89 reviews
After watching this film on television a couple weeks ago (TMC is the best), I was surprised how obscure 'No Way Out' really is. However, I wasn't exactly surprised.
The film follows Dr. Brooks (Sidney Poitier), an ER doctor whose first real-world experience is as intern in the prison ward of a New York hospital. While on duty, the brothers Biddle (the older of which is played by Richard Widmark), come in following a confrontation with the police. Both suffer from superficial injuries, but the younger brother's health is declining rapidly due to what Brooks diagnoses as a brain tumor. The kid dies while Brooks is operating, feet away from his brother. The racist Ray Biddle soon accuses Brooks of murder, but won't allow an autopsy to be conducted on his brother to determine the cause of death.
Poitier turns in a great performance as the hard-working young doctor, who is debased by the hollow accusations of a bigot. They dig at his core and bring up insecurities that would be common to anyone in the medical field, but are aggravated by the pure hatred of Widmark's equally well-played character.
While the script borders on stereotypes at times, you have to remember that these stereotypes were very real during the time it was written. The writer does a fantastic job of adding depth, personality, beyond the paper figures. Brooks is a practical man, who supports his family and tries to not let the circumstances bring him down. Behind the veneer of hatred, Biddle is a deeply insecure and misguided man who has let circumstance blacken his core. Mankiewicz and Samuels do an amazing job at bringing life to a situation that was taboo for the time.
Aside from the competent acting and well-executed script, the film featured a moving and well-choreographed race riot that fully captures the raw hatred that can surface between groups of people who face the same everyday problems and circumstances, but are torn by one difference (color, or creed, or religion).
This is definitely a film well worth seeing. For its time, the movie was groundbreaking for its portrayal of both racists and their victims. While today the movie may seem tame, it undoubtedly struck some sensitive nerves during its release. The film deserves to be more widely known, if only for its content.
The film follows Dr. Brooks (Sidney Poitier), an ER doctor whose first real-world experience is as intern in the prison ward of a New York hospital. While on duty, the brothers Biddle (the older of which is played by Richard Widmark), come in following a confrontation with the police. Both suffer from superficial injuries, but the younger brother's health is declining rapidly due to what Brooks diagnoses as a brain tumor. The kid dies while Brooks is operating, feet away from his brother. The racist Ray Biddle soon accuses Brooks of murder, but won't allow an autopsy to be conducted on his brother to determine the cause of death.
Poitier turns in a great performance as the hard-working young doctor, who is debased by the hollow accusations of a bigot. They dig at his core and bring up insecurities that would be common to anyone in the medical field, but are aggravated by the pure hatred of Widmark's equally well-played character.
While the script borders on stereotypes at times, you have to remember that these stereotypes were very real during the time it was written. The writer does a fantastic job of adding depth, personality, beyond the paper figures. Brooks is a practical man, who supports his family and tries to not let the circumstances bring him down. Behind the veneer of hatred, Biddle is a deeply insecure and misguided man who has let circumstance blacken his core. Mankiewicz and Samuels do an amazing job at bringing life to a situation that was taboo for the time.
Aside from the competent acting and well-executed script, the film featured a moving and well-choreographed race riot that fully captures the raw hatred that can surface between groups of people who face the same everyday problems and circumstances, but are torn by one difference (color, or creed, or religion).
This is definitely a film well worth seeing. For its time, the movie was groundbreaking for its portrayal of both racists and their victims. While today the movie may seem tame, it undoubtedly struck some sensitive nerves during its release. The film deserves to be more widely known, if only for its content.
- dragoneyez01
- Mar 19, 2005
- Permalink
I heard a rumor that this was coming out on DVD in 2006. I hope it's true because this is a fascinating film. Actually, "shocking" might be a better word.
Bigotry is the main theme and there is no beating around the bush here. The "n- word" is used at least 20 times in this film in one form or another which is shocking to hear in a classic film. Richard Widmark plays the main bigot and he is fascinating to watch. Few people in his day could play the wild-eyed fanatical villain as well as he could (see "Kiss Of Death" for the best example).
This was Sidney Poiteir's screen debut and he looks about 16 years old! He looks too young to be a doctor even if he is portrayed as someone in their first year of practice. Anyway, with Widmark and Poitier, and a fine supporting cast with some famous names, you have a very, very interesting movie that is long overdue to be made available to the public.
To the film's credit, this shows bigotry on both sides: black and white, although it concentrates more on white against black. Linda Darnell plays perhaps the most interesting role because she is the one person who switches back and forth, unable most of the time to figure out what side to take! For those who remember the Naked City TV series, it's also fun to see Harry Bellaver in here, playing Widmark's deaf-mute brother.
This movie could easily be very dated.....but it isn't.
Bigotry is the main theme and there is no beating around the bush here. The "n- word" is used at least 20 times in this film in one form or another which is shocking to hear in a classic film. Richard Widmark plays the main bigot and he is fascinating to watch. Few people in his day could play the wild-eyed fanatical villain as well as he could (see "Kiss Of Death" for the best example).
This was Sidney Poiteir's screen debut and he looks about 16 years old! He looks too young to be a doctor even if he is portrayed as someone in their first year of practice. Anyway, with Widmark and Poitier, and a fine supporting cast with some famous names, you have a very, very interesting movie that is long overdue to be made available to the public.
