The Verdict (1946) User Reviews

Victorian mystery with one of the great screen pairs

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 7 May 2009]

When historians talk about the great screen pairings, one hears Tracy and Hepburn and Bogart and Bacall tossed around, as well as other male-female combinations. One of the truly great screen pairings of all time was Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre - the former a large, sinister-looking man, and the latter a small, sinister-looking man with a quirky voice. They made nine films together, and when I see their names in a cast list, I know not to miss the movie.

"The Verdict," made in 1946, is a heavily atmospheric mystery set around 1890, when Supt. George Edward Grodman (Greenstreet) inadvertently sends an innocent man to the gallows for a woman's death and loses his job. The man claimed he had an alibi, but the person wasn't found until after the hanging. After many years in service, Grodman leaves with a blemish on his reputation. Replacing him is his ambitious nemesis, Supt. John R. Buckley (George Coulouris). Grodman begins to write the stories of his various cases, in the hopes that it can serve as a primer for police investigations.

When Arthur Kendall is murdered across the street from him, Grodman is pulled into the investigation, since Kendall's landlady (Rosalind Ivan) summoned him to help her get into the room. Kendall's aunt was the murder victim in the case where the innocent man was hanged. Before Kendall was killed, he visited Grodman, along with Grodman's friend Peter Emmric (Lorre) who lives in the same house as Kendall, and a politician, Clive Russell (Paul Cavanagh), who hates Kendall. Russell and Kendall come to blows outside of Grodman's house. Grodman now finds himself in a position of helping the man who replaced him.

This is an very clever mystery, brought up a few levels by the acting of Greenstreet and Lorre. Paul Cavanagh and George Coulouris turn in good performances in smaller roles, and Joan Lorring is fine as a dance hall girl who was involved with Kendall. Though not a great beauty, she has a great figure and conveys a low class background.

Highly recommended. With the Victorian times, the heavy fog, and the presence of Cavanagh and Coulouris, the film reminds one of the Sherlock Holmes movies.

Justice is done

[AAdaSC · 7/10 · 14 January 2012]

Sydney Greenstreet (Grodman) is relieved of his position at the police force after an innocent man is hanged under his watch. Devious George Coulouris, who has contributed to Greenstreet's downfall by not helping in the investigation, replaces him. When Morton Lowry (Kendall) is found murdered, Greenstreet can sit back and watch Coulouris make a hash of the investigation, a role that he relishes.

The cast are all good with Greenstreet and funny, morbid artist Peter Lorre (Victor) leading the way. The story is set in Victorian times in England and has plenty of foggy atmosphere. It's a murder mystery type of film that keeps you guessing as to who the murderer could be. You're bound to change your mind a few times but will you get it right? The film moves along at a good pace and is an enjoyable experience as you watch it thanks to the cast. Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet deliver their lines perfectly and they can be very funny as well as very misleading. They have great chemistry together as always.

Verdict: very good

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 12 May 2019]

Have always liked film noir, and there are many classics that are too numerous to list. Consider Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre to be fine actors and always loved seeing them together, at their best they were dynamite. Don Siegel did some great films, with 'Dirty Harry' for example being iconic and 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' (deservedly a landmark in its genre) and 'The Shootist' also among his best.

Thought 'The Verdict' to be a very good film. Much better than credit for, although well liked by a lot here also did read reviews from others that ranged from mixed to unimpressed. And it deserves to be much better known. Both Greenstreet and Lorre have done better, individually and together, and 'The Verdict' is not one of Siegel's best. They all come off well though, and do find the film to be much better than modestly suspenseful as has been described/indicated in reviews read.

It did slow down somewhat in pace at times in the middle. Joan Lorring to me felt bland in her role.

While the reveal and murderer identity was a genuine shock and had me floored, the staging of the ending itself is a touch melodramatic.

Both Greenstreet and Lorre excel though, in the last of their teamings, with roles well suited to them and play to their strengths. Greenstreet's is bigger and he shows no signs of fatigue or disinterest, while Lorre has the more colourful role and he is very entertaining to watch. Their chemistry is as riveting as one expects, bringing the right amount of tension and entertainment value. George Coulouris makes a big impression here as well.

Siegel, in his first feature film, does a more than credible job and while he did better films and his directing style became more refined this is hardly the work of an amateur. 'The Verdict' looks great, with moody photography and a handsomely rendered and vividly atmospheric Victorian setting. The music, while not mind-blowing, fits very well rather than being discordant with the atmosphere.

'The Verdict' further benefits from a tightly structured and intelligent script, that treats its viewers with respect, and to me the story did have suspense and thrills (not quite nail-biting but more than modest), going at a mostly crisp pace while meandering a little in the middle. Didn't find it predictable or implausible.

On the whole, very well done film. 7/10

Don't miss this one.....

