Really Surprised!

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

WELL NOW, HERE'S one for the books ! It seems that some particular, optherwise very conscientious writer really stepped on it ! The scribe in question (me), has failed to write his impressions of this John Huston production of THE MALTESE FALCON (Warner Brothers, 1941). IN ONE SENSE, this would be an easy error to commit; being that it is one of those "essentials", as they are called on Turner Classic Movies. We've truly screened it probably about 5 score times (that's a hundred, Schultz!). This celluloid mortal sin is compounded by the fact that our association with IMDb.com dates back to 2001. OH WELL, PLEASE accept our sincere Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpas ! Now let's move on and rectify the situation.WHAT MORE COULD be said about this Classic ? It ranks right up there with such Bogart standards as CASABLANCA, THE TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE, DEAD END and HIGH SIERRA. once this movie hit the theatres, there was a new standard set for the Detective Story.MUCH LIKE SO many Warner Brothers production of the period, this FALCON wastes little screen time. The story telling is taut, but not at all lacking. Director and co-screen writer, Mr John Huston, worked very well with the film editing department, possibly doing his job just a little too well. The editor most likely had a lot less to do than was the norm.AS FOR THE selection of the actors and actresses who would bring it all to life on the silver screen, everyone pitched in and worked as a sort of rep-oratory company. In addition To costars Bogie and Mary Astor, we had Peter Lorre (newcomer to Warners), Gladys George, Barton MacLane, Lee Patrick, Ward Bond, Jerome Cowan,Elisha Cook, Jr.,James Burke, Murray Alper and John Hamilton. These were all folks who were regulars around Warner Brothers, contract players. The cast also contained a couple of others, who could only be called "Gems" and inspired bits of genius. FIRST OF ALL, we had an unbilled, uncredited appearance by a veteran as Captain Jacoby, skipper of the ill fated steamship, La Paloma. It was Walter Huston, veteran and Father of writer-director John Huston. (This is an appearance that many otherwise astute film buffs remain unaware of.THE CROWNING GLORY and ultimate find was the casting of 63 year old Sydney Greenstreet in hi first film. Adding to his outstanding talent, tyhe production team made the fully figured Mr. Greenstreet appear even heavier and more portly. This was accomplished by specially tailoring his costuming and with the use of low angle camera shots done by the cinematographers.THE STUDIO HAD considered casting Edward Arnold in the role; but Studio Head Honcho, Mr. Jack Warner, saw Mr. Greenstreet in a stage play in the Los Angeles area and the rest is history. IN PARTING OF this most unusual and long overdue review, let us just say from the bottom of our hearts, "THANKS, JACK !"

Copyright and released 18 October 1941 by Warner Brothers Pictures. New York opening at the Strand: 3 October 1941. Australian release: 5 November 1942 (sic). 9,030 feet. 100 minutes. (Warner DVD is a 10/10).COMMENT: Although both film versions received rave reviews in The New York Times, only the Del Ruth version could be counted as a box- office success on its first release. The Huston film was lucky to earn back its comparatively high negative cost of $381,000. Warner's big successes of 1941-42 were Sergeant York, which returned a colossal $6.1 million in gross domestic rentals, and Yankee Doodle Dandy with $4.8 million. The Man Who Came to Dinner, King's Row, Captains of the Clouds, In This Our Life, The Bride Came C.O.D., Dive Bomber, The Sea Wolf and The Strawberry Blonde were also enormous, multi-million dollar box-office winners for the studio.The Maltese Falcon didn't figure at all and would be forgotten today were it not for the cult status of Humphrey Bogart and — to a lesser degree — John Huston. All the same, it comes a surprise to find that among film lovers, sixty times more people have seen this version than have enjoyed the original, even though both films are equally entertaining. While few would contend that Digges, Mattiesen and Frye outclass Greenstreet, Lorre and Cook, the decision is close. On the other hand, as for Long versus Cowan, Merkel v. Patrick, Todd v. George, and Elliott v. MacLane, the winners are plainly Del Ruth's. Yet Bond is certainly more forceful than MacDonald, and Walter Huston has it all over Borgato, simply because he has dialogue. So we come down to the principals. Which set you prefer here is simply a matter of taste. I prefer the Cortez-Daniels combination. The 1931 movie still has a gripping noir atmosphere despite the fact that Cortez's impeccably suave, super-pleased with himself, egotistical private eye runs somewhat against type. There is no self-agonizing here. The Cortez character is solely concerned with looking out for number one. The ruthless heroine is also far more stridently hard-boiled, whereas Mary Astor turns her into a lady- like, high society type. As for directorial finesse and production values, the Huston movie is definitely the winner. All the same, despite his smaller budget, Del Ruth gives Huston a good run for his money.

The film has a strong and great script. Sam Spade's character is written so well showing how he is clever, greedy, bold, and a good talker. The performers were perfect especially (Mary Astor) as (Brigid O'Shaughnessy) and (Peter Lorre) as (Joel Cairo). Of course i didn't mention (Humphrey Bogart) with them because i can't find the right words to describe his performance, but the way he talked in the movie was brilliant. The direction was good. The narrative was unbelievable There were nice clothes and suitable decor for a private detective's office The Soundtrack was very appropriate for a noir film. it was an interesting movie that i didn't want to end10/10

Finally, finally, finally got a chance to watch this after it being on my watch-list for like forever. It is one of those classic films that most people know of but never get to watch. But yeah, AMC had it on and gave me a chance to watch it. It was okay. Classic noir film. It isn't the best noir I have ever seen but it is okay. The acting is frankly lacking, from pretty much everyone except Humphrey Bogart. So yeah, the film with such an iconic title and etc is a bit disappointing. It may just be a little too dated which shouldn't make much of a difference if the film was a better experience with a cleaner flowing story, better acting, set design and etc, etc. Ultimately the movie is a letdown. 6.5 out of 10.