Whodunits are a dime a dozen in my view.What makes In the Heat of the Night so unique in the murder mystery genre is it's setting:The racially tense deep south.This is what I enjoy about the film.You have two major plot lines to keep you engrossed:The investigation into the murder itself,and the racial tensions between Sidney Poitier's Virgil Tibbs character and virtually every other character in the film.The film is loaded with great acting,particularly from Poitier,who,not surprisingly,considers this his best work and is his favorite amongst all the projects he has done.Not only is this recommended viewing,it is recommended for a spot on your home video shelf.
305 Reviews
Through The Mississippi Darkness
Lechuguilla3 January 2008
Gritty realism and a strong performance by Rod Steiger rev up the technical quality of this taut drama about a visiting Northern Black detective named Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier) who gets nailed as a suspect, foolishly, in the murder of a local VIP, in a small town in Mississippi. Eventually, the town's White police chief, the gum chewing Gillespie (Rod Steiger), accepts Tibbs' innocence. And the two of them then work together, reluctantly, to solve the case.
Forty years after the film was made, the racial themes seem just a tad heavy-handed. Whites are always backward and racist. And Tibbs is smart, urbane, and sophisticated. But back in the 1960s, the filmmaker probably did need to be blunt. And the point is made that Blacks and Whites, working together, can accomplish worthy aims, even though old Black Joe is still pickin' cotton at the Endicott Cotton Company.
As a whodunit, the story is fairly good, convenient coincidences notwithstanding. The clue to the killer's identity is pleasantly subtle.
The film's cinematography and production design are terrific. Many scenes take place at night. And the opaque lighting makes for a moody, slightly dangerous look and feel. Loved how they photographed that train moving down the tracks in the Mississippi darkness, a metaphor related to the film's theme. And the sound of a train whistle adds to the mournful realism.
Interiors look authentic. The masking tape that covers rips in a big leather chair in Gillespie's shabby office is so true to life. A single white light bulb hangs down from the ceiling in a small neighborhood grocery store, where the shelves are filled with empty fruit jars. And that greasy spoon called Comptons reeks of 1960's Southern rural reality.
My only complaint with this film is the background music. Some of the jukebox songs are not consistent with the film's overall tone.
"In The Heat Of The Night" is a technically well made, and quite interesting, murder mystery. Yet, it will always be remembered, rightfully, as the film that offered hope of racial harmony, during a decade in which there was none. Its "Best Picture" Oscar award is thus explained.
Forty years after the film was made, the racial themes seem just a tad heavy-handed. Whites are always backward and racist. And Tibbs is smart, urbane, and sophisticated. But back in the 1960s, the filmmaker probably did need to be blunt. And the point is made that Blacks and Whites, working together, can accomplish worthy aims, even though old Black Joe is still pickin' cotton at the Endicott Cotton Company.
As a whodunit, the story is fairly good, convenient coincidences notwithstanding. The clue to the killer's identity is pleasantly subtle.
The film's cinematography and production design are terrific. Many scenes take place at night. And the opaque lighting makes for a moody, slightly dangerous look and feel. Loved how they photographed that train moving down the tracks in the Mississippi darkness, a metaphor related to the film's theme. And the sound of a train whistle adds to the mournful realism.
Interiors look authentic. The masking tape that covers rips in a big leather chair in Gillespie's shabby office is so true to life. A single white light bulb hangs down from the ceiling in a small neighborhood grocery store, where the shelves are filled with empty fruit jars. And that greasy spoon called Comptons reeks of 1960's Southern rural reality.
My only complaint with this film is the background music. Some of the jukebox songs are not consistent with the film's overall tone.
"In The Heat Of The Night" is a technically well made, and quite interesting, murder mystery. Yet, it will always be remembered, rightfully, as the film that offered hope of racial harmony, during a decade in which there was none. Its "Best Picture" Oscar award is thus explained.
Top Acting and Story for a Difficult Subject
thespeos28 November 2021
A well-done film of the raucous Civil Rights era, and should be standard viewing in classrooms.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Up front, it's only lightly dramatic, fueled by the socially-supported bigotry of that era.
What's very clever about this film is the way the story reveals itself in stages.
It's one of the best stories in that regard; it actually just gets better as the film progressives.
If you're not interested in the race struggles of that era then this film may not interest you.
ACTING: Even with a swath of "dumb redneck" characters, the whole cast are believable and hold their characters well.
Of course, Poitier and Steiger are simply awesome on their own and fireworks together. Really superb blend.
TEMPO: An excellent pace with nothing hyper or dull. With Steiger there's a lot of yelling (as was his custom).
CINEMATOGRAPHY: Love old films, and settings all by themselves. If you want to step back into time and literally see what the "Old South" was like, watch this.
DIRECTING / WRITING: Excellent directing and writing ... so much attention to detail and the handling of the subject. My only critique is the screenplay was written by a man who did so primarily for TV, and it occasionally shows.
Is it a very good film? Yes.
Should you watch this once? A must.
Rating: 8.1.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Up front, it's only lightly dramatic, fueled by the socially-supported bigotry of that era.
What's very clever about this film is the way the story reveals itself in stages.
It's one of the best stories in that regard; it actually just gets better as the film progressives.
If you're not interested in the race struggles of that era then this film may not interest you.
ACTING: Even with a swath of "dumb redneck" characters, the whole cast are believable and hold their characters well.
Of course, Poitier and Steiger are simply awesome on their own and fireworks together. Really superb blend.
TEMPO: An excellent pace with nothing hyper or dull. With Steiger there's a lot of yelling (as was his custom).
CINEMATOGRAPHY: Love old films, and settings all by themselves. If you want to step back into time and literally see what the "Old South" was like, watch this.
DIRECTING / WRITING: Excellent directing and writing ... so much attention to detail and the handling of the subject. My only critique is the screenplay was written by a man who did so primarily for TV, and it occasionally shows.
Is it a very good film? Yes.
Should you watch this once? A must.
Rating: 8.1.
Once timely, now timeless
bwaynef23 September 2005
One of the great films of the 60s, "In the Heat of the Night" hasn't aged a bit in the four decades since its release and now deserves to be ranked with the great films of all time. Beautifully atmospheric, Haskell Wexler's brilliant cinematography and Norman Jewison's first rate direction make you feel the humidity of the small Mississippi town in which a black detective teams with the redneck sheriff to solve the murder of an important industrialist.
As sheriff Bill Gillespie, Rod Steiger is superb in his Oscar winning role, and this film provides Sidney Poitier with some of his greatest screen moments, including his famous admonition to Steiger that became the title of the less impressive 1970 spin off: "They call me MISTER Tibbs!"
This is one of the few politically correct films to make its point without resorting to heavy-handed, sanctimonious preaching. Stirling Silliphant's Oscar winning screenplay never hits a false note, and the change that occurs in the relationship between the leading characters is subtle, and, therefore, believable. The two stars are ably supported by an outstanding cast of both veterans (Lee Grant, Warren Oates, Beah Richards) and newcomers (Scott Wilson, Quentin Dean, and the delightfully creepy Anthony James). The score by Quincy Jones, featuring Ray Charles' rendition of the title song, captures the proper mood throughout.
In a year when the odds-makers were predicting an Oscar victory for "Bonnie and Clyde" or "The Graduate," "In the Heat of the Night" surprised the prognosticators by taking the Best Picture prize and four other Oscars. Considering its theme of racial tolerance, it seemed an appropriate choice at an Oscar ceremony that was postponed following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. The film's theme made it timely, but its artistry makes it timeless.
The Academy made the right choice.
