I liked this film because while it dealt with a tough subject (the morality of the death penalty--particularly in cases where there is circumstantial evidence), it was not preachy and didn't have any obvious answers. I could easily see this movie as being enjoyable to those opposed to the death penalty or those who want to see its widespread use--the film presents so many arguments for both opinions as well as those in the middle. It's actually pretty rare to see a film accomplish so much.
Dana Andrews plays a writer who is dating Joan Fontaine. Her father is an editor of a newspaper who is anti-capital punishment and he convinces Andrews to 'set himself up' for murder using only circumstantial evidence. This is to prove that an innocent man could easily be convicted on such evidence and this would supposedly make for an excellent book. So, once an unsolved murder occurred, they step-by-step created evidence that pointed in Andrews' direction but was not damning in and of itself--taking photos that proved the whole thing was orchestrated. One of several holes in the story is that if this REALLY was done, the legal system would not be very forgiving of a man who cost the state a fortune in legal expenses--all for a book! The plan seems to be working out just fine,...that is until the editor is killed in a car crash and the evidence exonerating Andrews is destroyed in the resulting fire!! Now Andrews is about to be convicted and there's no one who can prove it's all a set-up! I liked how towards the end the story took many unexpected turns and was a real thinking-person's film. Unfortunately, the ending is both very interesting but a bit hard to believe. I suggest you just watch it and try not to think about this weak ending too much, as the rest of the film is pretty dandy and engaging. Dana Andrews and director Fritz Lang, as usual, did a fine job.
Dana Andrews plays a writer who is dating Joan Fontaine. Her father is an editor of a newspaper who is anti-capital punishment and he convinces Andrews to 'set himself up' for murder using only circumstantial evidence. This is to prove that an innocent man could easily be convicted on such evidence and this would supposedly make for an excellent book. So, once an unsolved murder occurred, they step-by-step created evidence that pointed in Andrews' direction but was not damning in and of itself--taking photos that proved the whole thing was orchestrated. One of several holes in the story is that if this REALLY was done, the legal system would not be very forgiving of a man who cost the state a fortune in legal expenses--all for a book! The plan seems to be working out just fine,...that is until the editor is killed in a car crash and the evidence exonerating Andrews is destroyed in the resulting fire!! Now Andrews is about to be convicted and there's no one who can prove it's all a set-up! I liked how towards the end the story took many unexpected turns and was a real thinking-person's film. Unfortunately, the ending is both very interesting but a bit hard to believe. I suggest you just watch it and try not to think about this weak ending too much, as the rest of the film is pretty dandy and engaging. Dana Andrews and director Fritz Lang, as usual, did a fine job.