To the film's credit, this shows bigotry on both sides: black and white, although it concentrates more on white against black. Linda Darnell plays perhaps the most interesting role because she is the one person who switches back and forth, unable most of the time to figure out what side to take! For those who remember the Naked City TV series, it's also fun to see Harry Bellaver in here, playing Widmark's deaf-mute brother.
This movie could easily be very dated.....but it isn't.
- ccthemovieman-1
- Oct 27, 2005
- Permalink
Sidney Poitier made his screen debut in No Way Out about a young black doctor accused of 'murder' by Richard Widmark. Seeing the two of them you would hardly believe that they in fact became lifelong friends in real life.
The Biddle Brothers, a pair of white trash rednecks, from a neighborhood called Beaver Canal in a large American city, get brought into an emergency room with gunshot wounds. They tried to stick up a gas station and got caught. Sidney Poitier is a young intern on duty and he suspects something more wrong with the younger Biddle's condition. While doing a spinal tap his patient dies and the rabidly racist Widmark playing the older Biddle, accuses Poitier of murder.
No matter how off the wall his charges are, some people listen and some have to investigate. In Poitier's corner is his supervisor Stephen McNally. But Widmark manages to spread his poison and it results in a race riot.
Widmark is something else. Down to this day it's so easy for some to believe they're in a bad situation because someone else or some group else is somehow given preferential treatment. Widmark believes this and he lives in an area where it's taken as gospel. We've rarely seen a portrayal of hate as vivid as this on screen.
Hate whether it's individually or group directed can sometime take on a life of its own. Even when he's confronted with the truth about the ludicrousness of his charges, Widmark still won't let go. It's what's most frightening in No Way Out.
Linda Darnell is excellent also as the former wife of Widmark's brother. She buys into Widmark's hate at first, but she shows a capacity to learn. It can be found in most of us or there would be no hope for the human race.
Joseph Mankiewicz directed and wrote No Way Out. He was at the height of his career winning two best Director Oscars back to back for A Letter to Three Wives and All About Eve. He probably didn't win anything for No Way Out because the Academy voters didn't want to give him everything at that time. He was nominated for Best Screenplay.
Sixty Six years later No Way Out is still a powerful portrayal of racism and its ugly effects on the soul.
The Biddle Brothers, a pair of white trash rednecks, from a neighborhood called Beaver Canal in a large American city, get brought into an emergency room with gunshot wounds. They tried to stick up a gas station and got caught. Sidney Poitier is a young intern on duty and he suspects something more wrong with the younger Biddle's condition. While doing a spinal tap his patient dies and the rabidly racist Widmark playing the older Biddle, accuses Poitier of murder.
No matter how off the wall his charges are, some people listen and some have to investigate. In Poitier's corner is his supervisor Stephen McNally. But Widmark manages to spread his poison and it results in a race riot.
Widmark is something else. Down to this day it's so easy for some to believe they're in a bad situation because someone else or some group else is somehow given preferential treatment. Widmark believes this and he lives in an area where it's taken as gospel. We've rarely seen a portrayal of hate as vivid as this on screen.
Hate whether it's individually or group directed can sometime take on a life of its own. Even when he's confronted with the truth about the ludicrousness of his charges, Widmark still won't let go. It's what's most frightening in No Way Out.
Linda Darnell is excellent also as the former wife of Widmark's brother. She buys into Widmark's hate at first, but she shows a capacity to learn. It can be found in most of us or there would be no hope for the human race.
Joseph Mankiewicz directed and wrote No Way Out. He was at the height of his career winning two best Director Oscars back to back for A Letter to Three Wives and All About Eve. He probably didn't win anything for No Way Out because the Academy voters didn't want to give him everything at that time. He was nominated for Best Screenplay.
Sixty Six years later No Way Out is still a powerful portrayal of racism and its ugly effects on the soul.
- bkoganbing
- Sep 12, 2006
- Permalink
This film really surprised me, as I wasn't expecting something so raw and tense from 1950. The leads are excellent - nobody chews the scenery, as would be expected. Darnell is particularly effective. Honestly, being the cynical person I am, I never would have expected such an excellent film.
How this made it past the Code, I'll never know. The language and drama are intense. 1950?????? Amazing. What a pleasure to see Ossie in an early role...he's already missed.
Frankly, I rarely recommend a film. What a great experience....check this flick out.
How this made it past the Code, I'll never know. The language and drama are intense. 1950?????? Amazing. What a pleasure to see Ossie in an early role...he's already missed.
Frankly, I rarely recommend a film. What a great experience....check this flick out.
This movie, even today, stands out as one of the best, and most honest of Hollywood films dealing racism and prejudice. Good friends Poitier and Widmark are anything but as they play, respectively, a hospital intern and a racist hoodlum. The scenes between them are can be hard to watch because of the raw, uncensored for the time slurs spouted by Widmark at Poitier. Widmark is not redeemed at the end, nor is the subject of racism mollycoddled. It is a tribute to this film that its' existence bear witness to the fact that Hollywood has long been capable of portraying some of life's most unpleasant realities. This film is a bright spot on the resumes of all involved, particularly Poitier, who plays someone who is human more than noble, and Widmark, who puts a realistic face on raw, naked bigotry.