Brian W. Fairbanks
As sheriff Bill Gillespie, Rod Steiger is superb in his Oscar winning role, and this film provides Sidney Poitier with some of his greatest screen moments, including his famous admonition to Steiger that became the title of the less impressive 1970 spin off: "They call me MISTER Tibbs!"
This is one of the few politically correct films to make its point without resorting to heavy-handed, sanctimonious preaching. Stirling Silliphant's Oscar winning screenplay never hits a false note, and the change that occurs in the relationship between the leading characters is subtle, and, therefore, believable. The two stars are ably supported by an outstanding cast of both veterans (Lee Grant, Warren Oates, Beah Richards) and newcomers (Scott Wilson, Quentin Dean, and the delightfully creepy Anthony James). The score by Quincy Jones, featuring Ray Charles' rendition of the title song, captures the proper mood throughout.
In a year when the odds-makers were predicting an Oscar victory for "Bonnie and Clyde" or "The Graduate," "In the Heat of the Night" surprised the prognosticators by taking the Best Picture prize and four other Oscars. Considering its theme of racial tolerance, it seemed an appropriate choice at an Oscar ceremony that was postponed following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. The film's theme made it timely, but its artistry makes it timeless.
The Academy made the right choice.
Brian W. Fairbanks
"They call me Mister Tibbs!"
CJGlowacki7 September 2004
Whether he likes it or not, Sidney Poitier will always be remembered first and foremost as the first black actor to continuously star alongside and above his white counterparts. Just look at the opening credits to "In the Heat of the Night" and you will see that not only does he get an above the title starring credit with method maniac Rod Steiger, but his name also appears first. Something that could have easily been switched around and overlooked considering the importance of each character. But for this socially aware thriller born of the turbulent sixties, it had to be, most definitely, a conscious choice.
For Poitier, this film, along with "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?", marks the last of his civil rights driven roles in which his character's race is an all important plot element. From "Edge of the City" to "The Defiant Ones", Poitier excelled in bringing intelligent and commanding three dimensional characters to life. A feat he had to succeed at if his films were to gain the trust of a predominantly white audience and push for racial equality. Call him the Jackie Robinson of Hollywood.
When we first see Poitier as Virgil Tibbs, he is stepping off the train in the small Mississippi town of Sparta. Although we can only see him from the waist down, we do get a quick glimpse of his hand and from that we are aware of his race. An important fact for the audience to dwell on later when Rod Steiger as sheriff Gillespie, standing over a dead body on Main Street, and calls for his deputy to round up any strangers for questioning. From that moment on, director Norman Jewison establishes the racial tension that will only grow more and more intense as the film goes on.
Sometimes, the film is far from subtle in exploring the issue of racism. Endicott's plantation, complete with tall white pillars and a black jockey lawn ornament to guard them, is a perfect example. What starts off as a surprisingly civil conversation between Tibbs and Endicott quickly turns heated and unpredictable. From that moment on, the experience will serve to cloud Tibbs' judgment and bring his own flaws to the surface, making him almost as complex a character as Gillespie.
And it is the complexity of Gillespie that got Steiger the Best Actor Oscar over Poitier in 1968. This man has heart, but not made of gold, and his motivations are far from pure. He is simply a man who believes in doing his job, and doing it as just as possible - even if it means arresting a friend for murder. Take for an example the scene in which Tibbs is surrounded by a gang of blood thirsty locals. When Gillespie arrives to save the day, he simply gives them a warning and tells them to go home. It is only when they insult him personally that he becomes angry and takes a swing. His action is just - his motivation almost vain.
In the end, after the murder is solved and racial injustice is swept back under the rug, Tibbs and Gillespie say their farewells and continue on with their very different lives. Each one better off for knowing the other.
Rating [on a 5 star system] : 5 stars
For Poitier, this film, along with "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?", marks the last of his civil rights driven roles in which his character's race is an all important plot element. From "Edge of the City" to "The Defiant Ones", Poitier excelled in bringing intelligent and commanding three dimensional characters to life. A feat he had to succeed at if his films were to gain the trust of a predominantly white audience and push for racial equality. Call him the Jackie Robinson of Hollywood.
When we first see Poitier as Virgil Tibbs, he is stepping off the train in the small Mississippi town of Sparta. Although we can only see him from the waist down, we do get a quick glimpse of his hand and from that we are aware of his race. An important fact for the audience to dwell on later when Rod Steiger as sheriff Gillespie, standing over a dead body on Main Street, and calls for his deputy to round up any strangers for questioning. From that moment on, director Norman Jewison establishes the racial tension that will only grow more and more intense as the film goes on.
Sometimes, the film is far from subtle in exploring the issue of racism. Endicott's plantation, complete with tall white pillars and a black jockey lawn ornament to guard them, is a perfect example. What starts off as a surprisingly civil conversation between Tibbs and Endicott quickly turns heated and unpredictable. From that moment on, the experience will serve to cloud Tibbs' judgment and bring his own flaws to the surface, making him almost as complex a character as Gillespie.
And it is the complexity of Gillespie that got Steiger the Best Actor Oscar over Poitier in 1968. This man has heart, but not made of gold, and his motivations are far from pure. He is simply a man who believes in doing his job, and doing it as just as possible - even if it means arresting a friend for murder. Take for an example the scene in which Tibbs is surrounded by a gang of blood thirsty locals. When Gillespie arrives to save the day, he simply gives them a warning and tells them to go home. It is only when they insult him personally that he becomes angry and takes a swing. His action is just - his motivation almost vain.
In the end, after the murder is solved and racial injustice is swept back under the rug, Tibbs and Gillespie say their farewells and continue on with their very different lives. Each one better off for knowing the other.
Rating [on a 5 star system] : 5 stars
flawless movie, deserved Best Picture
dr_foreman29 March 2004
There are many bad "issues" movies out there, but this is not one of them. In a bad movie, all of the racist characters would be one dimensional and one hundred percent evil; here, Steiger is allowed to play a prejudiced man who is actually sympathetic and capable of growth (hence the Oscar). In a great twist, Virgil Tibbs himself is shown to be capable of prejudice, as he pursues Endicott without sufficient evidence. It's refreshing to see a movie that portrays the entire spectrum of racism, from the crazy extremists (and there are plenty of those on hand here) to the more subtly prejudiced.
"Mississippi Burning," a weaker effort, is not only more tediously didactic, but also less progressive; that film doesn't feature a protagonist like Virgil Tibbs, and instead focuses on the actions of two white federal agents. In this case, the old movie really is the better movie; produced at the height of the civil rights struggle, "In the Heat of the Night" feels more immediate and passionate than preachy films on the subject that were made years later, after the tension had died down.
Some reviewers complain that the mystery segments of the film are confusing, but I follow them without much trouble. Tibbs does a great Sherlock Holmes routine throughout, as he pieces together the solution based on clues that are also available to viewers. Sure, the ending is surprising, but it doesn't come entirely out of left field; I actually admire the subtle ways that clues are sewn throughout the film. If you're not used to mysteries, the barrage of red herrings and dead-end clues might surprise you, but it's pretty standard stuff for the genre.
I knew about the classic line "They call me Mr. Tibbs!" long before I actually saw this movie. I used to wonder why the line was so famous; it doesn't sound that exciting, does it? But when I finally heard Poitier say it in context, I asked my brother to pause the tape so I could cheer without missing any of the subsequent dialog. That's how excited I get during this movie. The performances are so naturalistic, and the racial conflict so vividly drawn, that I get pulled into the action completely. Though 1967 was a strong year for films, I still think that the right one got Best Picture, and not just because it was topical; "In the Heat of the Night" is a well-directed, superb character study, populated by some of the most vivid characters I've ever encountered in a movie.
