LogFAQs > #983136011

12. Dial M for Murder (1954)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
Score: 140

Inviso: 7
Seanchan: 7
Poke: 9
Lightning: 9
Suprak: 10
Mythiot: 15
Seginus: 15
Karo: 17
jcgamer: 21
Johnbobb: 30

Inviso
Im fairly certain this is the first Alfred Hitchcock movie Ive seen, because I cannot remember actually watching Psycho from beginning to end. And for that first time dipping my toe into the work of one of the most famous directors of all time, I enjoyed this. Im down for a good Monk-style murder mystery, where its all about figuring out how the bad guy did it (even though he get to see Tony lay out his entire plan, without taking into account the handful of elements of human nature that might ruin everything). And it all just plays out so wonderfully, because you can have the cleverest plan in the world, and you can read the human nature of a guy youre blackmailing on a whim, but everything changes when your wife behaves in a manner that doesnt facilitate her own murder. Watching the back half though, when shes been framed for murder and everyone is trying to figure a way out for her (including the inspector being a smart motherfucker) is great. Tony is SO smug, right up until the last possible second, and his own inability to account for human error bites him in the ass one last time and gets him caught. Its all very clever and fun the whole way through.

Seanchan
I thought I had seen this one before but that turned out not to be true. Anyway, I enjoyed it quite a bit. It's a very tense and taut film, where youre always wondering how things are going to go wrong (or right). Perhaps a bit overly explanatory at times, but its also the nature of movies like this.
I especially enjoyed the acting of the husband. One tiny detail that stuck out to me was when he was having the conversation with the guy from college. He wipes down the lamp, the glasses, the picture, etc. The conversation continues and the college guy ends up gripping the desk chair as theyre looking at the bank records. I thought for sure that would be a gotcha, either as part of the plot (that he forgot) or as a plot hole, but moments later he takes a rag and wipes the chair down. The fact that they paid attention to little details like that is telling.

Lightning
I usually put myself in the criminals shoes and then I keep asking myself, uh, what do I do next?

Alfred Hitchcock shows that hes the absolute master of suspense in this murder thriller with a fantastic setup and structure. The setup is simple but extremely well done; a jealous husband wants to have his wife killed and it goes wrong. The twists and turns this takes are exciting to watch, and this ties into the films brilliant structure. The first portion of the film establishes the characters and sets up the murder attempt, then there is the only real sequence of action in the middle with the home invasion scene leading into the wife being framed. This then goes into a sequence thats a mirror of the first one where the detective and the boyfriend try to reveal the truth and set her free. There is a kind of clever symmetry to the film with that exciting sequence in the middle dividing two clear acts.

Its really impressive that aside from the one big set-piece, the film is almost entirely people standing in the same room talking (usually just two of them) but its gripping throughout. The performances are all great (though Kellys accent isnt the best) and it manages to sell the dialogue and keep you hooked even when you might think it would be slow. This all leads to a very clever finale where they manage to expose the husband in a pretty smart way using what had been set up previously with the keys. In that plan you can see a lot of modern detective stories get their inspiration. My only issue with the film is probably the score. It doesnt quite fit the serious nature of whats happening, it is almost too buoyant. However this is only a small critique of a brilliant film. Overall this is a great crime thriller that holds up brilliantly today.

5/5

Seginus
Classic Hitchcock thriller about a guy who blackmails a patsy to kill his wife for him, and is cocky enough to think his scheme will go off without a hitch. Ray Milland plays this role with delicious hubris and its a joy to watch his carefully laid plans unravel all because he fails to anticipate his wifes lethal judo instinct, which forces him to think on his feet for the second half of the movie. This precipitates a Columboesque downfall at the hands of a diligent chief inspector, who puzzles over an increasingly complex set of clues until they all line up. Could the letter have been planted on the body? But then why was the money still in the briefcase? Then theres the matter of the missing stocking - and how did Swanns latchkey end up in Margots handbag? What about the mysterious behavior of the barbecue lid? Is it possible the sewing machine was taken over by the spirit of Byrons grandmother? It would be a nightmare to get jury duty on a case like this, Id be so confused the whole time.

But I dig this type of locked-room mystery, where the mechanics and details of a confined space are so intricately plotted and thoroughly considered that the limited setting enjoys a heightened veracity. The story here is clever enough to make the filmed play aspect work for me, and I get a kick out of the old-school English thespian acting.

Karo
This Hitchcock classic is an old fashioned murder mystery story only from the unusual point of view of the criminal as he plans his perfect crime.
This setup means the audience knows things the detective doesn't, and rather than trying to figure things out for ourselves we are merely passive observers to his attempts to crack the case. Indeed, for this time around it is the motives and methods of the police that are hidden from out view, and the big reveal at the end in not whodunit, but rather howdunit, as in how did the cops manage to break through his airtight alibi? (hint: it involves entrapment and tampering with evidence but hey, that's the police for you)
I mean I guess it is pretty good for an old movie but it's not even close to Hitchcock's best efforts.

jcgamer
This was right before Hitchcock really peaked - in fact he released a much better movie, Rear Window, later that same year. Dial M is OK but isnt one of the Hitchcock pictures that really sticks with you afterwards, like Psycho for example.

6/10

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
I may not be the biggest fan of Hitchcock as a director, but I can admit that it would feel weird having a crime list without at least one of his here. In fact, there'd likely be more included in the list, but I do intend to run a Mystery movie list someday, which will likely have quite a few of his. Dial M for Murder's legacy is undeniable as one of the key early murder conspiracy movies, it's been adapted and remade and is often considered one of Hitchcock's best.

What I thought:
Again, not the biggest Hitchcock fan in general - for someone specifically known for thrillers, his "thrilling" scenes never really click with me, with overblown performances and convenient plot points. That being said, Dial M is better than most of what I've seen from him. Hubbard may never be Poirot, but he still manages to have a decent bit of needed charisma. Overall I enjoyed it, even if it didn't quite blow me away.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
you lost me at the key thing bro