- terenceallen
- Sep 8, 2004
- Permalink
- rmax304823
- Apr 21, 2005
- Permalink
Although "No Way Out" looks a little dated in comparison to more recent racial dramas, such as "Mississippi Burning," "No Way Out" is still a very tense DRAMA. Poitier (in his first film role) gives a truly break-out performance, but it's Widmark who really steals the show. The riot scenes are beautifully choreographed, lending serious mood to the action.
A lot has been praise has been deservedly given on this site to Sidney Poitier and Richard Widmark. I'd just like to give a few words of praise to Linda Darnell. She was an actress--usually dismissed as "ornamental" or "decorative"--who really did show little range in her Hollywood career, much of which was past her by the time she did this in 1950. Various sources give her birthdate as either 1921 or 1923, but whatever the case, she had been acting in movies since she was a teenager. Here--at either age 27 or 29--she gives a moving, sincere, deglamorized portrait of a confused woman. At first she wants to do right, then she does wrong by fomenting a race riot, then--realizing her mistake--tries to set things right again. And does it.
I think that she probably represents the average viewer of the period who did not quite know what to do about racial issues (as if we do today). Not naturally racist, she gives into Widmark after he wickedly questions her about views on blacks, making her turn to what she had probably always been taught.
Had Darnell been given the chance to give any more performances like this, she would probably have had a longer, more substantial career.
Why the Academy didn't notice her is a mystery, especially after giving a Best Supporting Actress nomination to Nancy (WHO?) Olson in the same year.
I think that she probably represents the average viewer of the period who did not quite know what to do about racial issues (as if we do today). Not naturally racist, she gives into Widmark after he wickedly questions her about views on blacks, making her turn to what she had probably always been taught.
Had Darnell been given the chance to give any more performances like this, she would probably have had a longer, more substantial career.
Why the Academy didn't notice her is a mystery, especially after giving a Best Supporting Actress nomination to Nancy (WHO?) Olson in the same year.
A very effective and engrossing racial drama, with standout performances by Sidney Poitier and Richard Widmark. Widmark, in particular, tears up the screen with his harrowing portrayal of a pathologically obsessed racist; he is almost frightening to watch. The script keeps the action moving along briskly, in edge-of-the seat mode. Still effective, for a film half-a-century old.
I can't find any big studio films that concern themselves with racism prior to 1949, and this film takes up the subject in a very raw way just the year after that.
Dr. Luther Brooks (Sidney Poitier) is a resident in a hospital. He is assigned to the prison ward when the Biddle brothers are brought in, both shot in the leg trying to get away from the police after the hold-up of a gas station. But one of the brothers, Johnny Biddle, is incoherent and feels nothing when a cigarette he is smoking falls and smoulders in his hand. Brooks suspects a brain tumor and performs a spinal tap, but Johnny dies during he procedure. His racist brother Ray Biddle (Richard Widmark) declares that the doctor killed him. The state this happens in does not force an autopsy under such circumstances unless allowed by the next of kin. But that would be Ray Biddle and he really enjoys accusing Dr. Brooks of murder without any pesky truth or confirmation.
The supervising physician assures Brooks that he may or may not have been correct in his assessment, but that he most certainly did not kill Johnny Biddle. Meanwhile this situation has the potential of blowing up into a full fledged race riot with Biddle fanning the flames from inside of his prison hospital room. Complications ensue.
Today, a film like this could not be made primarily because of the language used, which is the language used by racists then and now. And that's too bad, because Widmark's no holds barred portrayal of Ray Biddle paints a very ugly and stupid face on racism, one that rings true even today. Biddle holds fast to his racism because he needs to feel superior to somebody else, and the Brooks family climbing into the middle class while he is left behind in the slums completely upsets his world view.
Without getting into details, this film has a high level of suspense and tension that carries it through to the end. I'd highly recommend it, just realize it is not an easy thing to watch.
Dr. Luther Brooks (Sidney Poitier) is a resident in a hospital. He is assigned to the prison ward when the Biddle brothers are brought in, both shot in the leg trying to get away from the police after the hold-up of a gas station. But one of the brothers, Johnny Biddle, is incoherent and feels nothing when a cigarette he is smoking falls and smoulders in his hand. Brooks suspects a brain tumor and performs a spinal tap, but Johnny dies during he procedure. His racist brother Ray Biddle (Richard Widmark) declares that the doctor killed him. The state this happens in does not force an autopsy under such circumstances unless allowed by the next of kin. But that would be Ray Biddle and he really enjoys accusing Dr. Brooks of murder without any pesky truth or confirmation.
The supervising physician assures Brooks that he may or may not have been correct in his assessment, but that he most certainly did not kill Johnny Biddle. Meanwhile this situation has the potential of blowing up into a full fledged race riot with Biddle fanning the flames from inside of his prison hospital room. Complications ensue.
Today, a film like this could not be made primarily because of the language used, which is the language used by racists then and now. And that's too bad, because Widmark's no holds barred portrayal of Ray Biddle paints a very ugly and stupid face on racism, one that rings true even today. Biddle holds fast to his racism because he needs to feel superior to somebody else, and the Brooks family climbing into the middle class while he is left behind in the slums completely upsets his world view.