[JOHN_REID · 19 November 2003]

It is sad that Sydney Greenstreet's career in film was relatively brief - albeit marked by memorable performances in some truly great movies. He may well have had a successful life on the stage in the bulk of his acting life but his roles in film, in a brief eight year period, are all that is preserved from a long and distinguished career. We can only guess at the performances of a young and perhaps thinner Sydney Greenstreet. Despite all this he made his debut in The Maltese Falcon and then a few films later co-starred in Casablanca, more than making up for the delay in the transition to the big screen. The Verdict sees Greenstreet at his finest as the wizened superintendent whose career has been forever marred by an error of judgment that costs a man his life. This is a perfect whodunit/noir/murder mystery that is still gripping and tight despite the slightly melodramatic ending where revenge is possibly carried a little too close to the wire. Lorre is his usual sinister self, fascinated at the thought of exhuming a dead body and Colouris appropriate as the inept detective. Highly recommended.

A foggy day in London town

[jotix100 · 7/10 · 15 October 2010]

"The Verdict" a Warner Bros. 1946 release showed on a cable channel recently. The film was Don Siegel's debut as a director. Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre are seen for the last time in a movie together after being sort of a duo in the ten pictures they appeared together.

Mr. Siegel had been involved behind the cameras for some time. He knew what he wanted and how he wanted to present it for an audience. It is curious he selected this project for his directorial debut, after all, most of his later career was devoted to a different kind of film making altogether, but one can see his talent all over this third retelling of the Israel Zangwill's novel, as adapted for the screen by Peter Milne.

As the film begins, we hear a bell tolling at Newgate's Prison tower indicating the death of a prisoner. Superintendent George Grodman is at hand to witness the execution. Unfortunately, the wrong man was killed and the real culprit is at large. Grodman is demoted because of his blunder and his rival, the hateful Buckley takes over his place. Grodman sets out to make amends and straighten things out in a most unconventional way.

Mr. Siegel's London was shot at the Warner's lot. Hollywood had its own resources to reproduce, sometimes brilliantly, the locales in which the films took place. Thus, the Victorian London we see is permanently darkened by the sort of pea soup one does not see these days, but it was a must at the time this was made. Ernest Haller, the cinematographer shot the film in dark tones to give it an atmospheric feeling that works well, although at times it is somewhat exaggerated.

Mr. Siegel got good all around ensemble acting from his cast. Sydney Greenstreet was not an expressive actor. In this film he shows a bit more of an understanding for what made Grodman tick. The great Peter Lorre is at his best. Joan Lorring, playing Lottie Rawson has some good moments. The supporting cast did wonders to enhance the film. Rosalind Ivan, Paul Cavanagh, the excellent George Couloris, and Morton Lowry, among them, do impressive work.

Guilty of Greatness and Greenstreet

[BaronBl00d · 9/10 · 14 September 2001]

I don't know what to say about the other reviews here(better to say nothing as their insights offer that suitable response). This is a great film with a great pairing of that wonderful coupling of gargantuan Sydney Greenstreet and devilish, diminuative Peter Lorre. Grenstreet never was better as a Scotland Yard superintendant who mistakenly sends an innocent man to his death. He is forced out of his job by another aspiring detective played with relish by George Coulouris. Greenstreet remarks, "He underestimated the size of my britches." And so he did! Greenstreet was that special kind of actor that draws you to his every word, action, and deed. His refinement of speech and larger-than-life presence greatly enhance the film. Lorre is Lorre, a funny character actor getting a break from villains for a chance. Lorre and Greenstreet aid each other very nicely and their scenes together are perhaps the most fun ones in the film. Behind all the actions of the two men is a fine Victorian mystery that has a good, hard-to-figure out ending. Director Don Siegel shows his deftness in capturing a dark Victorian setting. His scene exhuming a casket is particularly well-done. A fine film and an unfortunately all to rare chance to see Lorre and Greenstreet together.

London-by-gaslight thriller preserves last pairing of Greenstreet, Lorre

[bmacv · 6/10 · 21 June 2002]

When they were paired in The Maltese Falcon as that sinister, fey duo The Fat Man (Mr. Gutman) and Joel Cairo, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre struck an immediate chord with audiences. So much so that, over the next five years they went on to team up in nine more movies (in one of them, Hollywood Canteen, as themselves). The Verdict is the last of them.

A London-by-gaslight thriller set in 1890, The Verdict tries to combine the atmosphere of the Sherlock Holmes stories (fog, hansom cabs, capes and toppers, bachelors' quarters) with the plot devices of Agatha Christie (pivotal points are lifted from both The Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Murder on the Orient Express). Unfortunately, this cozy throwback to locked-room murder mysteries of an earlier time strikes a wrong note in the first full year of the post-war era, when the dark flowers of film noir – in which both Greenstreet and Lorre played far from incidental roles – were everywhere blossoming underfoot.

