Three Strangers (1946) User Reviews (50)

engrossing fare

[blanche-2 · 9/10 · 29 June 2005]

"Three Strangers" has long been a favorite film of mine, with its fascinating reference to the statue of the goddess Kwan Yin, who, in Chinese legend, opens her eyes and grants a wish to three strangers on the Chinese New Year. Geraldine Fitzgerald, Sydney Greenstreet, and Peter Lorre are the above-mentioned strangers, each with an agenda that can be easily pursued by money. So the wish is that their sweepstakes ticket win, and the agreement is that it then be entered into the horse race that follows.

Geraldine Fitzgerald's character seems sympathetic, but she reveals herself as quite obsessive and delusional as the film progresses. Greenstreet plays a crooked solicitor, and Lorre portrays a small time criminal - he's the most sympathetic character and, to my mind, gives the most memorable performance.

The film asks the question - did the meeting of the three strangers change their lives, or did events proceed as they would have? This is an unusual, absorbing, and entertaining film. I highly recommend it.

One of the oddest and most fascinating movies of the 1940s

[cherold · 8/10 · 19 December 2009]

Three Strangers is not a typical Hollywood film. Dark and philosophical, it introduces the viewer to three people, strangers to one another, and then follows their sad, desperate lives. While one reviewer on this site says it's a shame they don't make movies like this anymore, the fact is, they almost never made movies like this back then. This is far less neat and more philosophical than your typical 40s flick, a movie about strange twists of fate and the ways in which people fail to take responsibility for their actions.

The cast is excellent, with Peter Lorre particularly impressive in one of the best performances of his career as an alcoholic who thinks too much and does too little. I was also quite taken by Joan Lorring's touchingly vulnerable performance as a girl in with the wrong crowd.

Admittedly the ending ties things up in a neat little bow, yet for the most part this movie is far closer in spirit to the indie movies of the 1990s than to the film noirs of the 1940s it could be mistaken for.

In The Hope Of Fortune Coming Their Way

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 16 January 2009]

The time is 1938 London before the World War. A woman of mystery, Geraldine Fitzgerald, invites two perfect strangers played by Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet up to her apartment. She's a believer in the ancient Chinese god of Kwan Lin and it's said that if Three Strangers wish on that deity and their's is the same wish it will be granted. In this case the wish is money and it's in the form of a sweepstakes ticket that Peter Lorre has purchased and who gives two thirds away to Fitzgerald and Greenstreet in the hope of fortune coming their way.

After this we see a glimpse of the lives of the three people. Lorre is a petty criminal who's gotten himself into a beautiful jackpot being accused of a murder that he didn't commit. Fitzgerald is a shrewish wife who stays married to an unhappy Alan Napier who just wants to be free to marry Marjorie Riordan. This is a harbinger of a role that Fitzgerald really perfected a dozen years later in Ten North Frederick. As for Greenstreet, he's a solicitor, an attorney of no great significance in the legal profession, an English version of a man whose name I was once threatened with named Abe Hecht. It's now become a synonym for cheap shysters with me. Anyway Greenstreet's the trustee of an estate he's been dipping into. He wants to make a financial killing real bad because he thinks that money will buy him respectability which he craves like nothing else.

The film is like a 90 minute version of a Twilight Zone episode, but that's not a putdown because some really classic stuff was done on that program. The script was written by Howard Koch and John Huston and directed by Jean Negulesco. I'm surprised Huston did not want to direct this one himself, but Jean Negulesco got some of the best performances that members of the cast ever gave on screen, especially from the three leads.

Notice no really big movie names are in this cast, no leading men screen legends. That may have been an asset to the film because it concentrates on the story and the characters created. The ironic fates of all three of the sweepstakes ticket sharers could have come right out of the imaginative mind of Rod Serling. And Peter Lorre is actually allowed a little romance in a movie. That alone makes Three Strangers absolutely priceless.

Three Strangers is a B picture gem, one of those low budget sleepers that Hollywood puts out to great critical acclaim that turn a profit because of the low budget. And this review is dedicated to that attorney Abe Hecht whom I never met and to his idiot brother-in-law Morris Stetch who threatened me with him back in 1979. To see if Greenstreet obtains the status of a Clarence Darrow and rises from Abe Hechtdom, don't miss Three Strangers.

Quality movie.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 8/10 · 16 October 2007]

This is one fine made movie. It has a greatly written script and a top-notch cast. It sounds like a cliché of course but it's a real shame that movies like these aren't being made and written anymore. At least not on such a commercially large scale and with such fine big name actors in it. Movies like this aren't made anymore simply because movies like this don't really sell, unless they are being made exceptionally good. It's not really a film-noir, although the movie certainly shows similarities to the atmosphere and the story also shows noir tendencies. The movie in the end is perhaps a bit too 'light' to consider it a real film-noir, also because it features quite an amount of subtle black comedy. The story is solidly constructed and focuses on three different characters and plot-lines that of course are all still connected to each other. The fine script was written by Hollywood legend John Huston. It features lots of deeper themes such as greed and jealousy. You really start to care about the characters and their problems. Something that isn't too common for a '40's genre movie. It's not always an easy movie to watch and follow so make sure you watch this movie with a clear head. The dialog might be a bit overlong by todays standards but its so fine written and delivered by the actors that you tend to look past this. The movie gets really carried by the three main characters, that equally share the screen time. I was especially impressed by Sydney Greenstreet, which also might due to the fact that he had the best- or at least most credible plot line. Peter Lorre also played a great role and gave a fine performance. Geraldine Fitzgerald was definitely the least of the three actors and she tended to overact a bit in some of the dramatic sequences. But overall her role was also really a solid one and it says something about the quality of the acting from Lorre and Greenstreet to say that Fitzgerald gave the lesser performance of the movie. Alan Napier also plays a small role. Oh man, it really seems to be that this guy is in about every 'old' movie that I watch lately. Napier received his most fame for playing the butler Alfred in the Adam West "Batman" series from the '60's. The editing of the movie was also surprisingly good and fast. Instead of long single camera sequences, the movie cuts back and forth between different camera positions in the same sequence rapidly. It gives the story speed and helps to keep you interest even during the more slow and dull moments of the movie. The fine little musical score was from acclaimed composer Adolph Deutsch, whose music suited this movie and its atmosphere really well. It's a fine good old fashioned quality movie, made with limited resources but with fine experts involved. 8/10

