The Man Who Dared (1946) User Reviews

Decent first try for director Sturges

[gordonl56 · 7/10 · 7 November 2006]

A Columbia Pictures quickie featuring George Macready, Leslie Brooks and Forrest Tucker. Macready is a newspaper editor with a cause. He wants murder convictions based on circumstantial evidence struck down. He decides to prove his point and sets himself up to be arrested on murder charges. He gives the evidence that proves his innocence to fellow newsman Forrest Tucker. Macready goes through with the trial and is convicted on "circumstantial evidence". He is then sent to death row to await his hanging. Once he is convicted Macready asks Tucker to produce the life saving evidence. Needless to say there is a problem. Tucker was hit by a car on his way in and is now in a coma. Macready pulls an escape and goes out in search of anything that might help his cause. After a few close calls all ends with Macready going free. Not a great film but by no means a bad one. It was the first film by future big-time director John Sturges. Was remade as "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" by Fritz Lang.

Gord

The man is an idiot

[AAdaSC · 5/10 · 2 February 2012]

Reporter George Macready has got a serious problem with people being convicted on circumstantial evidence, so much so that he frames himself for a murder to prove a point. He takes the precaution of providing Forrest Tucker (Larry) with the evidence that will save him once he has been proved guilty only Tucker is run over and put into a coma at the moment he is required to provide this evidence. It's up to Macready to sort things out by himself. First of all, he has to escape from custody.

The cast are good in this film, especially Leslie Brooks as Macready's fiancée. Unfortunately, the film bombards you from the beginning with too much information. The story is not difficult to follow but it is made heavy-going by cramming in so much in such a short space of time. The result is a loss of interest and we end up just waiting for the thing to finish. Come on, get on and resolve the damn thing. It's not bad but George Macready is an idiot and too much happens.

Beyond A Shadow Of A Doubt

[karljhickey14 · 6/10 · 22 June 2022]

A crusading journalist attacking the use of circumstantial evidence frames himself for murder , but the only person who can prove it is in a car accident ... Is the plot of Fritz Lang's 1956 film Beyond A Reasonable Doubt . This time it's George Macready , not Dana Andrews , and his confidant is deliberately attacked by gangsters , rather than just a random accident . There is another big difference with the ending , but I won't spoil either film .

This is a typical Columbia B picture , notable mainly for being John Sturges first film .

This is a noir I've been looking for for a long time , didn't expect the deja vu with the plot .

It gets on with it , but the later chase scene feels like padding . The end scene screams TV show as well .

Macready still comes across as villainous ( as he usually was ) , and in one scene Forrest Tucker just looks blank . Brooks doesn't do much , and the real villain is hardly in the film .

Required viewing for noir fans and b movie collectors , but maybe not casual viewers .

( Beyond a shadow of a doubt is what the judge says in summing up , not quite saying the title of the future film . )

This topic reminds you anything else ?

[searchanddestroy-1 · 10 August 2008]

When I discovered this little gem from Columbia Pictures and directed by the no yet great John Sturges, I suddenly realized this scheme was the same as Fritz Lang's "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt": the tale of a man who pretends to be guilty of murder in order to denounce justice system with circumstantial evidence. But later, everything goes wrong for him.

The Fritz Lang's movie was shot a decade later and the screenwriters are not the same, unlike the story... Strange, isn't it?

At last, only the very end is a bit different.

No IMDb user has noticed this, even for the Lang's film...I am astonished. It's staring you in the face, as a flashlight !!!

Nevertheless, I admit that the Sturges' movie is a rare gem. No one seems to know it. That's the reason why, I think.