Scotland Yard Inspector Greenstreet gets nudged into early retirement when a man he sent to the gallows is found to have been innocent. He nurses a grudge against his arrogant replacement (George Coulouris) and bides his time.

When a prominent young cad is found stabbed in his locked chambers and the police get nowhere, Greenstreet steps in. Both he and Lorre moved in the same circles as the dead man, as did a Member of Parliament, around whom suspicion slowly deepens.

Though there are ties to an insolent music-hall singer (Joan Lorring) and the unseen wife of a peer of the realm, the story unfurls in the fussy Victorian world of unattached males. A vicious twist at the end leaves one perplexed: Is there enough psychological back story to justify it, or is it a desperate, last-ditch contrivance? In any case, it's much more Greenstreet's movie than Lorre's, but both contributed better work elsewhere during their five-year cinematic liaison.

Peter Lorre shines in brilliant Scotland Yard mystery

[Coventry · 10/10 · 20 March 2004]

The Verdict is an absolutely absorbing and ingenious locked-room murder mystery, complete with sheer performances and irresistible gothic atmosphere. Set in London, near the end of the 19th century this intelligent movie handles about a seemly insolvable murder. Superintendent Grodman hunts down the murderer of the man who lives across him…unofficially, because Scotland Yard dismissed him after making a mistake in his previous case, which resulted in the execution of an innocent man. Grodman playfully amuses himself by fooling and not helping Supt. Buckley…the ambitious vulture successor who gladly witnessed Grodman's resignation. The characters and their backgrounds in this film are so fascinating…the speculative possibilities and ‘maybe'-motivations are so left open that the Verdict really became the most unpredictable ‘whodunit' thriller I ever saw. And I'm utterly impressed by that. Director Don Siegel based his film on the novel by Israel Zangwill and I can clearly see why this author often gets referred to as ‘the father detective thrillers'. Both basic plot and screenplay are flawless and compelling, complete with fiendish dialogues. Plus…the atmosphere and structure are genius film-noir and gothic-like which is completely Don Siegel's achievement. Siegel, who shot his first long-feature film with The Verdict delivers one of the most powerful debuts in film history ever. Almost as remarkable as John Huston's debut with The Maltese Falcon, I dare to say… There are constant undertones of diabolicalness present, resulting in a high rate finale that leaves you completely speechless. Terrifically done! At one point, we even receive a pretext of what `12 Angry Men' will look like, 11 (!) years before this one gets released!! Don Siegel's later masterpieces perhaps overshadow this little highlight but, to me, this still is his finest film. And that certainly must mean something, seeing his entire repertoire contains milestone-titles like `Invasion of the Body Snatchers', `The Shootist', `Dirty Harry' and `Escape from Alcatraz'.

Of course, The Verdict wouldn't have been half as memorable as it is now if it weren't for the brilliant acting performances. Peter Lorre on top, and not exclusively since he's one of my top 5 favorite actors ever. Lorre is genius as ever as the amiable cartoon-artist obsessed by the sinister details such as corpse digging and strangling. Like in multiple of his other films, he also has a slight drinking problem which gives the film a tiny comical side-aspect. Sydney Greenstreet (best know as Bogart's concurrent in Casablanca) makes a great Supt. Grodman as he manages to remain distinguished and irritated at the same time. Without the slightest doubt, The Verdict receives a rating 10 out of 10 from me…and naturally, it comes with the highest possible recommendation. I'll even buy you a beer if you can name the murderer's identity before the film is over.

"There will be many to say that I have done deeds of calculated and unfathomable villainy . . . "

[boscofl · 7/10 · 8 April 2021]

Warner Brothers' The Verdict (1946) is a grim murder mystery set in Victorian London and serving as the final cinematic pairing of those masters of melodrama, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre. The film contains an intriguing premise and lots of atmosphere that is somewhat squandered by a stagnant plot. First time director Don Siegel has many wonderful assets to work with but his efforts never reach their full potential due to this issue of plotting; once the premise is established nothing important happens and events seem to exist to burn up running time until the surprise reveal at the end.

Scotland Yard Superintendent George Edward Grodman (Greenstreet) has his brilliant record as an investigator destroyed when he sends an innocent man to the gallows for murder. The disgraced inspector is dismissed and in short order his successor and rival, John Buckley (George Coulouris), is confronted with the confounding murder of Arthur Kendall (Morton Lowery). Several suspects emerge but the arrogant Buckley is unable to determine how the man was slain in his locked apartment with no trace of an assailant. The remaining running time is dedicated to red herrings, clutching glove hands, and an increasingly exasperated Buckley grasping for answers until the twist conclusion.

