zkonedog Much like "The Wrong Man", another Alfred Hitchcock gem, "I Confess" is a classic "what if?" scenario, this time involving a Catholic priest and a confession that completely changes his life.For a basic plot summary, "I Confess" sees Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift) hear the confession of murderer Otto Keller (O.E. Hasse). Sworn to secrecy by the tradition of the confessional, however, Father Logan must grapple with his devotion to the cloth when outing Otto would mean saving himself and the woman he loves.This is a simple little film (nothing grandeur or over-the-top about it), but at the same time it works very well on a number of different levels. The acting is superb (also including Anne Baxter in a key role), the plot is classic Hitchcock character-driven suspense, and the narrative keeps progressing forward in such a way that it continues to build upon itself. In other words, the pressure only continues to mount on Logan as each new development in the murder case comes to light.Overall, "I Confess" is a solid Hitch effort that, while maybe not in "Top Ten" status for the famous director, is most certainly worth a viewing for the emotional characters and progressive drama.

estherand First, I feel the need to verbalize that the flashback sequence in this film that illustrates Anne Baxter's testimony is incredibly haunting and one of the most memorable little bits of cinema, in my biased eyes. At first sight, I was in love.In fact, much of the film has the same understated and tragic tone. It is not an outwardly suspenseful film, as many have noted. It relies on expressive lighting (that seems to borrow from European films of the time), solid performances by Baxter and Malden, and a romantic, emotional core. Clift as the center of the film can be a bit underwhelming at times, but his work is believable and never distracting.Just because this film deviates from what is stereo-typically Hitchcock does not mean it should continue to be overlooked. It was a bit of a flop at the time of its release, and had plenty of strife connected to both the director and lead, but to me, that hardly shows. Its an unusual, visceral gem of a film that deserves a second look.

Charles Herold (cherold) While I heard this wasn't great Hitchcock, it begins quite nicely with a look that at times is reminiscent of German Expressionism and at other times of Neo-realism. The set up is nice and the murderer is squirmingly unlikable. Outside of Dimitri Tiomkin's horribly bombastic score, it seemed promising.I'd say for maybe a half hour it's a decent movie, as you see Montgomery Clift if conflict and see Karl Malden getting suspicious. Unfortunately the movie starts lagging, and then, when you think it won't be great but might be okay, it gets really, really bad. First off there's Anne Baxter's *endless* deposition, a dull mix of voice-over and bland snippets that should have taken about 2 minutes but instead goes on for what seemed to be 15. That was bad, as was the unrealistic gusto with which the police chased very slim evidence. But the movie achieved ultimate levels of absurdity in the last couple of scenes, in which a character's actions come out of nowhere, a plot thread just kind of peters out without resolution, and no one does anything that makes much sense at all, although it does wrap things up in a neat, though very ugly, bow.I find it incredible that people here are reviewing this favorably. I feel they all need to have seen the movie without knowing it was by Hitchcock, because I can't help but think that they are giving it a pass because of the director.

SnoopyStyle In Quebec City, Father Michael Logan (Montgomery Clift) finds a guilt-ridden Otto Keller in his church. Otto confesses that he killed Villette at whom he works as a gardener. He was trying to steal money to start a new life with his wife Alma. Witnesses tell Inspector Larrue (Karl Malden) that a priest was seen at Villette's at the time based on the outfit. Logan is brought in but he refuses to cooperate. Larrue suspects Logan. Ruth Grandfort (Anne Baxter) overhears it and warns Logan. He was her great love back before the war and still is. Villette had seen the lovers stranded on an island and recently tried to blackmail Ruth. Villette needed Ruth's husband who is a leading political figure to get him out of tax problems. A case starts to be formed but the confessional keeps Logan from pointing a finger at the real killer.This is a slightly different Hitchcock movie. It's not a whodunnit. The movie shows you the killer right away. I do wish that Montgomery Clift could or be allowed to emote more. He is quietly suffering throughout. He gets to put his face in his hands to show even greater suffering. The Quebec City locations provide some good backdrop. It doesn't draw the same tension but it's still well made Hitchcock.