Conflict (1945)

Admirable film.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

There are two items which reveal Warner Brothers' cheap-skate stagecraft and lack of continuity among their "pulp" film productions like "Conflict": First, Bogart's wife in pic is wearing the actual same sparkling brooch that Ingrid Bergman wore in her first scene of "Casablanca" - this jewelry is so unique and distinctive (and would be a near-priceless auction item nowadays) that it is as iconic as the film "Casablanca" itself; and Second, - believe it or not - the actual "Maltese Falcon" statuette from the eponymous film is perched on top of a filing cabinet in a scene at police headquarters. Was some wardrobe mistress or grip playing a tasteless joke? Or was WB so stingy that they couldn't afford separate jewelry or props for different films? Did they think we wouldn't notice such visual gaffes? Unpardonable.The Premise of pic is that Bogart's character is a man who sees his temporary incapacity from a broken leg as an alibi in his plan to rub out his shrewish wife and then hook up with her dazzling younger sister. Picture Bogart as a closet Walter Mitty character with pathetic delusions of romantic grandeur. Seriously?Bogart is miscast as the villain, visibly uncomfortable without the armor of his usual dour anti-hero persona. Bogie tricks his wife into going on a trip without him, but later confronts her suddenly on a dangerous mountain road (what a coincidence!), killing her and pushing her car with her body in it over a cliff. Sidney Greenstreet is also miscast as a perspicacious yet compassionate psychiatrist (picture Jabba the Hut from "Star Wars" with a heart-of-gold) who sniffs out Bogart's mendacity about his wife's disappearance, and then goes on to orchestrate an elaborate "Gaslight" plan with the police to trip up Bogart's character and have him tip his hand. Guess who wins?In real life, the younger sister (and I do mean younger - the dazzling Alexis Smith at twenty-four was in her prime and 22 years younger than the aging, sickly-looking Bogart) wouldn't give a second glance to a humorless, gloomy old geezer like Bogart. Bogie finally confesses his love to her during the search for her sister, and then mercilessly cross-examines her about why she should love him when she rejects him. Even the most perverse, masochistic woman wouldn't tolerate Bogie's nasty hectoring. It was like he was trying to verbally beat a confession out of a criminal rather than win the affections of a woman who looked young enough still be in college. Bogart was always miscast as any kind of a ladies' man. This film really shows Bogie's inability to charm anyone, much less either of the two principal leading ladies. Add to this the glistening, disgusting drool he always has in the corners of his mouth, like that of a die-hard chewing tobacco addict. Bogart always comes off as a man totally who is uncomfortable with women - i.e., a real man's man. Bogart doesn't play the villain well either. Besides his heartless demeanor with Alexis Smith as the woman for whom he invented the entire murder plot of his wife, he actually made a woman playing a bit-part scream for help, he was so intimidating. His tough-guy persona informs every facet of all of his performances, however inappropriately, as here.Bogie's man's man image does work wonderfully in guy-flicks like "The Caine Mutiny," "Sahara," his first big movie role, "The Petrified Forest," and Bogie's best performance ever, that of the psychotic gold prospector Fred C. Dobbs in "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre." To bad Bogie didn't stick to the roles that suited him, not ridiculous melodramas like "Conflict" where his character needed to be able to charm a woman.

" . . . but women don't," hapless "Dick Mason" (Humphrey Bogart) tells his shrink-in-hangman's-clothing, "Dr. Hamilton" (Sydney Greenstreet). Warner Bros. made CONFLICT primarily to allow Greenstreet to get back at Bogart for out-smarting him in THE MALTESE FALCON, CASABLANCA, and several other films. If Warners had paired James Cagney and Bogie for 100 flicks, they'd have forced the latter to bite the dust at least 99 times (as they loved the YANKEE DOODLE DANDY). Since it was harder for the Brothers and Church Censors to identify with Greenstreet than Cagney, they did not mind letting Bogart win the majority of his conflicts with the Fat Man. Given that Fundamentalist Societies essentially give the husband of an oldest sister "dibs" on her younger female siblings, there'd be little cause for CONFLICT here if this story took place in such an environment. Unfortunately for Dick, it doesn't. And women actually DO come back sometimes, if they have a little help from their friends.

On their fifth wedding anniversary a man and wife find out their marriage is a big mistake, and he's convinced her sister is in love with him. If only he wasn't already married.....Since this is a thriller he does the logical thing and pushes his wife off a mountain cliff. But then he gets signs that she may still be alive. Is he losing his mind or is he just a sloppy killer? The whole movie hinges on the fact that the viewer must choose either option as being true. Unless there's a third option, and just about anybody who has ever seen or read a mystery story will figure out soon enough what that is. Oh yes, Sydney Greenstreet's character is a psychiatrist, now what on earth would that have to do with any of this? I wonder...... Apart from the rather obvious plot there's isn't much suspense to make this an effective thriller.Bogart's character seems more annoyed than scared by any of the strange goings-on, like finding his dead wife's jewelry in her safe. And when he finds out his wife's sister rejects him, so the whole murder was in vain he's more unpleasantly surprised than shocked. The ending can't really come as a surprise to anyone. This movie is not without merit, and Bogart and Greenstreet are worth seeing in any movie, but i had higher hopes for this.

Have you noticed the similarities between, not only «Conflict» and «Vertigo» (1958), but also with «The Two Mrs. Carroll» (1947)? Indeed, in these movies, there is at least one of the following occurrences : 1) A husband planning to get rid of his wife. 2) A woman who «mysteriously» disappears after entering a building while being followed by a man. 3) A clue that gives away the guilty person (a rose, a necklace). I'll stop here : if you're familiar with the three movies mentioned -- or just curious about the «mechanics» of good suspense/noir films plotting -- then I'll leave it to you to find more connections. You may argue that, since «Vertigo» came after the others, if any «imitation» is to be pointed out, then Hitchcock's film would be the one to «blame». Perhaps.... Yet, none of the other two come close to the first part of «V.», in the atmospheric and hypnotic suggestion of a «romantic ghost».