At its core The Verdict is a so-called "locked room mystery" where an impossible crime is committed for which there seems to be no logical explanation. Unfortunately once this occurs the narrative flow grinds to a halt and the film relies on misdirection to beguile the audience. Unfortunately minimal suspense is generated and irrelevant sequences exist mainly to muddy the waters. The screenplay casts a wide net to make everyone appear guilty at one point or another but these moments are not organic to the story and, in retrospect, feel like a cheat. Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the movie is its delineation of "The Big Reveal" at the end. While the killing itself is ingenious (and ties up a huge loose end) it is the lazy and mundane way it is depicted that disappoints. Fortunately Siegel has a terrific cast of pros and plenty of Victorian mist to keep the viewer otherwise engaged.

The main selling point of the film is the pairing of Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre; the duo enjoy much screen time together and deliver peak performances. Greenstreet is commanding as Grodman while navigating a sea of emotions. He demonstrates no joy in condemning criminals to the gallows, is believably devastated when he learns he committed a fatal error, and is wonderfully impish as he watches Buckley fumble his investigation. Lorre portrays his artist friend Victor Emmric who is fond of drink, women, and seeing graves opened. It is a surprisingly well-rounded performance as he convincingly woes a dance hall girl half his age and demonstrates his uncanny knack for putting over morbid dialogue. Lorre is also made to appear suspicious in several scenes and a potential victim in another as the script keeps the audience guessing as to his true character.

The supporting cast is equally well chosen and all deliver fine performances. Joan Lorring is a joy as the mistress of the Kendall and delivers a delightful song and dance number, "Give Me a Little Bit", which is the bright spot in an otherwise gloomy film. George Coulouris, who made a career at Warners enacting irritating characters, crafts one of his best as the imperious Buckley. Skirting the line between comedy and irritation is Rosalind Ivan as the overwrought housekeeper Mrs Benson; she gives the great Una O'Connor a run for her money in the realm of hysterics. Morton Lowery is appropriately unsavory as Kendall while Arthur Shields pops up briefly as (what else?) a priest.

Despite its shortcomings The Verdict is a worthwhile addition to the Greenstreet-Lorre canon and runs on the electricity generated by the two legends. The ride is intriguing with evocative cinematography and stellar performances by the supporting cast. Of the nine films both Sydney and Peter appeared in together this is one of the few where they were a true screen team and leave you longing for more. Unfortunately this would be their last film together which is a verdict that should have been overruled.

A triumph of the genre

[robert-temple-1 · 10/10 · 27 October 2007]

This is one of the finest detective mysteries ever filmed. It is astonishing that the young director Don Siegel showed so much talent so early. Once again we have that wonderful pair, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre making a masterpiece together. Greenstreet is spellbinding in every scene. Lorre creates a well-rounded three-dimensional character from a two-dimensional part, and makes him eccentric and intriguing. The story is set in 1890 in London, and is based on a novel entitled 'The Big Bow Mystery' by best-selling author Israel Zangwill, which was in turn apparently based on a real case. The plot of the film is one of the most complex and intellectually challenging ever made. It 'out-Sherlocks Sherlock'. The essence of the dilemma is how can a man have his throat cut in a room in which the door and windows are locked and bolted from the inside, and there is no other way in or out. The film is helped a lot by a brilliant performance by Rosalind Ivan as a hysterical landlady who may or may not have murdered her lodger (but how??). The atmosphere is powerful, the filming expressionistic, the style impeccable, and the result magnificent. Greenstreet and Lorre are at the top of their form. This is a film no lover of the genre should miss.

Greenstreet and Lorre -- Excellent As Always

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 29 June 2014]

Scotland Yard inspector Sydney Greenstreet sends an innocent man to the gallows. As a result, he's disgraced and forced to resign. His replacement is an arrogant, obnoxious rival. Greenstreet decides to commit the perfect murder to ruin his successor's career just as his was. Excellent movie with a smart script and wonderful cast. Any movie with Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre in it is a must-see in my book. They both give terrific performances here. The rest of the cast is also good. Director Don Siegel's first full-length feature film and it's a doozy. He would, of course, go on to a long career with many great movies under his belt. This is a good start, if you ask me.

A must see for those who love a mystery

[kayo_bee · 10/10 · 3 June 2005]

Although there have been thousands of murder mysteries in hard cover and paper back, very few have translated to the movies well. Rarely is an audience ever surprised.

In The Verdict, Sydney Greenstreet as Supt. George Edward Grodman and Peter Lorre as Victor Emmric team up in what might be billed as the best whodunnit ever produced for the screen.

Grodman is summarily dismissed from his Scotland Yard position. After his forced retirement a neighbor is murdered and he and his eccentric friend Emmric try to solve the crime.

Why this is not among the favorites of every fan of this genre is a mystery in itself.