Tortuous Story of Three Miscreants.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 6 May 2009]

Geraldine Fitzgerald recruits two strangers -- Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet -- from the foggy streets of Victorian London and asks them to her flat. She asks them to chip in for a sweepstakes ticket and sign a document that they are equal contributors and none will sell his third of the payoff to anyone else. Maybe I should explain because this confused me. The sweepstakes isn't a random drawing of a number. It's horse race. The favorite horse is announced just before the race, so suddenly anyone who happens to own a ticket with the name of the favorite on it -- in this case "Corn Cracker" -- finds himself with a bird in the hand. He can sell his ticket (or his share in the ticket) to someone else at a higher price than what he paid. But the document with three signatures forbids this. So we already know this is a set up for later conflict.

As a matter of fact, the three signators are all up to illegal or unethical doings. Geraldine Fitzgerald is a wife whose impulsiveness has alienated her husband, a Member of Parliament who is now in love and in bed with a Canadian woman. A scandal would be calamitous to his career. She squeals on him out of spite.

The bibulous Peter Lorre has been involved in a stick up in which a bobby was killed by his partner. He barely escapes hanging.

Greenstreet, a Mount Everest of blubber, has been embezzling funds from the trust fund of one of his agreeable but ditzy elderly female clients. When she insists on an imediate audit just before the race, Greenstreet becomes desperate and needs to sell his share of the ticket in order to make up the loss. He rushes to Fitzgerald's flat where he finds her and Lorre. Conflict ensues.

All the way through, I wondered how the screenwriter, John Huston, was going to pull these three disparate narrative threads together because, after that first adventitious meeting, they never meet again until the resolution.

Well, he does a pretty good job, and the director, Jean Negulesco, doesn't let the script down. Both the writer and director add something to what otherwise might have been a pedestrian story of suspense and murder and intrigue. The sets help too. Who can not be enthralled by the foggy streets of London where each shadow might hide a mysterious figure -- perhaps with a RAZOR? I kind of like it, especially the mountainous Sydney Greenstreet with his quivering lips and darting eyes. Great heavy.

Interesting for unusual reasons

[JuguAbraham · 7/10 · 7 November 2004]

One of the most unusual facets of the movie that struck me was the gowns/dresses designed for the lead actress--they stood out in this black and white movie making a not-so-tall Geraldine Fitzgerald look tall and elegant. Very few films have costume designs that out-do the performances--this film is one that achieves this unusual distinction.

Equally unusual was the written prologue for the film on the statue. It wreaked of populist myths of the Orient and then ended with the statement that the film's location was London. One expected British mannerisms and accents and its distinctive transport--but the only reasons for the choice of the locations seemed to be the legal system, the law on Trusts, the pubs, the mention of Canada being far away, the South African mines, and the solicitor's office. The rest was distinctly American. Curious stuff.

The film was equally curious for another factor: two women Icey and Janet look disturbingly similar, two men look considerably alike Mr Shackleford and Mr Fallon, save for their difference in height. Was there some reason for this or was this a coincidence.

Apart from these details, the film provided much of the fare that "The Maltese Falcon" made cinema history--John Huston's screenplay and the enigmatic performances of Greenstreet and Lorre. Greenstreet did not have the brilliant lines of "Falcon" to aid him but his chortling performance is nevertheless fascinating. Lorre on the other hand provides the best performance because the grey cocktail of good and bad touches the viewer. Similarly the lead character of Fitzgerald leaves the viewer wondering whether the character deserves our sympathy or not.

At the end, the viewer is forced to see ourselves in the mirror--we are but pawns of a mightier force, and none of us is either a villain or a saint. The film quite unwittingly makes the viewer think about life. That is probably why this film ought to rate better than "The Maltese Falcon" which no doubt has more catchy dialogues but less substance.

Well worth getting acquainted with

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 26 April 2019]

A John Huston-penned script. Direction by Jean Negulesco. With the right execution the story had real potential to be fantastic. My love for classic film and black and white. A cast that includes Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre. Five great reasons to check out 'Three Strangers', and any film really. Just one of those points would be reason enough to watch.

Found myself thoroughly enjoying 'Three Strangers', actually very close to being one of my better recent film viewings which have mostly ranged from watchable to outstanding with some clunkers along the way, and it is well worth getting acquainted with rather than shafted to one side and forgotten. Also do think it is deserving of being known more, while not one of the all-time great films or one of the best from that decade (some of the best decades for film so that is a tough feat) this is the sort of film that films that have relatively similar concepts or structures today can learn from.

To me, if offering any criticisms (always try to look for things that could have been better in decent to brilliant film in order to be balanced), Geraldine Fitzgerald occasionally came over as melodramatic.

Did feel as well that the ending was a touch too neat.

