Watch Knock on Any Door For Free

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

I was mostly disappointed in Humphrey Bogart's performance as lawyer Andrew Morton who was too busy to defend and take care of a storekeepers assault charge while his little store was in the process of being robbed. The result being another lawyer from his firm who was unprepared to fight the case sent this poor innocent immigrant Italian storekeeper to the hoosegow where he unexpectedly dies of a heart attack and leaves his family without a father. The now fatherless son named Nick Romano played by John Derek is lost without his father's financial and parental support and guidance and ends up running with the wrong crowd in a desperate means to make some quick money by robbing storefronts and mugging innocent working stiffs. As the boy Nick Romano grows into a young man and learns his thieving trade in the school of hard "knocks" he runs into lawyer Andrew Morton who is burdened with a guilty conscience for the avoidable death of Nick's father while wrongfully in prison. So lawyer Andrew Morton attempts to keep an eye on the troubled youth Nick Romano but to no avail as Nick is eventually charged with the murder of an on duty police officer in Nicks neighborhood.The story of how Nick Romano found himself on trial for the murder of a police officer is told rather boorishly through Andrew Morton's interpretation to twelve (12) jurors. Typically in movie scenes that involve a prosecuting and defense attorney(s) there is a heated exchange while the accused is on the stand. In this case though the endless barrage of questions that the prosecutor district attorney Kerman played by George Macready throws at the befuddled accused Nick Romano is so choreographed that I thought I was witnessing a high school debate and not a murder trial.It was difficult to continue watching what seemed to be an ill prepared cast to handle a court room drama such that my mind kept wandering off as the film was unable to hold this viewers attention. Even Humphrey Bogart could not save this poorly delivered cookie cutter court room drama picture so the film title in my view would suggest that the vendors should please pass by my door as this dog bites with his honest review.p.s. Bogie's best picture in my view was (1951) The African Queen with co-star Katharine Hepburn and this is a must see if you want to see Bogart at his very best. Please read my full review on The African Queen dated August 04th, 2016

If not for the inspired casting of George Macready as DA Kerman,I'd give this no more than 5/10.He's just absolutely smoking as the prosecutor.And if he'd been prosecutor in To Kill A Mockingbird,just imagine how that would've been.Pretty Boy Romano is a poor excuse for a man,and Morton,his atty wastes his time trying to get him off murdering a cop.He was given every opportunity to straighten up and fly right,but as usual,the world owed him an apology for his tough life.He seemed to come from an okay family,but he was bound to associate with the wrong type.Morton was his equal in youth,and you can imagine the kind of youth Atty Kerman had in comparison to Morton,but the two were worthy opponents,the difference being that the law was right,and no matter what Morton argued in Romano's defense,it was a lost cause.This really was Macready's film!

This is a terrific film I'd have given an 8 to if it hadn't nearly shot itself in the foot with Bogart's heavy-handed (but mercifully brief) "We're all guilty" summary to the jury.The prosecutor is played by the wonderful George Macready. Macready -- who in real life was a dear human being -- had a voice that suggested diabolic evil. Simply casting him as the prosecutor has us rooting for the defendant.Nicholas Ray's direction is generally brisk and focused, and there is a surprising amount of sharp humor during the trial.Many years ago, a prominent black-revolutionary leader observed that "wanting to be president of General Motors" was a sickness. We need a modern film that shows how the rich and powerful were corrupted into becoming people who achieved success at the expense of ruining thousands of ordinary people's lives.