Nearly great movie - Hitchcockian mystery but not as smooth

[Nate-48 · 7/10 · 29 August 2020]

Like a great movie released the same year - The Big Sleep - this is a very confusing mystery movie like a Raymond Chandler novel or Hitchcock film - but the corners and edges are rougher and the script is not as smooth and clever. The dialogue also doesn't compare to that great film and frankly a number of the scenes just don't cut it.

The ending is a bit of a letdown to be straightforward.

The director Don Siegel is making one of his first films - before he would go on to things like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Babyface Nelson and of course Dirty Harry.

He looks to still be getting his bearings here and considering his lack of experience -does a very good job.

The adapted screenplay in in capable hands just falls short of greatness.

Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre are a great team - they make up for a lot of the film's shortcomings. There is a strong cast of British actors who also give the film some added weight. George Colouris is excellent - he was part of the Mercury Theatre group of Orson Welles. He played Walter Parks Thatcher in Citizen Kane.

The mystery of this film is really Joan Lorring - who is beyond excellent and on the screen for far too short of a time. She is mesmerizing every second she is on and it is a great wonder she did not turn into a major star as she was obviously meant to be. It doesn't make sense that Jack Warner, who produced this film, would have let her leave the studio to go on to a career in independent productions, Italian movies, and the New York theater when she could have been as big as Ava Gardner or Audrey Hepburn.

Peter Lorre at his best!!

[logangiese · 5/10 · 23 March 2010]

This film stars the great-unappreciated Peter Lorre and the large villainous Sydney Greenstreet as they match wits to try to solve a murder. This is a classic who-done-it murder mystery set in London during the late 1800's. The foggy backdrop that plays through the entire story sets the mood of murder and mayhem. The film starts out with Judge George Gordman (Sydney Greenstreet) making a fatal mistake by convicting an innocent man to death and therefore has to be relieved of his duties and is comforted by his friends and neighbors Victor Emmric (Peter Lorre) and Arthur Kendall (Morton Lowry). Arthur is a Member of Parliament and seems to have many enemies including a political rival and a former mistress threatening him and later that night Arthur is found stabbed to death in his room with the door locked from the inside. After they find their friend dead, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet are on the case to figure out who is the murderer. The film keeps you interested but that is about it. The story itself seems like it was torn out of a Sherlock Holmes novel that had an incredibly mild theme. The beginning was great but it dragged through the middle of the film making it so that you are detached from what's going on. The only thing that saved "The Verdict" was the ending where they reviled who actually the murderer was. This was considered a B film and not a lot of money went into it, but bearing that in mind they made a fine quality film with great acting that shouldn't go unnoticed. Peter Lorre once again is amazing as he plays the same old mysterious villainous type character that he is best known for and which he perfected since "M". Sydney Greenstreet also plays the villainous role flawlessly and seems to demand attention when he is in the room because of his large physique. These two starred in nine movies together because of the chemistry they have with one another but it seems that Peter Lorre's star shines brighter every single time. You can't deny the fact that Peter Lorre had that swagger that is only found in a handful of actors. This is not a great movie by any means but it is a good murder mystery.

2.5 out of 5 stars

Cool Factor: Peter Lorre being Peter Lorre

Lame Factor: The Film could have been Great

That Mystery from Big Bow

[theowinthrop · 3 July 2004]

Think of the great writers of Great Britain in the 1890s - 1900s. The list is like this: Hardy, Conrad, James, Wilde, Conan Doyle, Chesterton, Wells, Madox Ford, Bennett, Beerbohm, Shaw, Barrie...you would probably have the major names we remember (or should remember). But Israel Zangwell...? The author of THE BIG BOW MYSTERY is best recalled for his books of Jewish life in England and America, CHILDREN OF THE GHETTO and THE MELTING POT (he apparently invented that term for American immigrant society). THE BIG BOW MYSTERY was his one mystery story, and was written as a stunt. Zangwell wrote it for a magazine, and there was a contest to see if the readers could guess who the killer was. In the end only one reader guessed who it was.

The film actually changes the structure of the story, and of the denouement - the killer confesses in both the story and movie, but his confession is unnecessary to the police, who found the flaw in his plot beforehand. So he commits suicide.

Zangwell based his novel on an actual case of great public interest in 1887. A woman named Miriam Angel was heard moaning in her locked room in a boarding house on Batty Street in the East End of London. Other roomers broke down the door of her room, and found her dying in bed. A doctor was brought in quickly and discovered she had been poisoned with prussic acid. Then more moaning was heard. Under the dying woman's bed was a man named Israel Lipski, who had apparently taken some poison too. Lipski recovered, and was charged with Angel's murder. He would claim he was forced to go into the bedroom by two men, who then poisoned Angel and framed him. He was found guilty of the murder, and was eventually hanged. But first there was a great movement led by the editor William Stead, who felt the trial was unfair. Stead's attempt almost freed Lipski (Home Secretary Matthews and the trial Justice, Sir James Fitzjames Stephen reviewed the evidence, only to reaffirm the verdict after Lipski apparently confessed). It one wants the full story, read Martin Friedland's THE TRIALS OF ISRAEL LIPSKI.

