurdamente engenhosa.

88.000

The POV part of the film taxed the actors' ability to interact with a camera. The rest of the story was nondescript.

86.500

Kind of strange to have the star obscured for two-thirds of the movie, especially in the studio era and especially when that star is Humphrey Bogart. It's not a great movie but engaging and enjoyable.

This passable film noir is probably most notable for a storytelling gimmick that keeps the face of star Humphrey Bogart obscured for a good chunk of the film's running time, including the use of a subjective camera technique to depict the action strictly through his point of view. As a formal experiment, it's interesting enough. It stumbles as drama. The storyline is flat and uninteresting, and Bogart's onscreen dynamic with Lauren Bacall lacks the spark of their other collaborations.

Not up to the two earlier Bogart Bacall films, but pretty good nevertheless, with a fine noir atmosphere and a surprisingly upbeat ending that works.

The lesser known Bogart/Bacall film. Interesting, but rushed ending.

Bogart and Bacall post-consummation, and without chemistry.

Of course the first part seems gimmicky (even--or is that especially?--after you find out why the gimmick's there). It opens up toward the end though.