Critics are correct: Knock on Any Door is flawed, perhaps badly flawed. However, it's also an interesting film from a number of standpoints, with several important compensations critics tend to overlook. I think it's worth examining some of each since the film does feature the legendary Bogart and perhaps the fastest rising young director of the time, Nicholas Ray. So why then are the results as mixed as I think they are. Here are a few conjectures. A central weakness lies in the casting. Taking on the lawyer's role meant that Bogart's star power would require an expanded role for the attorney. That's unfortunate because the lawyer's part is both marginal to the plot and strictly one dimensional -- that of a "tough love" social reformer. Small wonder Bogart fans generally dislike the movie-- he gets a long emotional speech but no real chance at the darkly ambiguous character that was his specialty. The fact is that the part could have been filled by any number of lesser actors without loss to the movie as a whole The real star part, of course, is John Derek's hard-luck Nick Romano. It's a complex role that would tax even the best young actor. Unfortunately, Derek lacks both the intensity and emotional depth central to the character's predicament. He's appropriately brash and arrogant, but lacks the the tragic dimension of sensitivity. It's too bad his career began with such a demanding role. The woeful tantrum scene at the lakeside cabin may be an extreme example, still it does illustrate the problem. The prospect of Brando doing the part is a fascinating one, but one that regrettably fell through. Too bad also that the courtroom scenes are prolonged (probably to accommodate Bogart's starring role), since they amount to another key flaw. They're stagey, uninspired, and clash with the expressively noirish atmosphere of the slums. It's like two contrasting halves glued together in hopes that they will complement rather than clash. But conflict they do, because the slum scenes bring out the expressive artistry of director Ray, while the high-key lighting and prolonged dialog of the court resemble the boilerplate of the old Perry Mason show. I expect Ray did these scenes on auto-pilot.. And, of course, there's the final courtroom plea that should have been sent back for re- write. Critics are correct-- it's ham-handed to say the least. There have to be subtler, more effective methods of influencing the audience without hammering them in the process. The fact that the plea comes at movie's end leaves a bad last impression, which is why I believe so many of the positive elements tend to get over-looked. But those positive elements are indeed present. Note the electrifying opening, of cops plowing wildly through crowds of seedy bystanders That's pure Nick Ray. The crowds even look fairly authentic by 40's standards. They're also atmospheric and colorful. Note some of the distinctive characters-- the shuffling cadaver named "Junior", or the slippery "Kid Fingers", or the black man acting in a rare uncaricatured fashion. Note also some of the subtler miscellaneous touches, such as the flame that flares up from the restaurant tray the moment Derek pledges to reform-- an ominous portent; or the ugly hot water tank that dominates the visuals of the young couple's cold-water flat where Emma finds a home but Nick only finds desolation. There's also the film's central irony-- that the shrill, cruel-faced DA (George Mc Ready, with an enhanced scar) in fact wins the courtroom battle and Bogart loses. It passes by quickly, giving the DA no time to exult or the audience to react. But the fact is that attorney Morton (Bogart), who we've rooted for, has succumbed to systematic self-deception by seeing a version of his former self in the devious young Romano. This twist is jarring, because it abruptly overturns both movie convention and audience expectations. Where the movie really works-- as one reviewer sagely points out-- is as a love story between Emma and Nick. That's not surprising since no one was better at bringing out the touching side of romantic love than Ray ("They Live by Night" {1947} or "Rebel Without a Cause" {1955}). He was especially effective with actresses. Here Allene Robert's Emma transforms poignantly from vulnerable neighborhood waif into glowing young wife. She's really the one who's tragically trapped by poverty and circumstance. (Note the poignantly cheap ribbons in her hair as she lovingly prepares a dinner for Nick that he will never eat.) Too bad that this, the most effective phase of the film, is too often overlooked. Likely, the 90 minutes didn't help anyone's career, except maybe Roberts'. At least, Bogart and Ray were able to recover the following year with the artistically complete "In a Lonely Place" (1950), while Derek found a comfortable niche adorning a number of forgettable costume dramas. Nonetheless, there's something haunting for me about this movie. Perhaps it's the spectacle of social conscience gone awry. More likely, it's the lingering image of Emma, alone in that ugly flat, the ribbons in her hair. Her modest little dreams now dashed beyond repair. I really wish the movie had succeeded.