Without getting into details, this film has a high level of suspense and tension that carries it through to the end. I'd highly recommend it, just realize it is not an easy thing to watch.
RICHARD WIDMARK does nothing to tone down his performance as a nasty racist capable of making crude racial remarks to doctor SIDNEY POITIER in this stark, way ahead of its time shocker, a B&W classic that also gives LINDA DARNELL a role outside her usual glamor girl parts.
In fact, Linda is so deglamorized that she's hardly recognizable as the girl with the meltingly beautiful face who played so many ingenue roles opposite stars like Tyrone Power at the start of her career. She gives a hard edge, tough quality to her role and is most convincing.
But it's Widmark and Poitier who occupy most of the screen time, with Widmark as a patient at a busy hospital whose gunshot wounds need attention from doctor Poitier. The racial tension arises when Widmark utters curses and hostile resentment against being treated by a black man.
Daring racial drama still packs a punch today. Hardly a pleasant film to watch, but very hard-hitting performances from the entire cast.
In fact, Linda is so deglamorized that she's hardly recognizable as the girl with the meltingly beautiful face who played so many ingenue roles opposite stars like Tyrone Power at the start of her career. She gives a hard edge, tough quality to her role and is most convincing.
But it's Widmark and Poitier who occupy most of the screen time, with Widmark as a patient at a busy hospital whose gunshot wounds need attention from doctor Poitier. The racial tension arises when Widmark utters curses and hostile resentment against being treated by a black man.
Daring racial drama still packs a punch today. Hardly a pleasant film to watch, but very hard-hitting performances from the entire cast.
I didn't think it was possible for me to be shocked by a film about racism released in 1950, but I was wrong.
In "No Way Out," Richard Widmark plays an absolutely vile racist who spews the most hateful language I've heard in a narrative film in a long time. I found myself actually wincing every time he used some sort of racial epithet, which is frequently. His target is Sidney Poitier, the doctor who he thinks killed his brother while pretending to try to save his life. This specific story of racism plays out against the backdrop of a larger story of racist violence that occurs between a black neighborhood and the white trash enclave that has sworn vengeance against it.
This is a harsh, angry, bitter pill of a movie, and deserves to be rediscovered in our current climate of renewed racial outrage. I'd like to think Widmark's character is a bit of a caricature, but after hearing and seeing some of the people living in our country today, it would seem not. Poitier plays his role the way he played every role he was ever in, while Linda Darnell, as Widmark's former sister-in-law, creates the film's most fascinating character, a woman whose actual experience with black people doesn't jive with what she's been taught to think about them.
What I liked most about "No Way Out" was the way it refuses to condescend to black people and portray them all as too good to be true noble sufferers, the way other movies from the time period do. The scenes set in Poitier's household portray them as just normal people, painfully aware at all times of the burden of being black in America, but otherwise just wanting to go about their lives. The character of a black maid who works for a white doctor was one of my favorites in the movie. She has a warm employee/employer relationship with the doctor, and he even treats her at times like one of the family, but a word or glance she throws out here and there make clear that she never forgets the difference between them, even if he thinks he does.
"No Way Out" brought Joseph L. Mankiewicz and Lesser Samuels an Oscar nomination for Best Story and Screenplay in the same year that Mankiewicz won the awards for Best Director and Best Screenplay for "All About Eve." Good year for him.
Grade: A
In "No Way Out," Richard Widmark plays an absolutely vile racist who spews the most hateful language I've heard in a narrative film in a long time. I found myself actually wincing every time he used some sort of racial epithet, which is frequently. His target is Sidney Poitier, the doctor who he thinks killed his brother while pretending to try to save his life. This specific story of racism plays out against the backdrop of a larger story of racist violence that occurs between a black neighborhood and the white trash enclave that has sworn vengeance against it.
This is a harsh, angry, bitter pill of a movie, and deserves to be rediscovered in our current climate of renewed racial outrage. I'd like to think Widmark's character is a bit of a caricature, but after hearing and seeing some of the people living in our country today, it would seem not. Poitier plays his role the way he played every role he was ever in, while Linda Darnell, as Widmark's former sister-in-law, creates the film's most fascinating character, a woman whose actual experience with black people doesn't jive with what she's been taught to think about them.
What I liked most about "No Way Out" was the way it refuses to condescend to black people and portray them all as too good to be true noble sufferers, the way other movies from the time period do. The scenes set in Poitier's household portray them as just normal people, painfully aware at all times of the burden of being black in America, but otherwise just wanting to go about their lives. The character of a black maid who works for a white doctor was one of my favorites in the movie. She has a warm employee/employer relationship with the doctor, and he even treats her at times like one of the family, but a word or glance she throws out here and there make clear that she never forgets the difference between them, even if he thinks he does.
"No Way Out" brought Joseph L. Mankiewicz and Lesser Samuels an Oscar nomination for Best Story and Screenplay in the same year that Mankiewicz won the awards for Best Director and Best Screenplay for "All About Eve." Good year for him.