"Mississippi Burning," a weaker effort, is not only more tediously didactic, but also less progressive; that film doesn't feature a protagonist like Virgil Tibbs, and instead focuses on the actions of two white federal agents. In this case, the old movie really is the better movie; produced at the height of the civil rights struggle, "In the Heat of the Night" feels more immediate and passionate than preachy films on the subject that were made years later, after the tension had died down.
Some reviewers complain that the mystery segments of the film are confusing, but I follow them without much trouble. Tibbs does a great Sherlock Holmes routine throughout, as he pieces together the solution based on clues that are also available to viewers. Sure, the ending is surprising, but it doesn't come entirely out of left field; I actually admire the subtle ways that clues are sewn throughout the film. If you're not used to mysteries, the barrage of red herrings and dead-end clues might surprise you, but it's pretty standard stuff for the genre.
I knew about the classic line "They call me Mr. Tibbs!" long before I actually saw this movie. I used to wonder why the line was so famous; it doesn't sound that exciting, does it? But when I finally heard Poitier say it in context, I asked my brother to pause the tape so I could cheer without missing any of the subsequent dialog. That's how excited I get during this movie. The performances are so naturalistic, and the racial conflict so vividly drawn, that I get pulled into the action completely. Though 1967 was a strong year for films, I still think that the right one got Best Picture, and not just because it was topical; "In the Heat of the Night" is a well-directed, superb character study, populated by some of the most vivid characters I've ever encountered in a movie.
The Growing Pains of the New South
bkoganbing11 May 2007
In order to understand what's happening in In the Heat of the Night you have to realize that it is set in a very specific time period. The Civil Rights Act had been passed in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. But the impact of those laws was only beginning to be felt.
Especially the Voting Rights Act. The town of Sparta, Mississippi where William Schallert was Mayor and Rod Steiger was sheriff now has a significant new voting population and blacks might be a majority in that county. But even if they aren't, they know have a voice in the electoral process. Someone like Steiger has to take that into account now. Of course some of his deputies might not yet be with the program which explains why when a murder/robbery is committed of a very prominent northern businessman, Warren Oates sees fit to roust Sidney Poitier who's an unfamiliar black face in that town.
What a surprise they all get when they find out he's a top Philadelphia, Pennsylvania homicide detective and when his identity is established, his boss in Philly offers his services.
Poitier and Steiger both have to work through their prejudices, how each sees the other to solve this mystery which writer Stirling Silliphant gives us several red herrings before we learn the truth. Though Steiger got the Oscar for Best Actor, it should really have been a joint award. Their conflict and growing respect for each other drives the film. Steiger needs his expertise and respects him for that and Poitier comes to respect Steiger for his honesty.
Norman Jewison got great performances from his stars and the supporting cast of whom Warren Oates as the dimwit redneck deputy really shines.
Though set in a very narrow period of our history, In the Heat of the Night holds up very well with some eternal truths in its story. And it's the story of times that were a changing as one spokesman of the sixties put it.
Especially the Voting Rights Act. The town of Sparta, Mississippi where William Schallert was Mayor and Rod Steiger was sheriff now has a significant new voting population and blacks might be a majority in that county. But even if they aren't, they know have a voice in the electoral process. Someone like Steiger has to take that into account now. Of course some of his deputies might not yet be with the program which explains why when a murder/robbery is committed of a very prominent northern businessman, Warren Oates sees fit to roust Sidney Poitier who's an unfamiliar black face in that town.
What a surprise they all get when they find out he's a top Philadelphia, Pennsylvania homicide detective and when his identity is established, his boss in Philly offers his services.
Poitier and Steiger both have to work through their prejudices, how each sees the other to solve this mystery which writer Stirling Silliphant gives us several red herrings before we learn the truth. Though Steiger got the Oscar for Best Actor, it should really have been a joint award. Their conflict and growing respect for each other drives the film. Steiger needs his expertise and respects him for that and Poitier comes to respect Steiger for his honesty.
Norman Jewison got great performances from his stars and the supporting cast of whom Warren Oates as the dimwit redneck deputy really shines.
Though set in a very narrow period of our history, In the Heat of the Night holds up very well with some eternal truths in its story. And it's the story of times that were a changing as one spokesman of the sixties put it.
Poitier and Steiger make this a must-see
catherine_stebbins22 July 2010
The central mystery in Norman Jewison's exploration of racial tension is irrelevant to the importance of this film. While most of its other elements I could take or leave, the central relationship between Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier) and Gillespie (Rod Steiger) is still riveting and manages to not be heavy-handed but subtle in its development and progress. Seeing Tibbs push down his anger whilst everyone in the town treats him with anger and violence is wonderfully portrayed by Poitier. On the other hand, seeing Steiger grapple with his morals with Poitier's arrival is a treat as well. Each has their own complexities to deal with and when they are together, it adds an additional dynamic to the proceedings. Not only does the film hold important historic relevance but the racial issues still hold meaning today. The two lead performances are electric and are the main reason for seeing the film although all of it is well done.
www.cinemaenthusiast.com
www.cinemaenthusiast.com
Well-Crafted Murder Mystery With A Twist
ReelCheese3 December 2006
IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT is a well-crafted murder mystery with a twist. Sidney Poitier is a big city detective wrongfully arrested by a racist small police detachment after the brutal murder of the town's would-be financial savior. Once the matter is resolved and Poitier released, he finds himself aiding his former captors, including Police Chief Rod Steiger, in their quest to get to the bottom of the crime.
An Academy Award winner for Best Picture, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT works on so many levels. It's a solid, unpredictable whodunit with beautiful cinematography and crisp direction from Norman Jewison. All the actors are on top of their games, particularly Steiger, whose not-entirely-likable chief gradually looks past his prejudices to warm up to Poitier. Poitier is his usual superb self, once again maintaining his vast dignity as the target of bigotry, much like he did in THE DEFIANT ONES.
And like THE DEFIANT ONES, a key theme in IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT is racism. In fact the racism on display here is so fierce and perverse that it's almost hard to believe (though I'm sure it didn't stretch a thing). You can't help but feel an emotional attachment to Poitier as he's subjected to taunts, attempted attacks, and off-color remarks from those who either don't realize the power of their words or don't care. Poitier proves again why he is perhaps the finest African-American actor ever to grace the screen.
IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT is one of those movies that, while not perfect, is impossible to dislike. It's classic, though still relevant, entertainment.
An Academy Award winner for Best Picture, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT works on so many levels. It's a solid, unpredictable whodunit with beautiful cinematography and crisp direction from Norman Jewison. All the actors are on top of their games, particularly Steiger, whose not-entirely-likable chief gradually looks past his prejudices to warm up to Poitier. Poitier is his usual superb self, once again maintaining his vast dignity as the target of bigotry, much like he did in THE DEFIANT ONES.
And like THE DEFIANT ONES, a key theme in IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT is racism. In fact the racism on display here is so fierce and perverse that it's almost hard to believe (though I'm sure it didn't stretch a thing). You can't help but feel an emotional attachment to Poitier as he's subjected to taunts, attempted attacks, and off-color remarks from those who either don't realize the power of their words or don't care. Poitier proves again why he is perhaps the finest African-American actor ever to grace the screen.
IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT is one of those movies that, while not perfect, is impossible to dislike. It's classic, though still relevant, entertainment.
