A pickpocket (Richard Widmark) unwittingly lifts a message destined for enemy agents and becomes a target for a Communist spy ring.
In August 1952, the script was deemed unacceptable by the Production Code, by reasons of "excessive brutality and sadistic beatings, of both men and women." The committee also expressed disdain for the vicious beating of the character "Candy", on the part of "Joey." Apparently we had slid backwards in the 1950s, as such things would have been fine a decade earlier.
The French release of the movie removed any reference to spies and microfilm in the translation. They called the movie "Le Port de la Drogue" (Carrying Drugs). The managers of 20th Century Fox thought that the theme of communist spies was too controversial in a country where the Communist Party was an influential and legitimate part of public life. This is fascinating.
The whole concept is clever because it blends film noir and spy thriller. The two do not seem to overlap, but in this world they go together just fine. I prefer noir over spies, and I think that was executed well.
In August 1952, the script was deemed unacceptable by the Production Code, by reasons of "excessive brutality and sadistic beatings, of both men and women." The committee also expressed disdain for the vicious beating of the character "Candy", on the part of "Joey." Apparently we had slid backwards in the 1950s, as such things would have been fine a decade earlier.
The French release of the movie removed any reference to spies and microfilm in the translation. They called the movie "Le Port de la Drogue" (Carrying Drugs). The managers of 20th Century Fox thought that the theme of communist spies was too controversial in a country where the Communist Party was an influential and legitimate part of public life. This is fascinating.
The whole concept is clever because it blends film noir and spy thriller. The two do not seem to overlap, but in this world they go together just fine. I prefer noir over spies, and I think that was executed well.