On the other hand, 'Three Strangers' is a very well made film. Fitzgerald's eye-catching costumes are like characters of their own, the sets and lighting have a lot of atmosphere and the photography is both moody and dream-like. The music is a good fit in how it is placed and is both haunting and characterful. Negulesco's direction is richly focused and tightly paced, not allowing the momentum to dip and let the suspense shine and shine it does.

'Three Strangers' script is distinctive/characteristic John Huston, taut and intelligent but it's the bold style of writing that makes it stand out that one didn't see an awful lot at that time. The story is compelling and had no trouble following it, actually thought the story-lines did gel with Lorre's being the most interesting. The deeper themes incorporated allowed for a good amount of tension and suspense and didn't feel underdeveloped. The characters carry the film beautifully, especially Lorre.

While having some reservations about Fitzgerald, she is also at other parts suitably luminous and mysterious. Greenstreet is characteristically imperious and an affecting Joan Lorring is particularly good in the solid support, but the acting honours go to Lorre, who is shifty and has a ball with his role while also being unusually sympathetic.

In conclusion, very good and under-valued film. 8/10

It doesn't make a lot of sense and it's overly sensational...but it is also entertaining.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 25 May 2009]

This is a "turn off your brain and enjoy" film. In other words, if you think through how silly the plot is, you'll most likely grow tired of the film and fail to see it to the end. However, if you can suppress that urge, then you might just find the whole thing quite enjoyable.

The film begins with Geraldine Fitzgerald finding two strangers (Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre) and convincing them to come to her apartment (it's not THAT kind of film--relax). There, she tells them a strange tale that some Chinese goddess can grant wishes if three strangers all simultaneously wish for the exact same thing at the stroke of midnight (yeah, right). They all decide to wish for a winning sweepstakes ticket. In the meantime, they'll write up an agreement to share the proceeds equally. Then, after that's concluded, they all say a silent prayer to the goddess at midnight.

Upon leaving, the film then shows the lives of all three characters--all of which turn out to be very screwed up indeed. Fitzgerald turns out to be a vindictive Borderline Personality who delights in making her estranged husband miserable. You assume that sooner or later he would kill her because her actions are so pointless and mean. Peter Lorre is hiding out with another man, as they are implicated for murder. However, Lorre DIDN'T commit the crime--he's just an alcoholic who was with the wrong people at the wrong time. Finally, Greenstreet is a supposedly reputable solicitor (sort of like a lawyer who does not do criminal law, for those other Americans out there). However, he's really begun playing in the stock markets with his client's trust fund and throughout the film this problem gets worse and worse.

Actually, all three of the stories are quite compelling and I really wish the film had found some other way to string them all together other than the silly goddess plot device. I also liked how all three characters came back together at the end of the tale. But the whole wishing on a Buddhist statue at midnight angle just made my head hurt. With a bit of a re-write this could have been an exceptional film. As it is, it's goofy and strange but quite intriguing if you can slog through the silly stuff.

The Twists and Turns of Luck and Strangers

[theowinthrop · 28 August 2004]

Geraldine Fitzgerald believes in the Chinese God of Luck and Fortune. She goes out one night, and picks up Sidney Greenstreet. He follows her very easily (apparently believing her a prostitute, but why not), and they return to her apartment, where Greenstreet is surprised to find Peter Lorre there, having a drink. Lorre had been chosen earlier, and been waiting for his hostess to return. Fitzgerald explains to her two partners that if they work together the God of Luck will reward them. The Grand National is about to take place (this is 1938) and there is a lottery for a possible "winning" ticket. All three agree to join together in the purchase of a lottery ticket (but only one of them can have his or her name on the ticket - they agree to allow Ms Fitzgerald to have her name on the ticket). However, they have a written agreement to jointly share the results (if any) of the ticket. Oh...one condition - they can't allow any of the three to leave the agreement, or the chain binding their luck together will collapse.

It is a pip of a movie - not only the best of the Greenstreet and Lorre films (without Humphrey Bogart), but the best performance in the carreer of Geraldine Fitzgerald. Her Chrystal Shackleford is one of the least likeable or sympathetic women in the movies. She is having problems with her husband (Alan Napier). He is tired of her vicious nature and nymphomania (she burns his hand with a cigarette butt at one point). He's met Marjorie Riordan, and wants to divorce Fitzgerald and marry her. Fitzgerald breaks up his romance with Riordan by lying about Napier. She also is willing to allow Lorre to go to the gallows (when his luck seems going down the tubes), chortling in unholy glee with Greenstreet. And when Greenstreet tries to convince her to sell the race ticket they now own (Greenstreet desperately needs the money), she laughingly kicks him out of her apartment. When she does get her just desert in the conclusion, one can't sympathize with her.

Greenstreet's Jerome K. Arbutny, a solicitor who is too greedy for his own good, is as larcenous and dangerous as Casper Gutman or Titus Semple. It is amazing that an actor who was a brilliant comic performer on Broadway left such a long train of excellent performances as villains, but that is how it frequently happens. Like Chrystal, Arbutny brings about his own problems - he is convinced that he can make money on dubious stock deals, although he is aware of the laws about violating estate trusts (which a solicitor handles). Two of the best scenes in the film show him trying to solve his money troubles by marrying the dotty Lady Rhea Bellodon (Rosalind Ivan, in a marvelous cameo performance), and then (when this engagement collapses) his attempt to commit suicide carefully in his office. The former sequence is carefully built up, for the audience is kept from knowing one secret - that Lady Rhea is a believer in spiritualism, and always asks the "spirit" of her husband to advise her. When Arbutny offers his hand in marriage, Lady Rhea explains she has to ask her husband - the audience has not heard she is a widow yet, but we wonder how Arbutny could ask for her hand if her husband is still around. Then Arbutny hears Lady Rhea's request, but does not look startled. Indeed he takes it very seriously. Then we realize that the advise will be through Lady Rhea's favorite medium. [To cap it off, the medium or Lord Belladon suggests that Lady Rhea check the books of Arbutny's firm first - something that does shake up Arbutny!] As for the suicide attempt, Arbutny first gives his two clerks the day off (in an earlier scene he was yelling at them for being fools), then he writes a letter of apology to Lady Rhea, and starts moving his office furniture . He spreads out a newspaper on the carpet to prevent his bleeding on it when the bullet enters his head. As he leans forward in his stuffed chair to fall forward he starts. The favorite for the Grand National is Corncracker, the horse on the ticket that he owns one third of. All thoughts of suicide pass out of his mind. Perhaps, as things turn out, it would have been better if he had committed suicide.

