Private Hell 36 (1954)

You won't be disappointed!

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

A standard movie critic's cliché is "Good cast tries hard but can't overcome the material." That is the case with bland 1954 cop drama Private Hell 36, but with the added debacle of Ida Lupino struggling to overcome her own lousy script! The dialog is particularly bad. What may have been a misguided attempt at give the characters' lines an every-day realism succeeds so well it is downright boring. Director Don Seigel blamed it on drinking and other misbehavior on the set by Lupino, her co-screenwriter and ex-husband Collier Young, who also produced, and dissipated co-star Steve Cochran. For all that it doesn't seem much worse to yours truly than Seigel's average output, which except for his magnum opus Invasion Of The Body Snatchers (1956), never rose much above mediocrity.Don Seigel has a worshipful following amongst devotees of the auteur philosophy that seems all out of proportion to his modest accomplishments. He was an auteur for whatever that's worth all right in the sense that the pictures he directed show his imprint. Unfortunately that imprint is boring, predicable, and lacking in artistry. Which describes Private Hell 36.With no sure direction the unusually competent actors founder. Cocharan sleepwalks through it. Conversely Howard Duff overacts to the blood vessel popping point. Poor Lupino seems to get more and more hysterical as the doings progress without her finding a line of her own writing into which she can infuse any drama. Beautiful, talented Dorothy Malone, miscast as cop Duff's drab housewife, stumbles through the proceeding with a "what am I doing here?" look. Only ever-reliable Dean Jagger, as the Police Captain, shows any life, and the picture perks up only when he's on screen. Even the cinematography by Burnett Guffey, who had just won an Accademy Award for his camera work in From Here To Eternity (1953), is bland and lacking artistry. Guffey and Seigel show little imagination in using the wide screen, simply centering the characters in the 1.85:1 frame or overusing giant closeups of faces.Others liked this picture, but yours truly and the grouchy old wife can't figure out why. She bailed out before the halfway point. Unfortunately oldblackandwhite is one of those self-flagellating types who has to watch on the the bitter end no matter how bad. Private Hell 36 is lifeless, draggy, talky, predicable and just plain bad. An awful waste of a talented cast and also a waste of whiskey if drinking a lot of same on the set is what Ida and her pals believed was the key to movie-making. Only for die-hard fans of Ida Lupino and rock-hard, desperate insomniacs. Others should avoid it as if it were and amateur barber friend with a new set of clippers.

This film is interesting because it stars the real life husband and wife duo of Howard Duff and Ida Lupino (who also co-wrote the film). However, they do not play husband and wife in the film, as Duff's movie wife was played by Dorothy Malone. Even more interesting is that Duff's child in the film is actually played by his own daughter, Bridget. It was directed by Don Siegel--a guy known for making strong lower-budget thrillers during this era.Duff and Steve Cochran are both detectives, partners and friends. However, all this is tested when they are investigating a case and find a suitcase full of money. It's a lot of money and Cochran takes much of it for himself--figuring no one would miss it. Duff is appalled...but says nothing. It seems that he just hopes that his friend will see the light and do the right thing. However, the longer he waits the more trouble he, too, will be in for not reporting this. See how all this is resolved in this very nice detective film.My favorite aspect of the film was Cochran's character. Duff kept waiting for him to do the right thing...but Cochran had no mental compass and simply had no problem doing the selfish thing! None of this heart 'o gold or seeing the light at the end for this guy--a major plus for the film. Good acting, a good script and nice action make this one a nice example of film noir.By the way, the dead guy in elevator looked a lot like Nikita Khrushchev the way they had him made up! It was, in fact, Chester Conklin--an old movie veteran who gained some fame as one of Mack Sennett's 'Keystone Kops'.

Though it's tempting to regard every black and white crime thriller as noir, there's a danger of reading too much into the merely monotone.As here. This isn't film noir but film monotone, devoid of the irony, and the anger, of genre classics and instead graced by, and in part compensated with, some often sassy dialog and Cochran's acting.As a movie, it's a mess: the title relates to a location of stolen money, but the money isn't stolen until well past the half way point in the running time, and so nobody's in hell, public or private, for almost an hour but are instead laboriously working their way to that point in the script when the movie can actually begin.A curio for Siegel fans, and those with fond memories of Republic, but otherwise more like purgatory than the brand of Hades it purports to chronicle.

It's nice to see the old Republic logo at the start of this. Seeing Ida Lupino is always a delight. Steve Cochrane was a handsome, effective performer who was underutilized. And Don Siegal was a great director of gritty noirs in the 1950s.Unfortunately, these parts do not add up to much of a whole. It's a standard rogue cop story that doesn't ring true. The duologue is very arch. Are we trying for Oscar Wilde here or are we making a gritty detective movie? Dorothy Malone is beautiful in that somewhat unusual way she had and she also acts well.Lupino seems either to have been allowed, or directed, to chew up the scenery. She is playing to the balcony. And saying that about one of my all-time favorite perfumers hurts.