Grade: A
- evanston_dad
- Aug 12, 2020
- Permalink
- seymourblack-1
- Oct 16, 2010
- Permalink
No Way Out is an unfortunately familiar tale of racism. In this case it's all about a hospital that is progressive for its time because they trained and employed a black doctor. But as one might expect (particularly back in the early 50s) there are some people who don't exactly appreciate it. Sidney Poitier plays the doctor in question, and as you'd expect he's brilliant in the lead role. I questioned a few choices that were made, but I think my issues with that aspect lie more with the script than his performance. Richard Windmark is appropriately despicable as the main antagonist. I utterly hated him from start to finish, which is exactly as intended, and I never felt he was exaggerating his performance too much. Not only do I think certain people would act like Ray Biddle in that situation back in that time period, I fear there are still people today who would do the same.
Easily my biggest struggle with No Way Out was either the script or the directing. I'm not sure where the blame should lie, but there are a lot of moments that felt clunky and awkward. Several of the supporting cast members performed like downright terrible actors, but it felt more like they were given clumsy dialogue to spout, or were not allowed to say things in a natural fashion. I also have to mention that the plot of No Way Out is just depressing and tough to watch. I appreciate that films like this one have been made because people need to have a light shined on the depressing cycle of bigotry, and how wrong it can be. Yet, while there is value in the story, I cringe watching it. I feel the pain of Dr. Brooks even if it's not something I've experienced myself. If the writing and directing lived up to the quality of the actors in No Way Out it would be worth the effort, but it didn't reach that level for me.
Easily my biggest struggle with No Way Out was either the script or the directing. I'm not sure where the blame should lie, but there are a lot of moments that felt clunky and awkward. Several of the supporting cast members performed like downright terrible actors, but it felt more like they were given clumsy dialogue to spout, or were not allowed to say things in a natural fashion. I also have to mention that the plot of No Way Out is just depressing and tough to watch. I appreciate that films like this one have been made because people need to have a light shined on the depressing cycle of bigotry, and how wrong it can be. Yet, while there is value in the story, I cringe watching it. I feel the pain of Dr. Brooks even if it's not something I've experienced myself. If the writing and directing lived up to the quality of the actors in No Way Out it would be worth the effort, but it didn't reach that level for me.
- blott2319-1
- Sep 6, 2022
- Permalink
As in other 1950s films, Richard Widmark is very scary and Sidney Poitier very noble herein. There is little preaching in Mankiewicz's screenplay and it has splendidly filmed action sequences. The rap that Mankiewicz's films are "all talk and no action" is untenable (see, especially, "The Quiet Man" and "Five Fingers"), though the talk he wrote was often very incisive and very witty.
Notable for the debuts of Poitier, Ossie Davis, and Ruby Dee, this melodrama is of more than historical interest. It is a gripping, noirish tale of a nightmare experienced by a young black doctor. Although the ending is predictable, and Linda Darnell's character chances unconvincingly often and unconvincingly far (and her clothes are inconceivable for a drive-in car hop!), "No Way Out" is more than a historical curiosity. (And Mankiewicz deserves reconsideration as one of the directors who really was the author of the films he directed, up there with Billy Wilder and Preston Sturges.)
Notable for the debuts of Poitier, Ossie Davis, and Ruby Dee, this melodrama is of more than historical interest. It is a gripping, noirish tale of a nightmare experienced by a young black doctor. Although the ending is predictable, and Linda Darnell's character chances unconvincingly often and unconvincingly far (and her clothes are inconceivable for a drive-in car hop!), "No Way Out" is more than a historical curiosity. (And Mankiewicz deserves reconsideration as one of the directors who really was the author of the films he directed, up there with Billy Wilder and Preston Sturges.)
I watched this film soon after having seen the dreadfully stupid (but almost universally praised) American History X. The comparison does not make you very optimistic as far as the development of movies with a social message is concerned.
No Way Out is a very good story about racism - maybe the best ever told on screen. It is mainly set in a hospital, where black and white doctors and nurses - among other things - patch up people who bashed each other's heads in in race riots. Sidney Poitier is a very young, upwardly mobile doctor with high ethic standards, Richard Widmark a nasty, racist piece of "white trash" from Beaver Canal who accuses the black doctor of having killed his brother while under his care. This sounds pretty plain, but the screenplay succeeds in giving the characters real personal traits, and the actors fully live up to their task.
I have never seen Sidney Poitier better than here - and this apparently was his first screen appearance! The young doctor is, on the one hand, angry because of the racially motivated humiliations he has to endure. On the other hand, the accusations of the white bigot really shake him badly. He is having serious doubts about his abilities as a doctor because of it, although he is sure he did the right thing. In my opinion it was very wise to introduce these self doubts which are not race related. It makes of Poitier's character a well intentioned conscientious individual many people without regard of race (or gender or religion or whatever) can relate to.
Richard Widmark as the black doctor's racist adversary gives an equally brilliant performance. We see him here at his slimiest, meanest. He really is pure hate - yet even his character is more than a stereotype. His hate is propelled by an encompassing self pity which is really nauseating! This becomes most evident in the dramatic final scene. "Little Black Simba!", he shouts again and again to the black doctor like a moron, and the stupid taunting gets more and more pathetic. Then, badly wounded, he dissolves into a whimpering bundle and the viewer comes to the conclusion that the worst punishment for that creature consists in just staying alive!