Years later,this film is still socially important and still packs a punch.
raysond18 March 2003
Directed by Norman Jewison,the film "In The Heat Of The Night" won five Oscars including the Best Picture of 1967 over some stiff competition which included "Bonnie and Clyde","The Graduate","Guess Who's Coming To Dinner",and not to mention in the same category the musical "Camelot".
Even after some 35 years later after its initial release it is still one socially important masterpiece of a motion picture and to this day still packs a mighty punch. However,this picture came out during a time of one of the most turbulant times in American history and the overall struggle for Civil Rights and at a time when America itself was confronted with its own racism including the escalating saga in Vietnam,and it also focus on the status of the black man in particular as an individual in his own right.
Based on the John Ball's novel of the same title,the story takes place in a sleepy little town in Mississippi where the sweltering conflict of racism is found everywhere and it shows during the first twenty minutes of the movie. Sidney Poitier stars as Virgil Tibbs,a young black policeman from Philadelphia who ends up in the small town of Sparta who happens to be the suspect in a grisly murder and is arrested just because he is black. When police chief Bill Gillespie(played by Rod Steiger in the role that won him the Oscar for Best Actor in 1967) learns that Poitier is an police officer and not only that a homicide detective,he enlists his help.
However,Virgil is relectant but knows that he is likely the only man who can piece the clues together and solve this complicated case and catch the criminals who did this and bring them to justice. But that will not be easy for our young detective since he has to confront complete bigotry and straight up hatred at every turn not to even mention having his own life hanging in the balance and some dealings with the town mob. Not only that but in turn having Gillespie there for help and every turn to catch a deadly killer.
However,there are some fine performances here that makes this film worth seeing. Poitier's portrayal of Virgil Tibbs is excellent and Steiger's portrayal of Bill Gillespie is brillantly portrayal and it shows just by watching these two actors go and it in the prime of their careers. Also straight support performances from Warren Oates and Lee Grant as well. The film itself is overall brillant because of the risk-taking elements that are exposed here and it is handled nicely due to some of the subject matter that is present throughout the film. The direction,and the screenplay are nowadays a standard classic. The film's theme song sung by the great Ray Charles is a wonder to behold and the score by Quincy Jones is superb. A great film that needs to seen again all the way around just to show how different as human beings we can be in hopes of working together in a time of great need. Catch it sometime on either on home video or later on TCM(Turner Classic Movies). Five Stars.
Even after some 35 years later after its initial release it is still one socially important masterpiece of a motion picture and to this day still packs a mighty punch. However,this picture came out during a time of one of the most turbulant times in American history and the overall struggle for Civil Rights and at a time when America itself was confronted with its own racism including the escalating saga in Vietnam,and it also focus on the status of the black man in particular as an individual in his own right.
Based on the John Ball's novel of the same title,the story takes place in a sleepy little town in Mississippi where the sweltering conflict of racism is found everywhere and it shows during the first twenty minutes of the movie. Sidney Poitier stars as Virgil Tibbs,a young black policeman from Philadelphia who ends up in the small town of Sparta who happens to be the suspect in a grisly murder and is arrested just because he is black. When police chief Bill Gillespie(played by Rod Steiger in the role that won him the Oscar for Best Actor in 1967) learns that Poitier is an police officer and not only that a homicide detective,he enlists his help.
However,Virgil is relectant but knows that he is likely the only man who can piece the clues together and solve this complicated case and catch the criminals who did this and bring them to justice. But that will not be easy for our young detective since he has to confront complete bigotry and straight up hatred at every turn not to even mention having his own life hanging in the balance and some dealings with the town mob. Not only that but in turn having Gillespie there for help and every turn to catch a deadly killer.
However,there are some fine performances here that makes this film worth seeing. Poitier's portrayal of Virgil Tibbs is excellent and Steiger's portrayal of Bill Gillespie is brillantly portrayal and it shows just by watching these two actors go and it in the prime of their careers. Also straight support performances from Warren Oates and Lee Grant as well. The film itself is overall brillant because of the risk-taking elements that are exposed here and it is handled nicely due to some of the subject matter that is present throughout the film. The direction,and the screenplay are nowadays a standard classic. The film's theme song sung by the great Ray Charles is a wonder to behold and the score by Quincy Jones is superb. A great film that needs to seen again all the way around just to show how different as human beings we can be in hopes of working together in a time of great need. Catch it sometime on either on home video or later on TCM(Turner Classic Movies). Five Stars.
Breakthrough for its time
skepticskeptical10 March 2020
In the Heat of the Night was released in 1967 and tells a story set in Mississippi, so racism is naturally its focus. Both Rod Steiger and Sydney Poitier did a great job showing how, despite history and prejudice, blacks and whites can indeed work together and appreciate the humanity of one another. The depiction of most of the whites in the Deep South in this film is quite derogatory, but to be honest, not less than the Cohen brothers´ modern depictions of such people. There are exceptions to every tendency, however, and in this case there are individuals who rise above their upbringing and social context to appreciate the value of all human beings.
This is a good example of why there should be no censorship of works of art, ever. The word ´nigger´ is used throughout, but it is essential accurately to depict what Mississippi was like in order to be able to understand how much hatred and prejudice needed to be surmounted--and still do to some extent. To whitewash the history as though people did not use words such as ´nigger´ and wave Confederate flags as signs of white supremacy would be to discount the real strides made by human beings on this front over the past century.
This is a good example of why there should be no censorship of works of art, ever. The word ´nigger´ is used throughout, but it is essential accurately to depict what Mississippi was like in order to be able to understand how much hatred and prejudice needed to be surmounted--and still do to some extent. To whitewash the history as though people did not use words such as ´nigger´ and wave Confederate flags as signs of white supremacy would be to discount the real strides made by human beings on this front over the past century.
The Sun Has Set -- And You're Still Here?
rmax30482325 April 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Pauline Kael remarked at the time of the release of this movie that Hollywood seemed to have divided the United States into three parts. There was New York. There was The South. And then there was everything else. This is a story of "The South," circa 1968, with African-Americans as a second and much lower caste in the cotton-picking, sweltering South.
The story is well known. Sidney Poitier is Virgil Tibbs, an expert homicide detective from Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) who is told by his Chief of Police (Rizzo, no friend of blacks, as I know from living in Philadelphia at the time) to assist the local cops in the solution of an economically important murder. Tibbs' identity as a homicide cop is only revealed, in a funny scene, after he has been arrested for the murder by the pragmatic and inept local constabulary. Thereafter, he is nudged into helping them by their wheedling encouragement and his own arrogance. Lo! He solves the murder!
Well, in truth, the solution isn't really important. Something to do with abortion and who's responsible, but it's a minor matter. And actually the final scene is unbelievable. Poitier, about to be slaughtered by a gang of murderous and thoroughly organized rednecks who have all kinds of guns pointed at him, stymies them all by simply saying, "Look in her purse." In a Faulkner short story, the movie would have ended right there.
There are three things that make this movie worth repeated viewing. One is the ethos of the film. The second is the acting. And the third is the production itself.
The ethos of the film, by which I mean the values it examines, are locked into the 1960s, and even earlier. I recall hitchhiking through the South (Maryland, actually) and still seeing signs at the time reading "Colored Only" over the rest rooms. And an African-American friend who took pictures of such arrangements being followed out of town by a short string of local cars and stopped for questioning. The film reflects a dangerous and hate-filled time which Southerners have finally overcome, thank God.