Lorre's character, Johnny, is a ne'er-do-well, of good family but he's living under a pseudonym, and he works in a gang. He and a man named Bertam Fallon (and a third man (Peter Whitney) - a good guy who does not like Fallon) were involved in a robbery, and a policeman was killed. He is alone in court, only supported by Icey (Joan Loring) his girl friend [Fallon had his eye on her too, which is why Whitney suspects Fallon's plans for the robbery - that he may be setting Lorre up.] The prosecutor (Arthur Shields, in one of his good performances again) rips apart Fallon's defense (he set up a fake alibi). Fallon makes a deal to save himself at Lorre's expense, and Lorre is sentenced to death, while Fallon will get a prison sentence. Earlier we saw Lorre signal Loring and Whitney not to come forward, when the police had arrested him. Our sympathies remain with Lorre. So when Whitney turns avenger, and throws a knife into Fallon (despite Fallon's police escort), we cheer on the doomed avenger. Lorre is cleared by the dying man, and released...in time to learn that Corncracker is the favorite in the race. He heads for Chrystal's apartment and the denoument of this tragic comedy.

Who are the three strangers? Usually Fitzgerald, Lorre, and Greenstreet are considered the strangers, whose weird fates are at the center of the film's twists and turns. But if one studies the film everyones fortunes go up and down. Alan Napier is looking forward to getting rid of this incubus wife of his with Riordan. He confronts and tells off Chrystal, and gets injured as a result. Then Riordan is convinced to break up with Napier (they were planning to leave on their honeymoon on a Belladon liner, tying their part of this fictional world with Arbutny's). At the end, Napier heads for a final confrontation (possibly a deadly one) with Fitzgerald, only to find someone has beaten him to it (his slight look of satisfaction when he finds this out is a minor treasure). Rosalind Ivans nuttiness seems pathetic to the audience, until the audience sees how it enables her to be protected for her own benefit. The two clerks of Greenstreet are treated like dirt and called fools, but they get a day off and he is the real fool. Fallon, the head of the gang, hires a barrister and pays for an alibi of sorts, only to watch his perjured witness torn apart by Arthur Shields. He is forced to make a cowardly deal (at Lorre's expense) to save his own life. Only he is universally despised now (even his guard dislikes him), and within seconds his life is taken by an avenging former gang member. Peter Witney was at large (thanks to Lorre's sacrifice), but avenges Lorre by killing Fallon. As a result (in a moving moment) Lorre and Loring see Witney in police custody, realizing he's doomed now for killing Fallon. If anything, the film may concentrate on Fitzgerald, Greenstreet, and Lorre, but fate is universal, and all of us get affected one way or another (by nature and each other). The most blessed ones among us just don't know our future, nor (if they are wise) seek to know it or totally control it.

Triple Threat

[Ron Oliver · 10/10 · 23 September 2004]

THREE STRANGERS stake their future fortunes on the whims of Kwan Yin, an ancient Chinese goddess.

The original story behind this tidy little thriller was originally conceived by John Huston as a sequel to THE MALTESE FALCON (1941). That not proving possible, it was shaped into its present form with help from the writer Howard Koch and turned over to the noted director Jean Negulesco.

The film stars Sydney Greenstreet & Peter Lorre in one of their several pairings. Greenstreet, huge and implacable, plays a desperately duplicitous solicitor. Spooky-eyed Lorre, who gets to play a rare romantic role, is a petty criminal on the lam from the police. Their actual screen time together is sparse, but they make the most of it--the nervous little fellow playing perfectly off of the rumbling fat man. Greenstreet, especially, overacts magnificently, descending into melancholia and, eventually, madness, to the delight of the viewer.

Geraldine Fitzgerald is pure vixen as the third member of the trio, a woman so consumed by jealousy, and obsessed with the supposed powers of the goddess Kwan Yin, that she has ceased being influenced by natural love & affection. Every man's nightmare, she is unadulterated malice.

The supporting cast includes the sprightly Joan Lorring as Lorre's loyal girlfriend; Alan Napier as Fitzgerald's estranged husband; Rosalind Ivan as a widowed dowager still in communication with her deceased husband; Arthur Shields as a stern prosecutor; and the always competent Doris Lloyd as Lorre's slovenly landlady.

Movie mavens will recognize an unbilled Ian Wolfe as a London barrister.

Another dusky Huston jewel....

[walzking1 · 7/10 · 8 October 2004]

It was over 20 years ago that I first encountered this small cinematic treasure, on the now-defunct indie KHJ-TV, channel 9 in Los Angeles, but it was not at all by accident. Having been enthralled by the magic that is "Casablanca" some years before, I had been seeking out other films like it made by Warner Bros. in the late 30s, 40s and early 50s. Specifically I was after more work by that classic's storied supporting cast: Paul Henried, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Claude Rains, S.Z. Sakall and Joy Page, among others.