It is my opinion that the ever more persistent culture of coolness will not make the world a better or more desirable place to live in. Therefore I really was delighted to see that No Way Out is refreshingly uncool. It addresses social and philosophical issues in a down to earth way. Unforgettable to me is the conversation between the girl from Beaver Canal, the racist's brother's former wife, and the black servant of a white doctor, the boss of Sidney Poitier's character. The servant tells the girl that in her free time she likes to invite friends and cook elaborate meals for them. That is a lot of work you're doing in your free time, the girl remarks. To this the servant says: I like doing it, and it makes me feel I am somebody. Outdated? Corny? What do I care! The statement is still valid.
It should be noted that No Way Out is not a story of different groups of people pitted against each other but a story about individuals who have to find themselves in society and decide what stand they are taking towards civilisation. The movie states that civilisation and civilised behavior is not something you can take for granted and that it depends on the choice of every single human being.
No Way Out is a very good story about racism - maybe the best ever told on screen. It is mainly set in a hospital, where black and white doctors and nurses - among other things - patch up people who bashed each other's heads in in race riots. Sidney Poitier is a very young, upwardly mobile doctor with high ethic standards, Richard Widmark a nasty, racist piece of "white trash" from Beaver Canal who accuses the black doctor of having killed his brother while under his care. This sounds pretty plain, but the screenplay succeeds in giving the characters real personal traits, and the actors fully live up to their task.
I have never seen Sidney Poitier better than here - and this apparently was his first screen appearance! The young doctor is, on the one hand, angry because of the racially motivated humiliations he has to endure. On the other hand, the accusations of the white bigot really shake him badly. He is having serious doubts about his abilities as a doctor because of it, although he is sure he did the right thing. In my opinion it was very wise to introduce these self doubts which are not race related. It makes of Poitier's character a well intentioned conscientious individual many people without regard of race (or gender or religion or whatever) can relate to.
Richard Widmark as the black doctor's racist adversary gives an equally brilliant performance. We see him here at his slimiest, meanest. He really is pure hate - yet even his character is more than a stereotype. His hate is propelled by an encompassing self pity which is really nauseating! This becomes most evident in the dramatic final scene. "Little Black Simba!", he shouts again and again to the black doctor like a moron, and the stupid taunting gets more and more pathetic. Then, badly wounded, he dissolves into a whimpering bundle and the viewer comes to the conclusion that the worst punishment for that creature consists in just staying alive!
It is my opinion that the ever more persistent culture of coolness will not make the world a better or more desirable place to live in. Therefore I really was delighted to see that No Way Out is refreshingly uncool. It addresses social and philosophical issues in a down to earth way. Unforgettable to me is the conversation between the girl from Beaver Canal, the racist's brother's former wife, and the black servant of a white doctor, the boss of Sidney Poitier's character. The servant tells the girl that in her free time she likes to invite friends and cook elaborate meals for them. That is a lot of work you're doing in your free time, the girl remarks. To this the servant says: I like doing it, and it makes me feel I am somebody. Outdated? Corny? What do I care! The statement is still valid.
It should be noted that No Way Out is not a story of different groups of people pitted against each other but a story about individuals who have to find themselves in society and decide what stand they are taking towards civilisation. The movie states that civilisation and civilised behavior is not something you can take for granted and that it depends on the choice of every single human being.
- manuel-pestalozzi
- Jul 22, 2003
- Permalink
- planktonrules
- Sep 25, 2009
- Permalink
Decent and brooding Hollywood production about racism and intolerance with lots of violence, intense drama , and competetly filmed . Hard-edge social drama centers around racial conflicts and other unpleasant issues , being one of the most first cinematic forays in this theme . And stands out Richard Widmark as a heinous crook shot during an attempted robbery , who has gangster pals avenge his brother's death by creating race riots . As the Biddle brothers , two wounded hoodlums while robbing a gas station are taken to the prison ward of the nearby County Hospital. There the bigoted bad guy Roy (Richard Widmark) and his brother George (Bellaver) are taken by a small hospital run by doctor Wharton (Stephen McNally) who believes in giving all his doctors a fair chance . So black doctor Luther Brooks (Sidney Poitier) works on George dies , but his nasty brother who didn't want a treatment from a black resident witnesses the events . Naturally , the surviving brother Roy blames the doctor and he becomes obsessed with revenge , and then things go wrong , that's why there are several black racists around and African-American people want to defend themselves . Later on, Roy Biddle gets his hoodlum pals to cause some bloody confrontations . Is it a question ...or an answer !