The film keeps to most of the story, and invents some novel little twists. Grodman (Sidney Greenstreet) has been the brilliant Yard Superintendent for many years, and suddenly learns that he made a stupid error that cost an innocent man his life. The innocent man claimed he spoke to a minister at the time of the crime, and that the minister was going to Wales by boat the next day. Grodman explains that everyone knows that you go from London to Wales by train, not by boat. But it turns out the minister (Arthur Shields) went to New South Wales by boat. He did not hear about the trial of the man until it was too late for him to get back in time. Grodman is condemned in the press, and forced to resign - to be replaced by his rival Superintendent Buckley. This is bad enough, but Grodman is aware of two things that gnaw at him:

1) the evidence that convicted the innocent man was the word of the nephew of the victim (and her heir)that suggested the innocent man was at the scene of the crime when he was with the minister (i.e., the nephew lied).

2) Although Grodman's official work led to the successful trial and prosecution of the innocent man, he really is not responsible for the tragedy. Buckley suspected that the minister may have taken the ship to New South Wales, not Wales, and eventually locates the minister - but he took his time doing it, and did not mention it to Grodman or anyone else. In short, Buckley let Grodman's work kill an innocent man, so he could be disgraced and Buckley could replace them.

If you keep these two points in mind the entire plot makes sense. Grodman wants to return the favor with interest to Buckley.

Furthermore, the nephew of the victim (Morton Lowry - Arthur Kendall in the film), is rather despicable due to his fighting his workers seeking for better pay. He is confronted by a member of Parliament (Paul Cavanagh) who frequently has arguments with him in public. Both Lowry and Cavanagh are friends of Greenstreet and of his closest friend Peter Lorre. Cavanagh, Lowry, and Lorre live across the street from Greenstreet.

I will not go further into the plot, but it is done with great panache. At one point or another (including one famous sequence dealing with pairs of white gloves) everyone (including George Coulouris as Superintendent Buckley) is suspected of being the killer in the plot. It was a very finely made thriller, well directed by Don Siegel and with a tiptop cast. Being the only work by Zangwell that made it to the screen, it seems he was pretty well served after all.

His Defenses Are Down,,,,,

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 24 October 2012]

A prosecution attorney must eat crow when, thanks to an error by his assistant, an innocent man is hanged. Forced to resign amidst scandal, he watches and waits while the assistant (now in his old position) prepares to make the same mistake again. "The Fat Man" (Sydney Greenstreet) is back with diminutive Peter Lorre at his side, and before you can say, "Thank You, Mr. Moto", the two are searching for a murderer tied in with the one which doomed the innocent man. Set in the gaslight days of England in the early 20th Century, there is enough fog and eccentric characters to fill the entire Sherlock Holmes series. Greenstreet and Lorre are both very good, with Greenstreet very touching in the scene where he sees the press's reaction to the accidental hanging. Joan Lorring, the trouble-making teen from "The Corn is Green", is all grown up here, while Rosalind Keith emulates Una O'Connor as the high-strung landlady.

"There's Always A Clue"

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 10 April 2013]

Without the box office clout of Warner Brothers leading players, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet made two crackerjack films for their studio, Three Strangers and The Verdict. One only wishes they had done more together.

Greenstreet and Lorre are neighbors in Victorian London and Greenstreet is a Scotland Yard inspector. Another neighbor Morton Lowry has provided invaluable information in the murder of his aunt, a case Greenstreet was assigned to. But after the execution of the suspect which is what began the film, new evidence comes to light proving that an innocent man had been hung.

Greenstreet's rival on the job, George Coulouris practically dances a jig with this news. He's been doing a lot of back channel maneuvering to get Greenstreet canned and himself to take his place. He's truly one hateful dude.

But later on Lowry is found dead in the proverbial locked room and Coulouris is the one now with a baffling case. Greenstreet and his artist friend Peter Lorre who like a bit of a nip now and then are around to offer help which Coulouris would rather die than accept.

How was the murder committee? The only thing I will say on the subject is that when one is good, one can make people believe they see more than they really do.

Lorre and Greenstreet play beautifully off each other and add the presence of Coulouris, you've got the makes of a great film that needs no star power. Such other colorful character players like Paul Cavanaugh, Joan Lorring, Arthur Shields, Rosalind Ivan are also in the cast.

When the solution is given at the end, you'll think it so confounded simple you'll kick yourself you didn't think of it.

Greenstreet and Lorre are not to be missed in any event.

Neat and tidy little whodunit where Greenstreet and Lorre shine!

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 7/10 · 5 July 2014]

I rather liked this atmospheric mystery, and for several reasons.