And yet this same ethos lives on in the minds of some Southern whites and even more African-Americans, not reflected in on-the-ground behavioral reality, but in beliefs. I taught for years in a Southern mostly African-American university before I came to realize how important this myth is to blacks. To ask them, or anyone else, to give up that history of persecution is to ask them to sacrifice a solidarity that is otherwise unattainable. There is "us" and then there is "them". And "they" are the enemy which draws us together and from which we gain support and succor. There is not much segregation in the South or elsewhere (although it still exists), but there might as well be.
From the point of view of any cohesive group, there almost NEEDS to be. Don't human organizations need a history of persecution? The Christians have Nero, Jews have four thousand years of it, including the holocaust, Irish have the British occupation, Moslems have the hejira, Mormons have the assassination of Smith. We -- who have once been treated unjustly -- have Victim Power. You can't understand us unless you've walked a mile in our moccasins.
The acting. Rod Steiger deserved his academy award. He's often dismissible but not here. Standing around the initial dead body, worried, he's furiously chewing gum and trying to think of somebody to pin it on. Then he suddenly stops chewing, darts his eyes around, and says, "Couldda been a hitch-hiker." A well-conveyed dramatic moment. Poitier is at least equally good. He was lambasted in some of the press for playing a super-black, a kind of white guy in blackface. The fact is that Poitier was one of the best dramatic actors who has ever appeared on screen, and this is one of his best performances. Oh -- he's put upon, true, but once he gets his transmission in the proper gear he becomes all too human. Showing off in a subtle way, wrong about the town's big time racist being responsible, and Gillespie has his number. "Boy, you're just like the rest of us, ain't you." Warren Oates adds some much-needed comedy.
The bad guy has a face that could clear a room without using a gun. The succulent young woman who is spied upon by the Oates' character should be squirted all over with whipped cream spray and eaten alive. Perhaps the funniest scene in the move is when she describes Oates taking her down to the cemetery and rolling around together on the cool marble slabs. Steiger stops chewing again, looks up in amazement, and asks, "Sam did THAT?" Not so much that he's shocked at his deputy's depravity, just surprised at his imagination!
To end this quickly, okay, it was shot in Illinois. But does it capture the small-town South of the time! Two cars racing towards an empty garage and the camera shows us the squealing tires stirring up dust -- and a pile of burning, smoking garbage, which is what it's all about.
The story is well known. Sidney Poitier is Virgil Tibbs, an expert homicide detective from Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) who is told by his Chief of Police (Rizzo, no friend of blacks, as I know from living in Philadelphia at the time) to assist the local cops in the solution of an economically important murder. Tibbs' identity as a homicide cop is only revealed, in a funny scene, after he has been arrested for the murder by the pragmatic and inept local constabulary. Thereafter, he is nudged into helping them by their wheedling encouragement and his own arrogance. Lo! He solves the murder!
Well, in truth, the solution isn't really important. Something to do with abortion and who's responsible, but it's a minor matter. And actually the final scene is unbelievable. Poitier, about to be slaughtered by a gang of murderous and thoroughly organized rednecks who have all kinds of guns pointed at him, stymies them all by simply saying, "Look in her purse." In a Faulkner short story, the movie would have ended right there.
There are three things that make this movie worth repeated viewing. One is the ethos of the film. The second is the acting. And the third is the production itself.
The ethos of the film, by which I mean the values it examines, are locked into the 1960s, and even earlier. I recall hitchhiking through the South (Maryland, actually) and still seeing signs at the time reading "Colored Only" over the rest rooms. And an African-American friend who took pictures of such arrangements being followed out of town by a short string of local cars and stopped for questioning. The film reflects a dangerous and hate-filled time which Southerners have finally overcome, thank God.
And yet this same ethos lives on in the minds of some Southern whites and even more African-Americans, not reflected in on-the-ground behavioral reality, but in beliefs. I taught for years in a Southern mostly African-American university before I came to realize how important this myth is to blacks. To ask them, or anyone else, to give up that history of persecution is to ask them to sacrifice a solidarity that is otherwise unattainable. There is "us" and then there is "them". And "they" are the enemy which draws us together and from which we gain support and succor. There is not much segregation in the South or elsewhere (although it still exists), but there might as well be.
From the point of view of any cohesive group, there almost NEEDS to be. Don't human organizations need a history of persecution? The Christians have Nero, Jews have four thousand years of it, including the holocaust, Irish have the British occupation, Moslems have the hejira, Mormons have the assassination of Smith. We -- who have once been treated unjustly -- have Victim Power. You can't understand us unless you've walked a mile in our moccasins.
The acting. Rod Steiger deserved his academy award. He's often dismissible but not here. Standing around the initial dead body, worried, he's furiously chewing gum and trying to think of somebody to pin it on. Then he suddenly stops chewing, darts his eyes around, and says, "Couldda been a hitch-hiker." A well-conveyed dramatic moment. Poitier is at least equally good. He was lambasted in some of the press for playing a super-black, a kind of white guy in blackface. The fact is that Poitier was one of the best dramatic actors who has ever appeared on screen, and this is one of his best performances. Oh -- he's put upon, true, but once he gets his transmission in the proper gear he becomes all too human. Showing off in a subtle way, wrong about the town's big time racist being responsible, and Gillespie has his number. "Boy, you're just like the rest of us, ain't you." Warren Oates adds some much-needed comedy.
The bad guy has a face that could clear a room without using a gun. The succulent young woman who is spied upon by the Oates' character should be squirted all over with whipped cream spray and eaten alive. Perhaps the funniest scene in the move is when she describes Oates taking her down to the cemetery and rolling around together on the cool marble slabs. Steiger stops chewing again, looks up in amazement, and asks, "Sam did THAT?" Not so much that he's shocked at his deputy's depravity, just surprised at his imagination!
To end this quickly, okay, it was shot in Illinois. But does it capture the small-town South of the time! Two cars racing towards an empty garage and the camera shows us the squealing tires stirring up dust -- and a pile of burning, smoking garbage, which is what it's all about.
In the Heat of the Night
CinemaSerf22 May 2023
Warren Oates ("Wood") steps from his patrol car in the quiet town of Sparta and discovers the body of "Colbert" - a controversial local employer. Shortly afterwards he discovers "TIbbs" (Sidney Poitier) sitting waiting for the 4.05 train. He is black and there is a wealthy white murder victim on the street - ergo, two and two... Next thing, though, the police chief "Gillespie" (Rod Steiger) is interrogating their visitor and discovers that he is an accomplished homicide detective. Initially inclined to just send him on his way, "Gillespie" decides - with a bit of persuasion from the widow (Lee Grant) that it might make sense for "Tibbs" to do some of the investigating himself. Backs up, heckles raised, the white supremacists are outraged and astonished in equal measure as the police allow him to follow his nose and to uncover some rather nasty little home truths about their community and the people who dwell within. On the face of it, it's about racial prejudice and perhaps, offers a rather simplistic get out solution. Or, maybe, it demonstrates that the best cure for ignorance is exposure to that which we loathe or don't understand and let behaviours and experience alter these views? There is room for both perspectives as we evaluate the police attitudes to this clever and slightly arrogant man who clearly considers himself to be as superior to them as they to him. Fifty-five years on, it's hard to appreciate just how profound this kind cinema was in alerting the US population to the bigotries in their own backyard, and Poitier always was a poised and measured actor when it came to making a point without shoving it down your throat! Steiger is also on good form here. He underplays his role, his character has flaws - sure - but as we progress there appears to be a willingness to mature and his performance manages that well. Small town life, small town mentality - with a racist, xenophobic, tinge. Well worth a watch.
An important film is not necessarily a good film
JonathanWalford21 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I understand how important the subject matter of this film was when it was made, but if you put aside the 'if only we could all get along' message, what you left with is a highly flawed film.
