secondtake Down Three Dark Streets (1954)An FBI man has been killed, and the suspects are related to the three cases the agent was working one when he died. So all three cases become priorities, thinking that by solving them all, the cop killer will come to light.The title of the movie is a cue that this is in some ways a three part movie, with three basically distinct, if intertwined plots. But what holds it together is a single character, an FBI agent played by Broderick Crawford. And it's Crawford who holds it together beautifully. He plays his part with cool, somber, and weary reserve (and if you know Crawford in his more famous roles, such as "All the King's Men" or even more in "Born Yesterday").Each of the three stories is layered up as you go, which makes it interestingly complex, and in each there is one leading woman connected to a suspect. Ruth Roman is the most powerful of these three, though the other two are bit weak. Luckily, the weakest of these, Ruth Hyer, loses relevance so that Roman and Marisa Pavan (playing a blind woman fairly well) carry their shares. And in a way you never quite notice the uneven acting because the events tumble one after another, through lots of changes of location, and from one plot to the next. It's filmed with economy but good drama. And the story, which might lose some viewers because of its complexity, also has the beauty of not being obvious, with lots of good dialog. Why isn't it quite a classic? There's something awkward about the many parts that have to be connected, and an occasional odd aspect, like the unlikely ruse of a blanket carried as Roman's child into her car (it looks very much like a blanket). Still, there is a lot of suspense throughout, dark alleys, drives at night, phones that ring and aren't answered, all along waiting for something and not knowing what. An intense example is when Roman takes a senselessness lonely walk in a cemetery and a car pulls up. "I'm waiting for a friend." "Maybe I'm that friend you're waiting for."This is good movie-making, and it makes for a good movie. Then, to cap it off, it has what is maybe the best vintage use of the famous Hollywood letters on the hill overlooking movieland. Odd to say, but I think the movie is worth watching for that alone. This is exactly when the industry was falling apart (legally and literally), and the letters were no accident. There is also a nice use of that trope of money blowing away in the wind (made more archetypal in "The Killing" in 1958). The last line? "Sometimes you meet some nice people in this business." Perfect.

wes-connors It's "The F.B.I." starring Broderick Crawford, with special guest star Ruth Roman. The film begins promising - you expect a great interwoven, mysterious plot; but, it doesn't really work out that way. Instead, it's an extended TV crime drama, with stuff that may have been a little too sexy and violent for the time (so, couldn't they have put SOME bruise make-up on the blind woman?).The title "Down Three Dark Streets" refers to three seemingly unrelated crimes Mr. Broderick's F.B.I. solves. It seems like you need a notepad to keep track of events, but you'll get along by paying attention to the extortion plot involving Ms. Roman.Performance-wise, it's Roman's film. There are a lot of recognizable faces, though. Martha Hyer gives a Marilyn Monroe-type performance, as directed (Arnold Laven). Other than that, there are some Los Angeles-area location scenes that are very nice to see; the location scenery is the movie's highlight - climaxing by the "HOLLYWOOD sign". **** Down Three Dark Streets (1954) Arnold Laven ~ Ruth Roman, Broderick Crawford, Martha Hyer

dadier55 DOWN THREE DARK STREETS, with its trio of cases for the FBI to solve, was the template eight years later for EXPERIMENT IN TERROR, reduced down to just the extortion plot. Broderick Crawford is "Agent John Ripley" in the first, Glenn Ford is named the same character in the second. STREETS uses the semi-documentary approach (heavy-handed voice-over narration) and is more of a whodunit, while EXPERIMENT is a real suspense-filled thriller with the villain identified much earlier. But even then, it is much more chilling. Ruth Roman is the fear-filled victim in the original, Lee Remick plays the spunky lady being extorted in the semi-remake. Good Los Angeles locales, especially the "Hollywood" sign usage in the first. But great San Francisco scenes in TERROR, particularly the Candlestick Park shootout following a Giants-Dodgers game. Both are recommended, with STREETS a competent mystery and EXPERIMENT a classic at the end of the Noir cycle.

Neil Doyle Based on a novel by The Gordons called "Case File: F.B.I.", this is a semi-documentary style crime drama from Columbia starring BRODERICK CRAWFORD as a diligent F.B.I. agent John Ripley assigned to crack a few unsolved cases when a fellow agent on the job is killed in the line of duty.RUTH ROMAN, MARISA PAVAN and MARTHA HYER are the three women connected to the cases, all of whom give good performances but Pavan is particularly touching as a blind woman.The documentary style is nicely handled and there's a twist at the end that came as a real surprise to me.Not great, but an interesting example of satisfactory film noir.