First, it's almost a typical mystery...in reverse. The guilty party is hanged, but then we find out he wasn't really guilty, and so we watch the effort to apprehend the real criminal.

Second, the screenwriter and director put up some pretty decent decoys to confuse us. I mean, Peter Lorre is an almost instant suspect in any film...right? Or, it could be George Coulouris, who is clearly working hard to take over the superintendency of Scotland Yard. And Paul Cavanagh -- as a member of Parliament -- looks pretty suspicious, too. Not to mention Joan Lorring, as a rather cheap vaudeville performer, who may have her own motives for murder. I saw Peter Lorre as a decoy early on...because he seemed so obvious a choice as murderer. The twist near the end of the film, however, didn't come as a complete surprise; it dawned on me that there was a slight possibility that _____ was the real murderer, although I thought they were playing with us there, though. In other words, this is cleverly written! The film has a great foggy London-ish look to it, even though it was made in Hollywood. Some nice detail in the sets.

Sydney Greenstreet, as the Superintendent of Scotland Yard, shines here; nice to see him have a chance to star in a film. Peter Lorre is also superb as an irresponsible, but rather charming, artist; quite likable. I can't say much for Joan Lorring, as the vaudevillian; okay in the acting category, horrid as a singer. George Coulouris is sufficiently obnoxious as the man trying to take over the Superintendency of Scotland Yard. Paul Cavanagh's role as a member of Parliament might have been expanded a bit; he does nicely.

The one real criticism I have here is that as we go into the finale, Greenstreet's character should have gloated over the apparent same mistake as Superintendent that Coulouris made, as had Greenstreet himself. But it seems like they needed to move on and quickly finish the picture. And, although the true guilty party accepts his fate, a little more soul-searching could have been done by the character.

Nevertheless, this is an entertaining whodunit, where Greenstreet and Lorre shine. Well worth watching...and I may watch it a second time to see the clues that I may have missed!

You sent an innocent man to the gallows this morning

[hitchcockthelegend · 8/10 · 13 February 2013]

The Verdict is directed by Don Siegel and adapted to screenplay by Peter Milne from the novel The Big Bow Mystery written by Israel Zangwill. It stars Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, George Coulouris, Joann Lorring, Rosalind Ivan and Paul Cavanagh. Music is by Frederick Hollander and cinematography by Ernest Haller.

When Scotland Yard superintendent George Grodman (Greenstreet) in error sends an innocent man to be hanged at Newgate Prison, he is forced to retire in shame. Replaced by the irritable and obnoxious John Buckley (Coulouris), Grodman gets an unexpected opportunity to embarrass Buckley when a tricky murder occurs in a seemingly locked room…

The scene is set from the off, it's 1890 at Newgate Prison in London and a man is hanged off camera. Fog and gas lighted shadows cloak the events to enhance the macabre feel of the event. For the next 80 odd minutes 90% of the story will involve fog or shadows, or both at the same tame, making this very much of interest to the Gothic/noir fan. The story had previously formed the basis of a 1934 film titled as The Crime Doctor.

The story itself is most intriguing, the mystery element remains strong throughout as the suspects are deftly dangled in the plotting by Siegel (directing his first full length feature) and Milne. Just how could a murder be committed in a room completely locked from the inside? The makers ensure that certain areas are kept grey to give off a feeling of confusion, motives and means are deliberately matter of fact and the trusted pairing of Greenstreet and Lorre is a deliciously odd-ball little and large act.

It would be harsh to decry the production for being stage-bound, because although it inevitably is, it doesn't hurt the mood of the picture at all. The story is acted and directed with skill and Haller's photography is in turn beautiful and suitably sinister. 8/10

Gripping mystery

[lucy-19 · 7/10 · 25 April 2006]

I'll watch any movie that stars Lorre and Greenstreet (if you liked this, try The Mask of Demetrios). This is a movie that the TCM channel endlessly recycles at 3 a.m., so I didn't have high expectations, but I was gripped. The screaming landlady is a bit of a bore, but even she turns out to have a soft heart and a secret (and it's not just her drink problem). The girl who plays the musical hall artiste is excellent, as is Paul Cavanagh, a handsome B grade actor of the time. Only flaws: "London" is perpetually shrouded in fog (oh well, adds atmosphere and saves on sets), and some of the "English" characters are unexpectedly Irish.

TCM, if you're listening, please buy some more films!

Well done film noir

[AlsExGal · 10/10 · 13 December 2009]

Greenstreet and Lorre were terrific in the films they made together, this being the best of the ones I've seen so far.

The year is 1890. Greenstreet plays the superintendent of police of Scotland Yard, George Edward Grodman, who has just been to the execution of a man he arrested for the crime of murdering an elderly woman. He arrives back at his office to discover that the man is in fact innocent, as the clergyman that the man claimed as an alibi has finally surfaced. Disgraced, he is forced to resign in favor of his subordinate, John Buckley (George Coulouris).