The film has long drawn-out scenes like when the first suspect is being chased through the woods, while other important scenes are quickly cut to and from so fast that you can't understand how the plot advanced with so little said. The threat over whether Poitier's character is going to stay to solve the murder flip flops so many times I lost track. First Steiger wants him to go, then he wants him to stay, then go, then stay, then go. Steiger is supposed to be a racist, not necessarily stupid, so you have to wonder why he is willing to hang the first suspect he finds when he doesn't even know all the facts, especially when it's not even established if the suspect has an alibi or where or how he discovered the wallet. These are big plot holes and only one of several throughout the film.
Aside from holes in the writing and directing, there are egregious goofs like the deciduous forest in late autumn during what we are lead to believe is supposed to be a sultry summer heat wave. Alongside goofs there are unclear story lines, like why the boy in the café hates the cop.
The makers of this film were so intent on breaking a barrier they forgot to make a good film. I don't believe Steiger character's change of heart n the final scene, when he exhibited no softening of his own racist views throughout the story. In the Heat of the Night may have been an important film when it was made, but that doesn't make it a good film.
The film has long drawn-out scenes like when the first suspect is being chased through the woods, while other important scenes are quickly cut to and from so fast that you can't understand how the plot advanced with so little said. The threat over whether Poitier's character is going to stay to solve the murder flip flops so many times I lost track. First Steiger wants him to go, then he wants him to stay, then go, then stay, then go. Steiger is supposed to be a racist, not necessarily stupid, so you have to wonder why he is willing to hang the first suspect he finds when he doesn't even know all the facts, especially when it's not even established if the suspect has an alibi or where or how he discovered the wallet. These are big plot holes and only one of several throughout the film.
Aside from holes in the writing and directing, there are egregious goofs like the deciduous forest in late autumn during what we are lead to believe is supposed to be a sultry summer heat wave. Alongside goofs there are unclear story lines, like why the boy in the café hates the cop.
The makers of this film were so intent on breaking a barrier they forgot to make a good film. I don't believe Steiger character's change of heart n the final scene, when he exhibited no softening of his own racist views throughout the story. In the Heat of the Night may have been an important film when it was made, but that doesn't make it a good film.
...they call me Mr Tibbs!
Sleepin_Dragon26 July 2023
A prominent businessman is found dead in a small Mississippi town, local patrol cop Wood, picks up the first black man he comes across, a man who just so happens to be Detective Virgil Tibbs, who's just passing through.
First question, why on Earth is this film not in IMDb's top 100 movies of all time, let alone top 250? It makes no sense, this incredible film deserves its place there.
Outstanding from start to finish, In the heat of the night is a terrific mystery, an intelligent whodunnit, with some remarkable characters, but so much more, it highlights the social situation of the time.
What I found extraordinary, is the way that Gillespie begins to see the world through Virgil's eyes, he gets just a glimpse of what life is like from Virgil's point of view, the pair share some incredible scenes, that scene where chat about marriage and loneliness was phenomenal.
It is incredible when you think that in 1966, just one year before, The US sent up Lunar Orbiter 1, the first craft to orbit the moon, and yet Society was dogged by the most horrific racism.
Poitier delivers an outstanding performance, Oscar worthy in the eyes of many fans, me included, such an impressive presence. Steiger is equally terrific, the way Gillespie develops is a key factor to this movie's success.
The music is just incredible, there's that exquisite track by Ray Charles, which features prominently, but every featured track is spot on, it's a soundtrack you'll want to own.
One of the greatest movies ever made.
10/10.
First question, why on Earth is this film not in IMDb's top 100 movies of all time, let alone top 250? It makes no sense, this incredible film deserves its place there.
Outstanding from start to finish, In the heat of the night is a terrific mystery, an intelligent whodunnit, with some remarkable characters, but so much more, it highlights the social situation of the time.
What I found extraordinary, is the way that Gillespie begins to see the world through Virgil's eyes, he gets just a glimpse of what life is like from Virgil's point of view, the pair share some incredible scenes, that scene where chat about marriage and loneliness was phenomenal.
It is incredible when you think that in 1966, just one year before, The US sent up Lunar Orbiter 1, the first craft to orbit the moon, and yet Society was dogged by the most horrific racism.
Poitier delivers an outstanding performance, Oscar worthy in the eyes of many fans, me included, such an impressive presence. Steiger is equally terrific, the way Gillespie develops is a key factor to this movie's success.
The music is just incredible, there's that exquisite track by Ray Charles, which features prominently, but every featured track is spot on, it's a soundtrack you'll want to own.
One of the greatest movies ever made.
10/10.
The essence of modern-day film noir
robb_7724 May 2006
One of the best films of all time, a Best Picture Oscar winner, and a highly deserved one at that. After reading a plot summary, it would be easy for someone to classify Norman Jewison's IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT as a simple buddy-cop movie, but it is so much more - this is film-making at it's finest. An absolutely merciless mystery, NIGHT contains some incredibly intense scenes that might make some viewers uncomfortable (the garage confrontation comes immediately to mind).
The film is expertly put together, with the feel of heady film noir. The performances are first rate: both Poitier and Rod Steiger were nominated for Best Actor, with the Oscar actually going home to Steiger (the film won four other Oscars as well). The Poitier-Steiger pairing is one of the most potent in film history, and their slowly growing friendship is one of the most touching. is a glowing example of what happens when an excellent cast, director, and screenplay combine to make an exceptional film.
The film is expertly put together, with the feel of heady film noir. The performances are first rate: both Poitier and Rod Steiger were nominated for Best Actor, with the Oscar actually going home to Steiger (the film won four other Oscars as well). The Poitier-Steiger pairing is one of the most potent in film history, and their slowly growing friendship is one of the most touching. is a glowing example of what happens when an excellent cast, director, and screenplay combine to make an exceptional film.
One of the greatest films of the 60s
TheLittleSongbird5 July 2016
'In the Heat of the Night' was the winner of five Oscars with Norman Jewison for Best Director and the sound editing also receiving nominations, all richly deserved, especially the Best Picture and Best Actor.
Although the Best Picture was a strong one, apart from 'Doctor Doolittle', 'In the Heat of the Night' this reviewer finds the best of the five and also one of the greatest films of the 60s.
Visually, 'In the Heat of the Night' is an incredibly well-made film with cinematography that's both beautiful and gritty. It is immaculately directed also by Norman Jewison, who directed several other great films, and film and sound editing are also very good, fluid with a suitable unpleasantness which suits the atmosphere well and thrillingly authentic. Quincy Jones' soundtrack at least fits and evokes some good atmosphere, the title song sung by Ray Charles is a classic.
The script is incredibly thought-provoking with the racial tension tensely and vividly drawn, never resorting to heavy-handedness or talking at you, something that films with heavy subjects don't always achieve. The "they call me Mr Tibbs" line is iconic. The story is a gripping powerhouse and very ahead of and daring for its time with tremendous power, edge and emotion.
Characters are compelling, and the acting couldn't have been better. Rod Steiger has never been better as the bigoted police chief, and Sidney Poitier matches him every step of the way in a subtler and no less powerful performance. Warren Oates and Anthony James stand out in the uniformly strong supporting cast.
Overall, fantastic film and one of the greatest films of its decade. 10/10 Bethany Cox
Although the Best Picture was a strong one, apart from 'Doctor Doolittle', 'In the Heat of the Night' this reviewer finds the best of the five and also one of the greatest films of the 60s.
