Skip to main content

Review: The Wrong Man (1956)





In Life’s feature on the bizarre case of Christopher Emmanuel “Manny” Balestrero, a bashful, honest, family-loving string bass player of the then snazzy Stork Club, who was arrested for crimes he never committed, Herbert Brean, the writer, supposes the inconceivable event possessing the “somnambulist quality of a bad dream.” Alfred Hitchcock, basing a film on the incident three years later, conferred on the “bad dream” a touch of Kafkaesque disquietude. Though jettisoning much of the suspenseful streak that characterises his style, Hitchcock introduces in The Wrong Man (1956) a new suspense that is induced by a palpable sense of emotional detachedness. For years to come this would ultimately evolve to a semi-documentary approach of impassive-observing that culminates in the menacing sobriety ofPsycho.

To enhance the desperation of a tangled, never-ending nightmare, Hitchcock pardonably distorts a few facts to give rise to the dramatic. In the film, Manny’s quest of proving his innocence is devastated by the removal of the three people that might provide him alibis- two are dead and one cannot be found. Vera Miles delivers a superb performance as Manny’s affectionate, stalwart, suffering wife, whose resilience snaps under the weight of mounting stress, resulting in a protracted nervous breakdown that doesn’t seem to dissolve at the end of the film, where she remains unmoved by her husband’s cheerful news.

Amongst other concerns, the harrowing tale of Manny Balestrero reveals the defect of an unquestioning social system when dealing with plausible cases of mistaken identities. Interviewed by Life of the specific things he’d learned from the experience, Manny, true to his magnanimous, expansive, amiable character, credited his family and friends of making the ordeal more bearable, and believed the detectives and witnesses to be largely blameless for the blunder. When confronting the real stick-up man in the police station, Manny stared into the man’s deep-set eyes, of which he noticed immediately a resemblance, and asked: “Do you realise what you have done to my wife?”

Yet on reflection, the callousness of those who are responsible for sending a wrong man to jail is truly the most chilling aspect of the event and the film. One of the witnesses remained impenitent and said it wasn’t her intention of wronging an innocent man, but she still thought her impulsive reaction was right. In the film, the witnesses fled in guilt when they saw Manny, and the detective, his stern expression unrelaxed, merely gave Manny a pat on the back and said, “Alright, Manny?” In the Life article, the writer wryly observed that Manny received no apology from the detectives or the witnesses, and Manny, after much thought, said he believed they would’ve acted differently if they had “a bit more conscience.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Honore Daumier

“If you shut up truth and bury it under ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way.”- Émile Zola
Exited Honoré Victorin Daumier, 10 February 1879, in an impoverishment that many of his contemporaries, especially his foes, would have thought was his long overdue retribution- the painter was blind, heavily in debt, and later relegated to a pauper’s grave. His friends, upon visiting his resting place, would, I imagine, see it a chance to admonish their children: “Now that’s a lesson for you cheeky devils whose tongues rattle off things that should better stay unspoken.” But Daumier devoted his life in revealing those “unspoken things.” His lithography ink proved sharper than most writers’ pens. He vented his rage and stigmatised others’ infamy in his satirical and, oftentimes, side-splitting cartoons. The tone was relentlessly acerbic but only because Daumier was exposing truths that, in the time…

Review: Late Spring (1949)

As a storyteller, Yasujiro Ozu insists on an implausibly objective stance that refrains from direct commentary or criticism; his camera customarily assumes the role of a detached observer, to whom the characters in the film, staring or talking straight to the camera, occasionally address, with an intimacy akin to that between a host and his guest, a closeness that is underpinned by a mutual recognition of the psychological distance that separates the two. The audience, whose perspective, in this case, conflates the camera’s (the director’s), an invisible character’s in the film (to whom the other characters address) and their own, is thus situated amidst this spatial complexity which, as a rule, every work of art necessarily creates.
In Late Spring (1948), the camera serves in part as an underlying comment to the story, which is noted by its economy of details. A prolonged shot of a departing train, on which the father and daughter travel to the city for a one-day excursion, prefigures…

Review: Breathless (1960)

Jean Luc Godard’s first feature feels oddly like a swansong: in many respects the film seems a self-mockery of what it ostensibly celebrates – the new, the bold, the reckless; the 60s zeitgeist that resurrects the anguished ghosts of the 1920s, who, according to F. Scott Fitzgerald, grow up to “find all Gods dead, all wars fought, all faith in man shaken.” For the children of the ‘60s, their wars are of a kind in which the opponents constantly change roles: sometimes they are the unmerciful authorities bent on making miserable lives out of their inferiors; in other times they are the society at large, weeding out in its insidious and devious way the errant law-breakers. They all seem to be donning the same masks, through which the warriors recognise themselves.
This fight with one’s inner demon necessarily evokes concerns of mortality and death - timeless concerns that acquire an added pungency in the 1960s: would a dangerous, unheeding spell of hedonism finally defy life’s incontrove…