Crossfire, a film made in 1947, deals with Anti-Semitism. As such it is a film 'before its time'; in '47 few films dealt with the subject (note: 'Gentleman's Agreement' did, and did t better). But this film does not have the lofty aspirations of 'Agreement'; this is cinema noir plain and simple. A bad guy commits a bad act and it's up to the good guys to figure out the 'who' and the 'how'. Robert Young plays the police inspector; a pipe glued to his lower lip. Beside that, he is fine. Robert Mitchum is as close to a 'hero' as this film possesses; but heroics are not his forte. He is there to provide hope; his basic goodness a counterweight to the bad guy's bad. Robert Ryan plays the role of Robert Ryan, and plays it as well as ever. Sam Levene plays the Semite against whom atrocities are committed. Overall I enjoyed the film for what is is (a good 'B' movie); but other reviews had me thinking the film was a great one. It's not.

This fine film noir added social conscience to the usual panoply of a whodunit murder, flashbacks and atmospheric direction, to become one of the first, if not the first mainstream Hollywood movie to call out against anti-semitism in society, although I was interested to learn that in the source-novel, the "motivation" for the murder was actually homophobia.When it stays on-stereo, the film is great. Robert Ryan, a noted liberal in Hollywood, unflinchingly plays the part of the bullying ex-army commander Montgomery who in a cowardly act cold-bloodedly beats to death a Jewish man he and his small coterie of demobbed soldiers meet in a bar. He unsurprisingly then tries to cover up his vile deed by intimidating his companions as well as trying to mislead the local detective, the pipe- smoking Robert Young. Thankfully evil doesn't prosper in the end. but not before Ryan electrifies the screen with a display of boorish malevolence only accentuated by his formidable presence. I found the back-up story of the sensitive young soldier's disappearance and later hook-up with Gloria Grahame, in a memorable cameo as a dime-a-dance waitress in a local dive, to be unnecessary padding. Neither was I taken with slow-walking, slow-talking Young as the law's man-hunter and it's ridiculous to waste a star of the magnitude of Robert Mitchum in a relatively anonymous supporting role as another soldier. I was left wondering how well Mitchum might have played Ryan's part, certainly this film ain't big enough for the both of them.The film is brave enough to allow the word Jew to be used to avoid all doubt and also to show the villain of the piece as a returning army officer with director Tiomkin crafts many an effective scene, the best perhaps being when he puts the camera below Ryan's grim face as he towers over the young acolyte he's coercing into backing his story.For all its minor faults, this film gets it right on the big issue at stake here and deserved all the kudos it got at the time as ground-breaking film, although ironically its director and screenwriter themselves were subject to discrimination in the notorious anti-Communist Hollywood witch-hunt which followed soon after this particular film's release.

I preferred this to Gentlemen's Agreement, if we must limit the comparison to similarly-themed films. I have read too much about what this film could have been, should have been, would have been, but for . . .Criticizing a film because it was not the film you would have made is beside the point. Please go and make your own film. For example, I've seen complaints that the film was an insufficient exploration of anti-Semitism. If the film were made last year, I'd probably agree. But consider the time-frame. 1947. The theme of the source material featured gay-bashing rather than anti-Semitism. That theme would certainly have been interesting, addressed in a film from that year.But woulda coulda shoulda . . . That's not a valid criticism for a film made under the constraints that existed then. Making a 1947 film which "sympathized" with Jews just further cleared the way for the director's place on the blacklist.Let me offer only a simple example of the artistry in this film, which transcends any kind of "message": there is a scene near the end, when soldiers are shaving in a group washroom. The composition of that scene (involving mirrors) and the shots in it--simply breathtaking. I don't know if that scene was the product of the director or the cinematographer, or both. But OMG, what a wonder this is!

Edward Dmytryk was one of the most reliable of workman-like directors working in Hollywood from the 1940s to the 1960s. He was responsible for classics like FAREWELL MY LOVELY, THE DEVIL COMMANDS and THE CAINE MUTINY. CROSSFIRE isn't the best film on the Dmytryk CV, but even a so-so Dmytryk movie is better than most other directors' on their good days.The plot revolves around a group of men recently released from war-service in the US Army, so recently that some of them still wear their uniforms. After an afternoon's hard drinking, a man the soldiers meet in a bar is murdered. It looks like one of the soldiers, Mitch Mitchell (George Cooper), did it, but the police flounder when it comes to finding a motive. The soldier's sergeant, Keeley (Robert Mitchum) is convinced the suspect didn't do the crime and sets out to uncover the true killer himself.The always-terrific Gloria Grahame plays an embittered bar hostess who might be able to give Mitch the nearest thing to an alibi he's going to get. Not sure I like Gloria as a bleached blonde, but the look suits her character exactly.Mitchum's performance is even more laid-back than usual and you get the feeling he thinks he's slumming it in this low-budget picture. But his presence still contributes some gravitas and focus to the story.The fact is that it's not much of a mystery. You'll probably figure out who the killer is first time you lay eyes on him, but even so, I enjoyed watching the plot unfold and seeing how men who fought together show such loyalty to one another despite having little else in common. I'd quite happily sit through this again ...