Visually, 'In the Heat of the Night' is an incredibly well-made film with cinematography that's both beautiful and gritty. It is immaculately directed also by Norman Jewison, who directed several other great films, and film and sound editing are also very good, fluid with a suitable unpleasantness which suits the atmosphere well and thrillingly authentic. Quincy Jones' soundtrack at least fits and evokes some good atmosphere, the title song sung by Ray Charles is a classic.
The script is incredibly thought-provoking with the racial tension tensely and vividly drawn, never resorting to heavy-handedness or talking at you, something that films with heavy subjects don't always achieve. The "they call me Mr Tibbs" line is iconic. The story is a gripping powerhouse and very ahead of and daring for its time with tremendous power, edge and emotion.
Characters are compelling, and the acting couldn't have been better. Rod Steiger has never been better as the bigoted police chief, and Sidney Poitier matches him every step of the way in a subtler and no less powerful performance. Warren Oates and Anthony James stand out in the uniformly strong supporting cast.
Overall, fantastic film and one of the greatest films of its decade. 10/10 Bethany Cox
Groundbreaker
Hitchcoc11 June 2023
I had a theatre instructor who when asked who the best American actor in movies or on stage were said Rod Steiger. At that time I had never seen him in a film. Since then, I've seen most and if this film was any indication, I must agree he ranks near the top. This is a groundbreaking film with Sidney Poitier, a Philadelphia cop, visiting his mother, who is arrested for a murder while he waits at a train station. This leads to his facing consummate racism, including Steiger's police chief. The neat thing is that the acting is so good, we sense that Steiger's character is moving, but there is no dramatic, sudden change. The final statement he makes to Virgil (Poitier) is so subtle and yet so powerful, it wraps things up with a bow. There are some things that have become cliched by today's standards, especially the portrayal of the dimwitted kids who go after Virgil. It's dangerous in the town and he has to use every bit of his guile to just stay alive. Great cast. After 56 years, I finally saw the whole thing.
A solid, intelligent film. (Possible spoilers)
Jim Griffin21 April 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Hollywood isn't as liberal as it likes to think. Too often its message movies are behind the times they condemn, trailing behind the trailblazers who have the nerve to speak out when it matters. In The Heat of the Night is something of an exception. Beyond that, it's simply a great film.
Principally a detective story, the murder of a wealthy businessman in small-town Mississippi is, for the most part, only a framework around which the real story can be told. This is a battle-of-wills between Detective Tibbs and Chief Gillespie, a struggle for power between black and white, a contest for acting honours between Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger. While there is no doubt as to which character is the victor, and which race is the most shamed, the actors are absolute equals. Both give superb, layered performances. Steiger's Gillespie is racist, proud, but lets us feel a degree of pity; Poitier's Tibbs is intelligent, thoughtful, but shows a degree of arrogance. These are not simply characters, but people.
Some have complained that its message is far from subtle, that the lines are too clearly defined, that the racism is too overt. Such criticism comes from those with little understanding of history and little appreciation for context. This was 1967, this was the south; this was how it was. Remember, this film came only four years after Martin Luther King told us his dream, only three years after amendments to The Civil Rights Bill were passed, only two years after the murder of Malcolm X, and only one year before the murder of Dr King. Its message certainly was not subtle, it had no need to be. Its delivery, however, is subtle enough that even today's audience can appreciate it.
Beyond the superb performances, and the dignified message they contain, there are details that give the film a greater depth. When Poitier is being frisked by Officer Wood, he's told to spread his fingers apart, so that he can `see all ten'. Poitier doesn't move them; they're apart enough already. That non-reaction is a great moment, showing that he's been here before, that he knows the drill, that'll he'll tolerate it because for now he has to, but that he won't take orders without reason.
There is so much to praise here. The slow pace of the film should kill its tension, but instead it reflects the sticky heat and the leisurely pace of life in the town. Never is it too slow. The scene where Steiger would rather condemn one of his own officers than lose another point to Poitier's big-city detective skills is a high point, as is the gentle yet vicious racism from Endicott. The conversation between the leads in Steiger's house is surprisingly touching; its brief moment of bonding never seems patronising or contrived, and is expertly ruined by the crudeness of Steiger's racism. The characters' growth is slight, uneven, and without any real payoff. And that's by no means a criticism.
In the Heat of the Night is a film that simply has to be seen, one that soars despite all that could have brought it down. It should be preachy but it isn't; it should have dated but it hasn't; its slow pace should be leaden but it's perfect. This is a rare kind of a film, and one that after a run of terrible movies has helped to remind me why I love cinema in the first place. I'm grateful for that.
Principally a detective story, the murder of a wealthy businessman in small-town Mississippi is, for the most part, only a framework around which the real story can be told. This is a battle-of-wills between Detective Tibbs and Chief Gillespie, a struggle for power between black and white, a contest for acting honours between Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger. While there is no doubt as to which character is the victor, and which race is the most shamed, the actors are absolute equals. Both give superb, layered performances. Steiger's Gillespie is racist, proud, but lets us feel a degree of pity; Poitier's Tibbs is intelligent, thoughtful, but shows a degree of arrogance. These are not simply characters, but people.
Some have complained that its message is far from subtle, that the lines are too clearly defined, that the racism is too overt. Such criticism comes from those with little understanding of history and little appreciation for context. This was 1967, this was the south; this was how it was. Remember, this film came only four years after Martin Luther King told us his dream, only three years after amendments to The Civil Rights Bill were passed, only two years after the murder of Malcolm X, and only one year before the murder of Dr King. Its message certainly was not subtle, it had no need to be. Its delivery, however, is subtle enough that even today's audience can appreciate it.
Beyond the superb performances, and the dignified message they contain, there are details that give the film a greater depth. When Poitier is being frisked by Officer Wood, he's told to spread his fingers apart, so that he can `see all ten'. Poitier doesn't move them; they're apart enough already. That non-reaction is a great moment, showing that he's been here before, that he knows the drill, that'll he'll tolerate it because for now he has to, but that he won't take orders without reason.
There is so much to praise here. The slow pace of the film should kill its tension, but instead it reflects the sticky heat and the leisurely pace of life in the town. Never is it too slow. The scene where Steiger would rather condemn one of his own officers than lose another point to Poitier's big-city detective skills is a high point, as is the gentle yet vicious racism from Endicott. The conversation between the leads in Steiger's house is surprisingly touching; its brief moment of bonding never seems patronising or contrived, and is expertly ruined by the crudeness of Steiger's racism. The characters' growth is slight, uneven, and without any real payoff. And that's by no means a criticism.
In the Heat of the Night is a film that simply has to be seen, one that soars despite all that could have brought it down. It should be preachy but it isn't; it should have dated but it hasn't; its slow pace should be leaden but it's perfect. This is a rare kind of a film, and one that after a run of terrible movies has helped to remind me why I love cinema in the first place. I'm grateful for that.
Interesting, but Slow Moving
dcshanno3 December 2001
I think I expected something a little more heavy handed and cut and dry along the lines of "Mississippi Burning," but "In the Heat of the Night" turned out to be much more subtle. There are no speeches and really no moments of truth. Poitier and Steiger wisely play their characters as complicated, multi-dimensional people rather than the stereotypes they might have become in a lesser film. Tibbs is both aloof and seething while Gillespie is neither a bigot nor saint.
Unfortunately, the mystery angle is unsatisfying, and the solution is arbitrary (It's a perfect example of film critic Roger Ebert's "Economy of Characters" rule, which states that no one is introduced into a film without having to serve *some* purpose). I know the killing was only a catalyst for everything that came after, but equal attention could have been focused on both the murder and everything that happens because of it (e.g., "Chinatown"). I also found the movie's pacing to be excruciatingly slow, especially the first half an hour.