An interesting and attractive film if rather thorny drama , with emotion , thrills and packing some terrific interpretations . Violent flick of racial hatred involving bigotry , medical duties and moral conflicts . Once-provocating movie is still engrossing but seems a bit dated and artificial at times . It resuls to be an incisive Hollywood examination on racism , including intrigue , twists , surprises , thriller and amazing final . This is a thoughful and thought-provoking story of racial violence and xenophobia with countless tension in which a spark causes a thorny situation that slides rapidly toward violence . This is another example of a serious movie about xenophobia and racism in which a black role -Sidney Poiter- is a main figure in the story , while in precedent films the white roles predominate and African-American characters provide background. As Sidney Poitier is awesome as the unfortunate doctor who finds a hardship way to work in a world of white men . Richard Widmark took the acting honours , giving a nice acting in his usual style as the sardonic , world-weary , rabid racist who blames the African-American doctor for his brother's death . While Linda Darnell is pretty good as the unfortunate ex-wife who must take a difficult choice. And being film debuts of Sidney Poitier , Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee . Support cast is very fine , such as : Stephen McNally , Harry Bellaver , Stanley Ridges , Robert Adler , and uncredited : Betsy Blair, Ray Teal , Frank Overton, Victor Kilian, Jack Kruschen , among others
It contains an atmospheric cinematography in black and white by classic cameraman by Milton R. Krasner . Evocative and sensitive musical score by Alfred Newman . The motion picture was well directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz . He was a witty dialoguist, a master in the use of flashback and a talented actors' director. Having left Metro after a dispute with studio chief Louis B. Mayer over Judy Garland, he then worked for Darryl F. Zanuck at 20th Century-Fox, producing The keys of the Kingdom (1944), when Ernst Lubitsch's illness first brought him to the director's chair for Dragonwyck (1946). Mankiewicz directed 20 films in a 26-year period, successfully attempted every kind of movie from Shakespeare adaptation to western, from urban sociological drama to musical, from epic film with thousands of extras to a two-character picture. Mankiewicz was a prestigious writer, producer who made notorious films such as : Somewhere in the night, The ghost and Mrs Muir, A letter to 3 wives, House of strangers, All about Eva, No way out, People will talk, 5 fingers, Julius Caesar, Guys and dolls, The quiet American, Suddenly last summer, Cleopatra, The honey pot, There was a crooked man, and Sleuth. His more highly esteemed films were All about Eva and A letter for three wives that also won some Oscars, while the lavishly made Cleopatra was a real flop . No Way Out (1950) rating : 7/10 , better than average . Well worth watching.
An interesting and attractive film if rather thorny drama , with emotion , thrills and packing some terrific interpretations . Violent flick of racial hatred involving bigotry , medical duties and moral conflicts . Once-provocating movie is still engrossing but seems a bit dated and artificial at times . It resuls to be an incisive Hollywood examination on racism , including intrigue , twists , surprises , thriller and amazing final . This is a thoughful and thought-provoking story of racial violence and xenophobia with countless tension in which a spark causes a thorny situation that slides rapidly toward violence . This is another example of a serious movie about xenophobia and racism in which a black role -Sidney Poiter- is a main figure in the story , while in precedent films the white roles predominate and African-American characters provide background. As Sidney Poitier is awesome as the unfortunate doctor who finds a hardship way to work in a world of white men . Richard Widmark took the acting honours , giving a nice acting in his usual style as the sardonic , world-weary , rabid racist who blames the African-American doctor for his brother's death . While Linda Darnell is pretty good as the unfortunate ex-wife who must take a difficult choice. And being film debuts of Sidney Poitier , Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee . Support cast is very fine , such as : Stephen McNally , Harry Bellaver , Stanley Ridges , Robert Adler , and uncredited : Betsy Blair, Ray Teal , Frank Overton, Victor Kilian, Jack Kruschen , among others
It contains an atmospheric cinematography in black and white by classic cameraman by Milton R. Krasner . Evocative and sensitive musical score by Alfred Newman . The motion picture was well directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz . He was a witty dialoguist, a master in the use of flashback and a talented actors' director. Having left Metro after a dispute with studio chief Louis B. Mayer over Judy Garland, he then worked for Darryl F. Zanuck at 20th Century-Fox, producing The keys of the Kingdom (1944), when Ernst Lubitsch's illness first brought him to the director's chair for Dragonwyck (1946). Mankiewicz directed 20 films in a 26-year period, successfully attempted every kind of movie from Shakespeare adaptation to western, from urban sociological drama to musical, from epic film with thousands of extras to a two-character picture. Mankiewicz was a prestigious writer, producer who made notorious films such as : Somewhere in the night, The ghost and Mrs Muir, A letter to 3 wives, House of strangers, All about Eva, No way out, People will talk, 5 fingers, Julius Caesar, Guys and dolls, The quiet American, Suddenly last summer, Cleopatra, The honey pot, There was a crooked man, and Sleuth. His more highly esteemed films were All about Eva and A letter for three wives that also won some Oscars, while the lavishly made Cleopatra was a real flop . No Way Out (1950) rating : 7/10 , better than average . Well worth watching.
"No Way Out" is an outstanding film starring Richard Widmark, Sidney Poitier, and Linda Darnell, which deals with prejudice in a community hospital and the community in which it stands. Richard Widmark plays a wounded criminal whom the police bring to the hospital along with his brother. When his brother dies, Widmark blames the black doctor, Poitier, in what is apparently his first screen appearance. I can only say, what a debut. In an attempt to get an autopsy that will clear him of any wrongdoing, Poitier and his boss, played by Stephen McNally, appeal to the brother's ex-wife, Linda Darnell, to talk to Widmark and convince him to consent. When Widmark's version of the story gets out, the seething community explodes, and a race riot breaks out.
