Dangerous Corner

Plot— elite members of a publishing house gather for a celebratory evening only to find out one of their staff has apparently committed suicide. In the emotional aftermath, a number of hidden truths emerge.

There are elements of a mystery in the story, but overall, the film amounts to considerably more. The narrative appears fairly conventional until the upshot. Then the threads that have accumulated are exposed in an unexpected manner, and we're left with considerable food for thought. As a lesson in "sleeping dogs" the film succeeds brilliantly; as movie however, the narrative requires real patience. There's no action and darn few scene changes. Instead, the cast stands around in evening clothes and talks and talks-- it is, after all, a filmed stage play. At least a few interesting personal embarrassments get revealed as the story moves on, but how interesting you find the characters themselves is, I think, a matter of taste. Except for actor Keith's overdone Martin, the acting helps by being nicely accomplished.

Anyway, as a dramatized lesson in social truths, the movie rates highly. As a form of sheer entertainment, however, the movie's average, at best. My advice is to exercise patience because the upshot does furnish timely food for thought.

This is an intriquing mystery of a bond theft and a suicide (?) that is discussed by a group of people (connected with both) over dinner. There are sooo many flashbacks and plot twists/changes, that it becomes quite confusing as to "what's what"! The ending leaves you with a feeling of "that's IT?!?!",

& I'd recommend that you see it SEVERAL times before everything "sinks in"!

A very young Melvyn Douglas gives quite a solid performance in this screen drama adapted from a successful stage play. The film's origins are not at all disguised, and even the nice trick ending looks like the type of thing one would expect in theatre. There are a number of curious ideas that are spread throughout the film, especially in terms of distorting the truth, however there's relatively little action, with events told through dialogue, which makes it a bit overly talkative and a tad confusing. It is also inappropriately slow to build up and melodramatic, although never poorly done. It is hard to know what to make of the film, but by the end I did not feel like much had happened, and therefore I can only half-heartedly recommend it, although Douglas fans are sure to delight at seeing him here so young.

A bond goes missing from the finances of Chatfield Publishers. One of the Chatfield brothers isn't present for most of the film. He is the one who would seem to get the blame especially after he is supposed to have committed suicide. But then there is a torrent of revelations and accusations from other characters concerned with the publishing business. Suspicions of theft and murder pass from one suspect to another.

A potentially interesting character is novelist Maude Mockridge. I felt she should have been in it more especially with her book title of 'Let Sleeping Dogs Lie.' This phrase takes on significance with the younger characters and their secret longings and unhappy marriages. And what exactly was their feelings towards the dead man and why does everybody seem to be lying?

A good reason to watch this film is to see the natural performance of Melvyn Douglas who plays Charles Stanton. His is the only 100% natural performance throughout the film. You may find the complications irritating at times and it is certainly an atypical murder mystery. Be prepared to retrace your steps through the story towards the end. Although I have to admit this is not really my type of mystery I will probably re-watch this at some point to try and unpick the confusing thread of feelings running between the characters.

Watch this movie from 1934 (from a 1932 English play by J.B. Priestley)to see how early the English-speaking elite began to smash up their values, with a direct path to the mayhem and anomie of the 1960s/70s, and now the politically correct straightjackets of the early 21st century. I don't give it a 10 because of the excisions made to satisfy the censors - too bad for that, as it would have made the movie even more delicious.

For delicious it is, watching people throw up on their values as they wear magnificent gowns, even if we are living with the consequences now. Watch it to see what we need to recover...

Priestley is of the GB Shaw school - tradition and the wisdom of our ancestors is out the window, with no one knowing at the time what great new world awaits us. Unfortunately, we know now, and owe it all to these misguided geniuses for dramatic dialogue.