Unfortunately, the mystery angle is unsatisfying, and the solution is arbitrary (It's a perfect example of film critic Roger Ebert's "Economy of Characters" rule, which states that no one is introduced into a film without having to serve *some* purpose). I know the killing was only a catalyst for everything that came after, but equal attention could have been focused on both the murder and everything that happens because of it (e.g., "Chinatown"). I also found the movie's pacing to be excruciatingly slow, especially the first half an hour.
A Really Good Movie
dee.reid26 October 2001
I would just like to say up front that I am not a particularly big fan of movies made during the 1960's. Now I'm an African-American and since this movie was made in 1967, when racism was a major issue in this country, it touched me very deeply.
A wealthy white businessman from Chicago is found dead, the victim of an apparent homicide, in a southern racist town. The police, being the bigots that they are, think they have the murderer when they arrest Virgil Tibbs(Sidney Poitier), an African-American police officer from Philadelphia who is there to visit his mother. The sheriff(Rod Steiger in an Oscar-Winning performance) laughs at Virgil's claims of being a police officer, a high-ranking officer at that. The scene where Virgil tells the sheriff of how much money he makes is a striking moment. When Virgil's identity is confirmed by the Philadelphia police, they say that he must stay in town until the crime is solved. Staying in the town, however, is not going to be pleasant as many of the local residents think that Virgil should leave while he still has a chance.
This movie is so under-appreciated by critics and the movie-going public alike. Didn't this movie used to be on the IMDb Top 250 List? I mean, what happened? Why did it get booted off? Why isn't it still on there? I'm sick of all the people who say that this movie is so overrated. Please. Sure, In The Heat Of The Night won Best Picture in 1967, but that was 1967, everybody has probably forgotten it since then. Sidney Poitier is a great actor whose performance in this movie was completely overlooked by the Academy Awards. Rod Steiger's performance here was good as well. He really did deserve the Oscar for Best Actor, but Sidney Poitier should gotten at least a nomination. This movie should also have gotten an Oscar nomination for it's hip 60's soundtrack. The Ray Charles song "In The Heat Of The Night" is a classic.
One scene I would like to personally comment on, is the scene inside the jail cell where Virgil is talking to Harvey, the guy suspected of killing the businessman. The reason is because the way the bars are casting a shadow over his face. They show separated Virgil is from everyone else in the movie.
I love this movie and I'm never, never ever going to get tired of it.
10/10
A wealthy white businessman from Chicago is found dead, the victim of an apparent homicide, in a southern racist town. The police, being the bigots that they are, think they have the murderer when they arrest Virgil Tibbs(Sidney Poitier), an African-American police officer from Philadelphia who is there to visit his mother. The sheriff(Rod Steiger in an Oscar-Winning performance) laughs at Virgil's claims of being a police officer, a high-ranking officer at that. The scene where Virgil tells the sheriff of how much money he makes is a striking moment. When Virgil's identity is confirmed by the Philadelphia police, they say that he must stay in town until the crime is solved. Staying in the town, however, is not going to be pleasant as many of the local residents think that Virgil should leave while he still has a chance.
This movie is so under-appreciated by critics and the movie-going public alike. Didn't this movie used to be on the IMDb Top 250 List? I mean, what happened? Why did it get booted off? Why isn't it still on there? I'm sick of all the people who say that this movie is so overrated. Please. Sure, In The Heat Of The Night won Best Picture in 1967, but that was 1967, everybody has probably forgotten it since then. Sidney Poitier is a great actor whose performance in this movie was completely overlooked by the Academy Awards. Rod Steiger's performance here was good as well. He really did deserve the Oscar for Best Actor, but Sidney Poitier should gotten at least a nomination. This movie should also have gotten an Oscar nomination for it's hip 60's soundtrack. The Ray Charles song "In The Heat Of The Night" is a classic.
One scene I would like to personally comment on, is the scene inside the jail cell where Virgil is talking to Harvey, the guy suspected of killing the businessman. The reason is because the way the bars are casting a shadow over his face. They show separated Virgil is from everyone else in the movie.
I love this movie and I'm never, never ever going to get tired of it.
10/10
Great performances all around but a poor climax
bsinc25 April 2003
So far I haven't seen a Sydney Poitier movie that was boring and this one is no exception. Maybe the most charismatic actor of our time always finds a new way to keep me wondering what he'll do next. "The heat of the night" deals with a murder case, but it's the racial issues that play a greater role, showing how intolerant and how full of prejudice people can be. But here lies the problem; the movie relies too much on the racial conflicts and doesn't pay that much attention to the mystery of the murder. The outcome is as thrilling and satisfying as a Matlock case and the only thing that kept the movie together was the acting. A bit outdated, but still enjoyable. 7/10
A True Landmark Film
waynec5022 February 2006
1967 was a turbulent year in the U S. Civil rights marches and demonstrations, anti-war rallies, the summer of love,psychedelic music and backlash against the previously noted, 1967 had it all. And this great movie came out, about a small Mississippi town embroiled in a steaming hot summer and a sizzling murder case. The movie diverges from the book on many aspects, mostly for the better. This is a serious look at a nation and a community in turmoil. The acting is first rate, from Sidney Poitier (one of the greatest American actors of this generation, regardless of race), Rod Steiger, Lee Grant, Warren Oates and the whole passel of townsfolk. The plot has been well outlined in previous posts, so I won't belabor it. My favorite scene is when Virgil examines the deceased, looking for clues in discoloration, type of wound, etc., while the sheriff looks on with his jaw practically on the floor in amazement. You can plainly see that he wanted to pin the crime on a hitch-hiker or one of the town's less desirable inhabitants. While some may see the film as preachy or presenting Virgil as a superior to the hicks, seen in the context of its time, it really tells a lot about race relations of the time. The movie is well filmed with lots of atmospheric detail of the time and region (even though it was filmed in Illinois, some areas of Illinois and Indiana were very Southern in their feel and outlook). Great acting, a good mystery, fine cinematography and an important theme make this a must-see movie. 10 stars.
A good tale about prejudice
gazineo-124 June 2002
An American African expert detective (Poitier) is forced to team up with a racist and bad tempered sheriff Steiger) of a small town in Mississipi to find out the murderer of a wealth man of the community. Almost a classic, the movie shines with the great performances by Poitier and Steiger but in fact the plot is a bit too simple and the characters are shallow and not well developed (for example, why Mr. Endicott was a principal suspect?).Jewison made a good directional work, one of the great achievement here. I give this a 7 (seven).
Boring and outdated
Turin_Horse18 May 2013
I like to watch films having in mind the context in which they were filmed, so I do not mind to watch films from the past that deal with topics which today we might consider silly, pointless or strange. But in the case of In the Heat of the Night the film has important flaws in its very grounds, irrespective of the topic it deals with and the fact that it was filmed in the sixties in a context very different from what "the South" is nowadays. The plot never really manages to engage you; looking at the title you expect a story of racist prejudgments intermingled with the investigation of a crime told in a thriller-style way, and the film actually seems to try to pursue this in some moments, but totally fails, and both aspects run in parallel but are very awkwardly connected. Particularly unfortunate is the depiction of the chief policeman of the city; the clumsy script and the poor acting make one ends up having no idea if he is a racist whose attitude is changed by the intelligence and straight attitude of detective Virgil, or if he is not but has to act as if he were because of the social environment he lives in, or... who knows!? Watch Missisipi Burning, when you finish then watch it again, but skip this one.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