The liberal use of the N word is a little hard to take in this movie, and the blatancy of Widmark's hatred and prejudice is shocking. Widmark, who used to help out Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee in their various charity events, gives an astonishing performance as a wounded man both physically and emotionally, a man possessed by hate, rage, and bitterness. Poitier is excellent as a young doctor dealing with race in his profession, though he's fortunate to have a color-blind boss. It's interesting to note that a black worker in the hospital intimates that in order to succeed as a resident, Poitier had to take tests the whites didn't have to, etc. Poitier orders him to knock it off.
Although a star from the late '30s, Linda Darnell is only 27 in this film. She's deglamorized but beautiful, and "No Way Out" was made at a time when she was getting her best roles. She's marvelous as a down and out, frightened woman.
Although the genre has evolved since "No Way Out," this is a tough, tense, well directed movie that is well worth seeing.
The liberal use of the N word is a little hard to take in this movie, and the blatancy of Widmark's hatred and prejudice is shocking. Widmark, who used to help out Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee in their various charity events, gives an astonishing performance as a wounded man both physically and emotionally, a man possessed by hate, rage, and bitterness. Poitier is excellent as a young doctor dealing with race in his profession, though he's fortunate to have a color-blind boss. It's interesting to note that a black worker in the hospital intimates that in order to succeed as a resident, Poitier had to take tests the whites didn't have to, etc. Poitier orders him to knock it off.
Although a star from the late '30s, Linda Darnell is only 27 in this film. She's deglamorized but beautiful, and "No Way Out" was made at a time when she was getting her best roles. She's marvelous as a down and out, frightened woman.
Although the genre has evolved since "No Way Out," this is a tough, tense, well directed movie that is well worth seeing.
Great film nourish photography and grim world view in this film. All the performances are fine. Sparse music score is very effective and uses some tunes on a radio to good effect too. Approach to racial issues and poverty still seem true today in a realistic not preachy way. This is more film noir than political in nature--a major plus.
Darnel is a stand out. The situation is interesting. Racial elements still spark heat even today or maybe even more heat as the politically correct 21st century wouldn't let the racism be as raw as it is here.
My only complaint is a plot contrivance towards the end and then Widmark struggling with an over the top (writing wise) psycho coward villain ending that probably seemed a little fresher back then. It's not the actor's fault it's the concept and writing that just don't work.
It's kind of like they wanted a "thriller" ending and the film would have done better with a more personal or internal conflict than the melodramatic way it goes. Also I see from the trivia section that the studio forced a change to the ending and this hurts as well.
Too bad as it almost spoils a grade A movie. Still a film that deserves to be better known today, even if it stumbles in the final lap.
Darnel is a stand out. The situation is interesting. Racial elements still spark heat even today or maybe even more heat as the politically correct 21st century wouldn't let the racism be as raw as it is here.
My only complaint is a plot contrivance towards the end and then Widmark struggling with an over the top (writing wise) psycho coward villain ending that probably seemed a little fresher back then. It's not the actor's fault it's the concept and writing that just don't work.
It's kind of like they wanted a "thriller" ending and the film would have done better with a more personal or internal conflict than the melodramatic way it goes. Also I see from the trivia section that the studio forced a change to the ending and this hurts as well.
Too bad as it almost spoils a grade A movie. Still a film that deserves to be better known today, even if it stumbles in the final lap.
- classicsoncall
- Feb 8, 2013
- Permalink
If you like your noir hardboiled and action filled, this may not be the movie for you. But if you can handle a frank and at times abrasive drama about racism and it's social consequences this movie has a lot to offer. At times the good intentions of the director and cast threaten to overshadow the storyline, but there's much to praise about the performances. Especially the antagonism between Poitier and Widmark makes sparks fly,and you keep wondering how this movie ever got made in the first place. Widmark's racism is crude and offensive and would never be put on a movie screen today. When you consider this was made in 1950, it's truly amazing this movie was even considered for production.Hardly a feel-good movie, it failed miserably at the box office. The usual explanation in such cases is that the movie was ahead of it's time, and in this case that's more than true. This is not a movie for couch potatoes, you need to keep your brain switched on for this one, but if you do, you will see a rich, rewarding movie.
- madmonkmcghee
- Nov 6, 2012
- Permalink
A hospital-bound drama that gets more exciting to watch when it gets out of the hospital. Any film with Sidney Poitier from this era (or just about any era) is bound to have racial overtones, and this one is about as overtoned as they get. Richard Widmark reprises his psycho image, this time as a racist thug arrested with his dying brother after being shot in the leg while trying to rob a gas station, and Poitier is the doctor assigned by idealist head doctor Stephen McNalley to work in the county hospital's lock-up criminal ward. Between all the mutual admiration between Poitier and McNalley the film gets preachy, but finds some legs (literally) when attractive Linda Darnell comes in as the dying brother's estranged wife and opens a can of worms with her relationship with Widmark and other racists from his part of town. The white racist community is fairly chillingly portrayed (it's the strongest part of the film in my opinion) as they prepare one night to attack the black part of town, with cinematographer Milton Krasner really finding the perfect mix of light and darkness in scenes that explode off the screen.
- RanchoTuVu
- Jan 9, 2008
- Permalink
- JurijFedorov
- Jun 27, 2022
- Permalink