The Missing Juror

Breezy B detective movie from Columbia, who made some of the best B movies of the 1940s. Jim Bannon stars as a reporter investigating the murders of jurors from a high profile case. The mystery here is not very compelling. The identity of the killer is obvious from the start. So obvious that I have to wonder if it was even expected to fool the audience. Maybe it was supposed to be a Vertigo type of thing. At any rate, the movie is a fun watch despite the weak mystery. The cast is likable and director Budd Boetticher keeps things moving along quickly. The following year Bannon would rejoin co-star George Macready in the first of Bannon's short-lived I Love a Mystery series.

There is not one juror going missing here, but they are all gradually being disposed of one by one, until only five remain. We never learn what ever happened to those last five.

Jim Bannon plays the reporter who starts paying attention to the case, investigating it and digging it up, while the murders just go on. The case is the problem of a murderer convicted of a murder he did not commit, he is sentenced to be hanged, and not until in the last moments before his hanging he is pardoned, as the case is solved. But he is already destroyed, distraught by the hardships in the prison with the terrible psychological torture of daily having to witness other convicts being brought out to be hanged, and he has to be confined to a mental asylum. There he hangs himself and destroys all traces of himself by setting fire to the cell. The case is closed, but that's how it opens.

You will immediately grasp the plot if you are not stupid, but although it's all self-evident, it keeps developing and getting more complicated, as another is caught for the murders who confesses to all of them in detail. So where does this labyrinth lead?

It is one of Budd Boetticher's early films, and already here he excels with his special tricks, number one being an excellent camera work, supported by exquisite photo. In spite of all its B-superficiality, the film is worth watching - and enjoying. It is also graced by Janis Carter's enchanting appearance.

Film Daily said this picture was for people who were not too demanding. I would say it's for people who are not too awake. As sloppy as it is moronic (the deaths are described as accidents, though one man is shot from a passing car), it has a murderer whose identity is obvious very soon after the start. We are asked to believe that a man can, with hair dye, glasses, and a false beard, impersonate someone who has spent several days with his victim. The impersonator also has a very distinctive, velvety voice that would not have been identical with the absent man's. The impersonation is blindingly obvious to anyone watching the movie, so how can all the people IN the movie be taken in?

If a real woman were as passive and dumb as Janis Carter's character, the menaced heroine, she would not have lasted to adulthood. Approached by the weaponless murderer (who has fooled her for days), Janis has two opportunities to save her life, but just stands there, looking mildly worried.

This movie certainly makes a demand of its own--for one's disbelief to be suspended higher than any of the movie's gallows.

This film, rarely seen on TV, is one of the great over-looked film noirs of the 1940's. Similar in tone to such noirs as the "Stranger On The Third Floor", the movie plays out as a noir-twist on the film "And Then There Was None" with George Macready at his nasty best.

With a largely anonymous cast and a plot that is nothing to write home about, this little film from the 40's is still worth watching mainly for its noirish atmosphere and George MacReady's wonderful over-the-top performance as a wrongfully condemned man gone mad.

MacReady plays Harry Wharton, a man who is wrongfully convicted of killing his sweetheart and sentenced to hang. He sits on death row for months while reporter Joe Keats, who senses Wharton is innocent, tries to track down the real killer. Hours before the execution, Keats comes up with the evidence that points to another and Wharton is pardoned. However, no pardon will fix the fact that Wharton's mind has snapped. He is admitted to a mental hospital, but nothing eases his misery and he ultimately sets fire to his room before hanging himself. His body is burned beyond recognition. Now, months later, reporter Joe Keats is refocused on the Wharton case. This time because half a dozen of the Wharton jurors have died mysterious accidental deaths in a short period of time. Keats believes someone is avenging Wharton's wrongful conviction and subsequent suicide, but he can't prove it. Along the way he falls for a beautiful female juror who doesn't care to cooperate with his investigation.

If you watch it, you're going to know what's going on immediately. There is really no mystery here. However, it is amazing to watch what Columbia could do in the field of drama/noir/mystery during the 40's and 50's without nearly the resources of the other major studios or the star power. All the stuff you expect in such a film is here - the all night diner where reporters seem to congregate and the proprietor who's always handing out sage advice, the know-it-all reporter 40's style and his antagonistic relationship with a boss that still appreciates the reporter's craft and insight, the classy girl that the reporter sets his sights on and somehow winds up the center of the drama, and the mystery criminal that runs circles around multiple police departments and is only tripped up by one blood-hound of a journalist.

Recommended for fans of post-war and almost post-war fare.