terrible... so disappointed.

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

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Hammer studios are, of course, best known for their horror films; but early on in the studio's history, there were a number of noir style films produced; and while this is one of the later efforts, it's surely one of the best! The film is clearly intended to mimic the American film noir being produced en mass during the fifties; although the film does retain an aura of Britishness which is achieved through the locations and strong accents of most of the lead characters. The film is suitably dark, though not as dark as many of its American counterparts. The plot focuses on a criminal that has escaped from jail after committing a robbery that went wrong. Inspector Harry Martineau, who happened to have gone to school with the criminal, guesses that he will return home to Manchester in order to pick up his share from the job. The criminal does return to Manchester and ends up with the inspector on his tail as he moves through the underworld, trying to find a place to hide.Writer-director Val Guest (who previously directed a handful of Hammer's earliest horror films) spins an interesting story that remains intriguing throughout. The dialogue is surprisingly witty at times, and the characters are 'cool' enough to rival the films that this one is trying to imitate. There's more to the plot than just what is immediately going on, and the inspector's personal life is one of the main sub-plots. This thread is somewhat well expanded; although it has to be said that some other areas of the plot do not go as far as they could; although at only ninety minutes, there was obviously only so much that could be squeezed in. The film moves forward well, although at times it is a little silly; a plot that hinges on the idea of nobody looking at their hands is somewhat far fetched. The cast is strong, with Stanley Baker and John Crawford taking the lead roles and doing well with them; there's also a small appearance for the great Donald Pleasance. Overall, Hell is a City is an excellent British noir, and well worth a look.

I watched Hell is a City on DVD again the other day and was struck by how fresh and undated the story and acting still appears. It was a breakout Brit film for 1959/60- with its semi-documentary approach to police procedure,meshed with a tough on women approach and attempt to show relationships that don't have happy endings. On the DVD there is an alternate ending shown, which the director Val Guest claims to have no knowledge of at all! It's much weaker i think than Guest's own choice of ending. Stanley Baker is excellent; successfully showing all dimensions to an Inspector's working/personal life; Billie Whitelaw got nominated that year with the BAA for in the Newcomer category and deservedly so. All the support cast flesh out their characters' quirks very well. Actual location shooting (in this case-Manchester) was still quite unusual and there is a world of difference between this and a studio based crime thriller of maybe 10 years before.

This is a wonderful example of how worldly some british films can seem, while maintaining their local flavor. I believe that this film is very appropriately set in Manchester, anyone having been to Manchester will tell you its quite a tough place.50s British entertainment was heavily influenced by Hollywood and continued to be influenced especially on TV until the late 70s, when things all started to get a bit colorless. This movie was made in a time when entertainment came first and the needs of the audience and hence a box office return, came before the politically correct requirements of the day. Having said that I have to say I'm VERY glad that you don't see many characters quite as sorry as Martineau's repressed housebound wife these days!For those who are not familiar with director Val Guest - check out his other movies. He was a director who knew exactly what he was doing.

Inspector Harry Martineau is a hard-edged police man in gritty Manchester. When a major criminal, Don Stirling, escapes from jail by killing a guard Martineau makes it his person responsibility to hunt him down. Stirling gets his old gang together to steal £4000 from wealthy businessman Gus. However the theft goes wrong and a young girl is killed and the money begins to leave behind a trail that will lead to the gang.This desperately wants to be an English 1950's American style film noir. It has the gritty urban title, it has a moody lead actor with an iffy moral code, a pumping jazz soundtrack and is surprisingly tough. It isn't completely successful because of one main problem - it's in England. In Manchester. It's tough even for someone who lives here to take it as seriously as the Bogart-esque equivalents. It's an unfair criticism perhaps but it is off-putting to hear the thick Yorkshire accents in the setting of an urban crime drama.There is quite a lot to like here. The plot is interesting with gritty levels, the whole idea of the money being dyed and staining hands is a good concept and only seems stretched occasionally and is actually a very effective way of leaving a money trail. The jazz score does give the film a real feel of a urban crime zone, but at times it feels a bit out of place with some of the scenes.The 2 lead performances are mixed in their roles. Stanley Baker is good as Martineau mixing the role with a bad guy edge by being distant from his wife etc, but he isn't as convincing as his American equivalents. You never are totally convinced that he is anything but a good guy, with his only real faults being his commitment to work over his wife. John Crawford is better as Stirling who benefits from not having an English accent. He plays the violent, cruel criminal well and is totally convincing. It's also good to see Donald Pleasance in a small role as Gus, but his accent is frighteningly thick.The film is surprisingly tough. I assumed that this would be a lesser film because it's British but this has quite strong language (although not by today's standards) and is very violent considering when it was made. There is quite a bit of violence towards women all of which gives the film a much more believable very tough edge that adds to it's credentials as a crime thriller.Overall a strong attempt to make a British film noir. It loses something with Baker being too clean-cut in his role and the Manchester setting and accents are hard to line up mentally with the action. But hey - it's pretty good.