"Three Strangers" gathers two of those and weaves them into a unexpectedly amoral tale of the cost of reversing fortune. Lorre plays a fallen gentleman who fallen into a bottle and thus into some dicey company, while Greenstreet plays a solicitor who's been a tad too speculative with his trust accounts. The underregarded Geraldine Fitzgerald joins them as the mysterious woman who randomly gathers the other two off a London street to see if they'll take a chance on an ancient Chinese proverb coming true.

"Three Strangers" if anything goes "Casablanca" and that other Huston/Lorre/Greenstreet classic, "The Maltese Falcon," one better in the world-weariness department, with moral ambiguities and ambivalent characters straight out of films noir made five years later. Unlike those other two films, though, there's little likability to be found in the lead characters' roguishness --- save perhaps for Lorre, who gets redeemed by a "good" woman's love at the end.

Yet that very fact makes "Three Strangers" play out like a much more modern film (like one from the early 1970s, say), rendering it an intriguing admixture of old-style character-driven plotting and contemporary moral waywardness and antiheroism.

"We are but strangers on this moving globe; it's not for us to tarry long."

[jzappa · 9/10 · 21 April 2010]

With its low-key black and white cinematography, hard-boiled characters of profound weakness and an almost cheerfully subversive story, Jean Negulesco's Three Strangers is undiluted nostalgia of an urbane and cunning variety. Never so far away from rationality that it is an altogether unique yet unmistakably theatrical parable, it makes a shadowy and alluring potboiler, reaching some moments of pure magnetism in a handful of its crucial sequences.

The script by John Huston and his friend Howard Koch is masterful in structure. The film begins in the shadows and fog of the London streets as Geraldine Fitzgerald coaxes two strangers, Sydney Greenstreet's caricatured attorney Jerome K. Arbutney and Peter Lorre's charismatic and cultivated alcoholic Johnny West to her London pad on Chinese New Year at the hand of her doctrine that if three strangers make the same wish to an idol of the Chinese goddess of fortune and destiny, the wish will be fulfilled. Because money will make their dreams come true, the three gamble on a sweepstakes ticket for the Grand National horse race together and concur that they will not sell the ticket if it is selected, and will hold onto it until the race is run. Fitzgerald would use the money to attempt to win her alienated husband back, Arbutny to lay the groundwork for his appointment to the esteemed Barrister's Club, and Johnny to purchase a bar as his home.

After this single, taut, spare and graceful expository dialogue scene, the plot strands of the three strangers are unraveled, demystifying who we began to believe they were in the initial scene. Greenstreet insatiably and uproariously overplays as Arbutney, who we learn has looted a trust fund. Lorre is seamlessly graceful as the drunk who becomes enmeshed in a murder of which he's not guilty, while Fitzgerald is astonishing as a manipulative and truly unpredictable woman, a femme fatale of the highest caliber.

Undeservedly obscure and overlooked, Three Strangers is about the human desire to look to gods and idols to resolve our problems, only to be driven into worse new ones. Mostly owing to the performances and the cynical manipulation of the noir plot, the film resolves as kind of a black comedy. It is an admirable and deftly executed variation on the hopeless and acerbic atmosphere of the film noir. In noir, characters are corrupt fall guys of the universe, brimming with existential distress, just like us all. Why not find a chuckle or two in it?

strong opening

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 21 November 2021]

Crystal Shackleford (Geraldine Fitzgerald) invites two strangers, Jerome K. Arbutny (Sydney Greenstreet) and Johnny West (Peter Lorre), to her apartment on the night of Chinese New Year in 1938. She has an idol of Kwan Yin and tells them that it would grant them a wish to three people who are strangers to each other. They decide to share a sweepstakes ticket.

This is a very strong opening. It drives a hook right into the audience but the hook slowly slips out. The three characters don't have enough time to build chemistry before scattering to the winds. What would have been stronger is to have them go on a quest together for the night. They could remain strangers until each one of their issues is reveal but with the others present in this way. As it stands, the movie loses my attention as each one of their stories are explained. I try to stay with one story when another story takes over. I just kept waiting for them to reunite. I do have to give this full marks for imaginative story writing and great acting.

Familiar strangers

[tomsview · 9/10 · 24 March 2017]

Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet - the Laurel and Hardy of crime as they were once described - made nine movies together and this is one of the best. It has a clever plot not unlike those that came along a decade later in shows like "The Twilight Zone" and "Alfred Hitchcock Presents".

Beautiful Crystal Shackleford (Geraldine Fitzgerald) entices two men to her flat on a London night in 1938. She believes that if three strangers make the same wish to her idol, Kwan Yin, at precisely midnight on Chinese New Year, their wish will be granted.

The two men turn out to be solicitor Jerome K. Arbutny (Sydney Greenstreet) and the philosophical, alcoholic Johnny West (Peter Lorre).

They wish for success on a sweepstakes ticket that Johnny has in his pocket. The story then follows each of their lives, all of which are deeply troubled. Eventually they meet again as Kwan Yin affects their fate in unexpected ways.

Peter Lorre championed the original story by John Huston and according to "The Lost One": A Life of Peter Lorre" by Stephen D. Youngkin, was instrumental in getting it made. He wanted to break away from his typecasting as the duplicitous and often creepy foreigner from roles in films such as "M", "Crime and Punishment" and "Mad Love".

He was given a fairly free reign by director Jean Negulesco, allowing him to create the warm character of Johnny West who although alcoholic, is thoughtful and understanding of human weakness. As Negulesco said, "He brought to the role his own melancholy whimsy, the calm of a poet".