Grodman is a man of means, so the loss of a paycheck doesn't seem to be a problem, but his nightmares about sending an innocent man to the gallows are. He seems to be recovering, and even making plans for writing a book about his past cases, when a neighbor from across the street is murdered. The crime seems to be a perfect one - the murderer apparently killed the man from inside his own locked room and escaped without detection or leaving any clues behind. However, the brash and boorish new superintendent Buckley will not accept that, and continues seeking a suspect, although in the manner of a bull in a china shoppe. In the meantime, there are a multitude of suspects that intersect with a multitude of witnesses, and Grodman along with the help of his friend, illustrator Victor Emmric (Peter Lorre) decide to do some investigating themselves on their own time.

Greenstreet and Lorre are terrific together as always, with a timing and chemistry that makes them great at these kinds of films. You never know if the likable exteriors displayed by each is the truth or a lie in either or both cases, usually up to the end. This one will keep you guessing right up to the final scene, and I highly recommend it.

Flawed premise

[dawh1 · 7/10 · 28 August 2018]

This is not a spoiler because we know this in the first five minutes. A respected Scotland Yard detective is dismissed because he "hanged an innocent man." I can't accept the basic premise of this story. The police simply investigate the crime and bring their findings to the prosecutor. If an innocent man is hanged, it is not the fault of the detective, but rather that the prosecutor didn't do due diligence and the defense attorney didn't call him on it. No one person is to blame if the wrong person is punished because it involves two opposing teams at work.

An excellent and intelligent film.

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 25 May 2009]

All too often, films are made for dumb people or the lazy or teenagers. Plot twists, intelligent writing and acting seem a lot less important in these films and this is my biggest complaint about American films today. That said, I liked this film because it DID feature all three of these seemingly forgotten elements. Plus, when some knucklehead says that older films are no good, point this one out as an example of a very good older film--one for audiences who don't minding thinking.

The film begins with the unfortunate execution of an innocent man. Naturally, instead of learning from this, the police begin with recriminations and the police superintendent (Sydney Greenstreet) is sacked--even though you could easily see why the dead man's story seemed false. In his place, the weaselly George Coulouris now ran the police department and it was obvious that he was a real toad.

Shortly after this, three friends leave the now retired Greenstreet's flat after having a get together that is disrupted by an argument. The next morning, one of the men (who happens to live across the street) is found murdered. The new superintendent goes about investigating the case all wrong--blindly lashing out for suspects in a very haphazard manner. At the same time, Greenstreet on his own begins looking into the matter as well.

When the film all comes together at the end, why the man was murdered as well as who and how were all solved incorrectly (naturally) by Coulouris. So, it's up to Greenstreet to work quickly to uncover the real why, who and how in order to save a man from hanging.

The film excels with lots of red herrings, twists and intelligent dialog. While not the best of the mysteries of the era, it sure is close and is well worth seeing. They just don't make 'em like they used to....too bad.

Another Day's Work

[boblipton · 7/10 · 25 March 2021]

It's the first feature directed by Don Siegel, and has a number of interesting points: it's a locked room mystery, the last film in which Sidney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre appeared together.

That's pretty much it for the sort of trivia that obsessives like me obsess over, unless you're fascinated by it being the latest screen adaptation of a work by Israel Zangwill, which I am not. It's clearly a minor piece, a B movie intended to see how Warners' longtime montage expert and recent Oscar winner would handle a feature. The answer is ably, apparently by letting the members of his team do their jobs. Any discussions must have taken well in advance to figure out, for example, how to combine the fog and camera placements to give that gloomy gaslight-London-by-night look a noir edge. Or maybe DP Ernest Haller, on hearing what was wanted, just rattled off what he needed, because he had done it five times before.

In the end, it's a studio production, done competently and ably by assembling a team of craftsmen, giving them a decent script, and watching the budget. Given modern ideas of film making as reinventing the wheel every time, the easy excellence on tap in Hollywood's biggest year might seem like fantasy. No: just another solid movie from the well-oiled machine.

AN EARLY SIEGEL MISFIRE...!

[masonfisk · 4/10 · 9 May 2021]

Don Siegel's (Dirty Harry/Charley Varrick) first feature from 1946 stars perennial screen chums Sydney Greenstreet & Peter Lorre in this tale on the nature of law & order. Greenstreet is a constable in Scotland Yard who has found out a man he's put away (& who's about to be executed) is actually innocent. The rest of the film we follow him as another person turns up murdered & he has to find the culprit before the end of the running time. For the most part the film's through-line is a lot of fun but when the murderer is revealed & the reason is stated (which is similar to a movie from 2003 w/Kevin Spacey named The Life of David Gale which also didn't work) what we've seen before & invested any emotion into just evaporates before our eyes.