Lorre's character is the perfect contrast to the neurotic and scheming Crystal Shackleford and the equally scheming Jerome K. Arbutny. Life magazine summed up Greenstreet's performance as a villain "whose cold machinations lurk beneath the apparent dignity and wisdom of old age". For a man who was only 5'9", Greenstreet's bulk is filmed in a menacing manner. Often shot from waist-height he looms over the other actors like a well-dressed King Kong.

The film has the sense of claustrophobia that went with those old Warner Bros. movies shot on the sound stage, but has ambiance to spare. The film used to turn up regularly on TV in the 1960's, but over the decades has become harder to find, especially as we don't receive Turner Classic Movies in Australia any more - thank you Foxtel.

Interesting black comedy about greed in a movie rich with detail and atmosphere.

[tjonasgreen · 8/10 · 4 April 2004]

A very literate script by John Huston and Howard Koch makes this one worth seeing. Only after the initial intriguing premise is set in motion do we discover to our amusement that all the characters we've become interested in are fairly despicable, particularly Geraldine Fitzgerald as a sociopath and nymphomaniac. With the unusually well observed character details provided by the script and the use of many supporting and bit actors one hasn't seen in lots of other pictures, THREE STRANGERS really has something of the atmosphere of London in 1938 rather than of London-via-Hollywood.

And make no mistake: Despite good direction by Jean Negulesco, John Huston's cynicism, pessimism and misogyny are evident everywhere, and that alone makes this unusual in a '40s picture. Like MALTESE FALCON it is a black comedy about greed, but it has no big stars, no glamor, and only the sliest, cruelest humor. Add the perfectly judged performances of everyone in this film, and it adds up to a neglected near-classic, one that seemed to predict the funnier and more elegant KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS.

As the real star of the film, Peter Lorre is wonderfully wry and quite lovable as one of life's eternal losers. Sydney Greenstreet often played nasty men deliciously but here he takes his character's weakness and pettiness much further than usual, and his scenes of escalating madness are very effective. Geraldine Fitzgerald's portrait of an amoral seductress is different than what she usually played at Warners, and should be considered some kind of '40s milestone in the depiction of depraved women alongside Gene Tierney in LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN and Agnes Moorehead in DARK PASSAGE. She's aided by some very form-fitting Milo Anderson gowns, one of which, a pleated satin negligee, was recycled in black for Patricia Neal in THE FOUNTAINHEAD a few years later. It looks great in both incarnations. In smaller parts Peter Whitney makes an impression as a soft-hearted (and homosexual?) crony of Lorre's, and Rosalind Ivan is memorable as a dotty widow who is much shrewder than she appears. Finally, the casting of Fitzgerald, Marjorie Riordan and Joan Lorring (who looks like a young Irene Selznick) is curious: all three young women have prominent noses, darkly painted lips and very dark, shoulder-length hair which is styled similarly. And as each character descends in economic scale, her looks are heavier and plainer. Another comment on how fickle fortune can be? Anne Sharp's comment below that the characters are meant to illustrate the dark forces that enabled WWII is interesting and valuable.

By the way, the print shown on TCM is rather dim, sketchy and full of harsh contrasts so it's hard to judge what the film was actually meant to look like. Whoever now owns the Warner Bros. library should strike a pristine version of this one.

Putting a Sheen on Difficult Material

[dougdoepke · 14 March 2008]

The story may get confusing, even muddled, but the visuals continue to shine. This is the golden age of black and white photography from the studios. There's a dreamy quality to the low key lighting that keeps the eye riveted even when the story line falters. Ace director Jean Negulesco certainly knows how to put a sheen on even difficult material.

Scripters Huston and Koch appear to be following on 1941's Maltese Falcon with Lorre and Greenstreet and a statuette with perhaps mystical powers. The format is unusual for its time. The screenplay interweaves three story lines using the statuette and a sweepstakes ticket as an axis. None of the three story lines, however, really gels. Perhaps it's the editing or the script that gives the shifting back and forth a disjointed quality that's sometimes hard to follow. But none of the three strands follow-up well on that intriguing initial scene in Fitzgerald's apartment. (Note her clinging gown in that scene. I'm surprised it got past the censors.)

Anyway, it's always a treat to watch such stylish presences as the imperious Greenstreet and the sly-fox Lorre play-off one another. There's been no one like them before or since. And, for once, Lorre gets a sympathetic role and even the girl (Loring). Then too, it's probably not surprising that the dipso character Lorre plays comes-off best since writer Huston was himself a notorious boozer. The scene that lingers for me is where Greenstreet uses his oily charm on the pixilated Lady Beladon (Rosalind Ivan) who turns out to be shrewder than he thought. I gather that the movie's last scene-- in addition to its irony-- intends to say something profound about the role of fate in our lives. I take the point to be that some unseen hand may control the fortune of lottery tickets, but the hand for all its mystical force cannot determine what we do with them. For the fate-obsessed 1940's this was an unusual gesture to the power of free-will. But, metaphysics aside, it's the power of the camera that continues to hold this stylish pastiche together.

Three Strangers (1946)

[MartinTeller · 7/10 · 3 January 2012]

A woman entices two strangers to her home to fulfill an unusual Chinese prophecy, granting a wish... in this case, a horse race ticket that they hope to be a winner. With a screenplay by John Huston and appearances by Lorre and Greenstreet, and a figurine as a major plot device, you might expect a MALTESE FALCON retread. But this is a very different story. I hesitate to call it noir, although it does have some of the visual stylization and explores some of man's darker impulses. But it's really more of a triptych character study. The three represent different moral stances: Fitzgerald is conniving and ruthless, Greenstreet does something wrong but at least has enough decency to be conflicted about it, and Lorre is simply a carefree drunk who trusts the wrong people. I didn't count the minutes, but it felt like Lorre got the most screen time, and deservedly so. I don't know if I've ever seen a better performance from him, certainly not a more likable one. He's a charming character with a thoughtful outlook on life. His story also has the benefit of wonderful turns by Peter Whitney and especially Joan Lorring, a very appealing actress I've never seen before, but I'm delighted to see appears in a few more noirs I intended to see. Greenstreet's and Fitzgerald's plot threads are interesting as well, and the way all they come together and resolve at the end is satisfying. It's a quirky film with a very good script, quite fulfilling.

The Maltese Falcon Boys Strike Again

[Hitchcoc · 9/10 · 1 January 2010]

Put together Peter Lorre and Sidney Greenstreet and you've got me. Lorre is at his "I don't give a damn about anything" best. Greenstreet is the windbag know-it-all who dismisses everything that doesn't benefit him, but becomes the apotheosis of neediness when he starts to fail. Now you have a pact set up by a group of ne'er-do-wells, centering around a ticket for the Grand National. At the beginning they laugh about the pact because they realize the chances of winning are nil. Now we get to know them and their human failings: a drunk, an embezzler, and a self-possessed woman who set the whole thing up. Their exploits are woven together when the ticket is drawn. They each handle it in their own way and the conclusion is quite satisfying. It is nicely set up but we know that their bargain is truly with a devil.

Eerie and good

[robert-temple-1 · 9/10 · 15 May 2017]

This film noir directed by the highly talented Jean Negulesco manages to convey a great deal of menacing and sinister atmosphere in an indirect manner. Such subtlety is often lacking in such films. Much of this is due to the inspired casting. Anything with Sydney Greenstreet in it is always bound to be good, and here he is even more effective than usual. He 'acts up a storm', as the saying goes. His anxiety level is so high that he even seems to be able to make himself sweat, and one wonders if he really did that without the aid of the makeup people. Stranger things are possible. But the central piece of casting that makes this film work so well is Geraldine Fitzgerald as the female lead. She is absolutely brilliant at portraying a brazenly narcissistic and ruthless 'grabber', who simply has to have it all, whatever the cost to others. The scenes where Greenstreet begs her to help him are so powerful and tense that one's nerves are nearly shattered just watching it. The third lead is Peter Lorre, who is as effective as always. Those three make up the 'three strangers' of the title, who join in a pact together despite the fact that they have never before met. John Huston and Howard Koch were the two authors of the original screenplay. Koch had written the screenplay for CASABLANCA (1942) and two years later would do the screenplay for the brilliant Max Ophuls film LETTER FROM AN UNKNOWN WOMAN (1948), which was adopted from a story by Stefan Zweig. He was therefore one of the best screenwriters around. Also excellent in this film is the actress Joan Lorring, then aged 20, who plays a girl who is in love with Peter Lorre, and will do anything for him. The strange story concerns a bronze statue of the Chinese goddess Guanyin (spelled in the film Kwan Yin), the Goddess of Mercy, which Geraldine Fitzgerald has in her apartment. (The small statue used in the film is very inferior, but never mind.) As I also have a Guanyin, this was of particular interest to me. Fitzgerald mistakenly says she is the Goddess of Fate, but then mercy was nothing anything that a character like Fitzgerald's would be interested in. She claims there is an old legend that says that if three strangers gather before the statue of Guanyin on the night of the Spring Festival (i.e., Chinese New Year) and make a joint wish, the wish will be granted. Fitzgerald goes out in the street and picks up the two men and brings them back to her apartment. They all wish for money, in the form of a sweepstakes ticket connected with horse racing, concerning which they all sign a binding legal agreement that they each own one third of it. The two men then go away, believing this to be a kind of a joke. But some time later the ticket wins. And then the complications begin. Insane greed, utter desperation, and competition between the three people all raise their ugly heads. The situation becomes very extreme. This is when Greenstreet sweats, because he has become compromised as a lawyer in the maladministration of some trust funds. But to tell more might ruin the viewer's suspense. This is an excellent film, one of the best of its kind.

A handsomely mounted, ironic thriller devoid of emotional resonance

[bmacv · 27 April 2003]

Why is Three Strangers, a 1946 movie, set in the London in 1938? There's nothing in the story that links it to a particular time. But in 1938, Britain had yet to be drawn into the long and arduous war to come, when gallantry and self-sacrifice were the orders of the day. The characters in Three Strangers are mirthlessly ungallant and single-mindedly self-absorbed; relegating them to the fool's paradise of the year before all hell broke loose was a diplomatic courtesy.

But a movie centered around three unappealing characters presents another, more immediate problem: The problems they bring on themselves do not compel much sympathy. The movie opens before midnight as the Chinese New Year is about to strike. Geraldine Fitzgerald has been trolling the streets to bring two strangers (Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre) back to her flat. Her quest is not sexual but ritualistic: The Chinese goddess of fortune, a statue of whom graces her drawing room, requires the gathering of three persons unknown to one another before she will grant her annual wish. When all the conditions and codicils have been duly haggled over, the three agree to wish for a winning sweepstakes ticket.

Then they part ways to return to their separate hells. The grasping, manipulative Fitzgerald has driven away her husband, who returns from Canada with a young woman he wants to marry. The avaricious Greenstreet, a solicitor, has been plundering his clients' accounts to speculate in stocks. The alcoholic Lorre (by default the least offensive of the trio) finds himself on death row for a policeman's murder committed by one of his low-life friends who framed him. Their individual stories unfold and, in ironies reminiscent of de Maupassant or O. Henry, ultimately reconverge. As expected, Jean Negulesco directs handsomely but can't overcome the emotional vacuum in John Huston's script: The fates of these three strangers leave us cold.

Reshuffling Destiny's Cards

[utgard14 · 8/10 · 29 December 2013]

In order to fulfill a ritual on the night of the Chinese New Year, Crystal Shackleford (Geraldine Fitzgerald) invites two strangers (Peter Lorre, Sydney Greenstreet) up to her apartment. The ritual is that if three strangers make the same wish at the same time to an idol of a Chinese goddess, it will come true. So they all make a wish that a lottery ticket will be a winner and they can split the winnings. From here the film explores the separate stories of the three people before tying it all back together.

This is an underrated little gem directed by Jean Negulesco with a script by Howard Koch and John Huston. It's very fascinating with terrific performances from the three leads. Peter Lorre is especially fantastic. He gets most of the best lines. Any movie with Lorre and Greenstreet just has to be good on that basis alone. Definitely a great movie you should seek out.

Excellent 1946 Film

[whpratt1 · 7/10 · 12 March 2008]

Geraldine Fitzgerald, (Crystal Shackleford) strolls down a London street and manages to recruit two strangers named Jerome K. Arbutny, (Sydney Greenstreet) and Johnny West, (Peter Lorre) to her apartment in order to celebrate a Chinese New Year. Crystal has a statue in her apartment named the goddess Kwan Yin which will open her eyes and grant wishes to the three strangers which involves a sweepstakes ticket. The two strangers have some very dark secrets and Jerome Arbutny is a crooked solicitor who steals money from trust funds and Johnny West is a small time criminal who loves to drink all the time. Crystal is a woman who has a husband who just plain left her and found another woman and then he is asking her for a divorce, but Crystal will not give him a divorce. If you liked seeing these actors in previous films you will enjoy viewing this film which is very mysterious with very dark secrets. Enjoy.

Great Performances

[Michael_Elliott · 8 June 2009]

Three Strangers (1946)

*** (out of 4)

John Huston wrote the short story this is based on and his also co-wrote the screenplay with Howard Koch. In the film, Sydney Greenstreet, Geraldine Fitzgerald and Peter Lorre play three strangers who go to an apartment where they come in front of a Chinese goddess who is said to grant a wish if three people make the same wish at midnight. After making the wish the three go their separate ways and their lives take separate paths but soon they wind up together again with that one wish in common. Some have held this as an unseen masterpiece and while I wouldn't go that far, the movie does have some great performances that make it a must see. We basically get three different stories that are told in different style but are brought together by this magical wish. I enjoyed Lorre's story of a criminal who gets in trouble when a partner gets caught killing a cop. I found this segment to be the best because Lorre is just so cold yet funny in his role. The weakest is without a doubt Fitzgerald's because it just comes off too melodramatic, although she too is great in the film. What happens to Greenstreet's character at the end was a great twist to the film and his breakdown is masterfully done. I'm really not sure if the magical goddess thing should have been in the screenplay at all because it is rather far fetched and makes the film seem campy at times. With that said, if you're a fan of any of the actors then you'll certainly want to check it out. Again, I didn't see it as a masterpiece as some have called it but the film is still quite good for what it is.

A clone that goes one better

[Anne_Sharp · 2 June 2000]

Obviously meant as a "Maltese Falcon" ripoff, this is in many ways a much better film, and definitely one of Huston's best. Though set in 1938, it has a strongly pessimistic, existentialist post-WWII feel to it. The three strangers seem to symbolize the forces of greed, cruelty, and self-destruction at the heart of war and human misery in general--and note that in this version there is no Sam Spade to intervene when things go horribly wrong. The hero of the story by default is the romantic alcoholic Johnny West (a tour de force by Peter Lorre in one of the few true lead roles allowed him by the vindictive Jack Warner.) Not that he's morally superior to the vicious Crystal Shackleford or the crass Arbutney, just that he's too apathetic and detached to intentionally harm anyone.

Three Strangers, three stories

[AlsExGal · 7/10 · 18 November 2021]

Alfred Hitchcock was interested in directing this, and I can see why. Because it plays out like three intertwined episodes of Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

Crystal Shackleford (Geraldine Fitzgerald) lures two strangers, solicitor Jerome K. Arbutny (Sydney Greenstreet) and drunkard Johnny West (Peter Lorre) to her London home on Chinese New Year in 1938 because of her belief that if three strangers make the same wish to an idol of Kwan Yin, Chinese goddess of fortune and destiny, the wish will be granted.

They must not know each other's names until after the wish is made, and she has thought this out and believes that the only common wish they could make is for money. So they wish for a sweepstakes ticket to come in, and they all sign their names to it. Crystal says that part of the bargain is that if the ticket wins they will bet it all on the ensuing horserace. Well of course they agree to this, because they don't really think anything will come of it anyways. So they go their own way having thought this episode nothing more than somewhat amusing.

Johnny is mixed up in a robbery that turned to murder even though he was just the look-out and drunk and did not really know what was going on.

Arbutny has embezzled money from a client's estate and the investment goes south, with him having insufficient funds to avoid disgrace and jail.

Crystal wants her husband back, but he is in love with somebody else and is adamant about wanting a divorce. She seems obsessed with winning more than she is in love.

Now I can see how Arbutny's problem would be solved by money. But as for Johnny and Crystal - no amount of money could get them what they want. And it's a strange film where Peter Lorre plays the most well adjusted character, somewhat resigned to whatever fate he gets as destiny.

Then the paths of these three people converge again and the whole thing ends quite ironically. If you are looking for Greenstreet and Lorre together, they really are not for the vast majority of the film, but it still plays to their strengths and I'd recommend it.