Marketic It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

MisterWhiplash This was Jack Palance's debut in films as an actor (or should I say "Walter" Jack Palance, for some reason that's there in the credits), and he eats up every second of film he has. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, and in a way it helps to lift up a character who has little dimension. He doesn't need it, you could argue: he's a thug who wants his money, that's it, and will do anything he can to get it (this may include killing, of course, which we see very early on as the thing that kicks off much of the story). He is imposing too physically, with that chiseled face and tall frame - at one point he talks to someone who is quite short and the difference between the two is like night and day - and he also is believable to the point where you realize why Zero Mostel (also very good as the talky-kinda-dumb lackey) is so subservient. Not much depth, no, but who needs depth when Palance can kick your ass any way to Sunday? In this story it's a film-noir but unique in that it's focus is not about a man-hunt only for the killer, but because of a plague (not the Bubonic plague, the other one the Numonic plague or other, the one that you just need to know is around now), and Richard Widmark plays the stalwart, headstrong doctor who will get his job done to catch the people infected (or even those, especially those, who may not be yet) into quarantine and given shots and so on. He's up against cops (including a sometimes-sympathetic-sometimes-not Paul Douglas), and a bevvy of other cops and reporters.Some of the early scenes with Widmark's family is pretty standard - he has a nice and loving and family, OK, that's fine - but once that's out of the way the story kicks in and it has a natural momentum to it. An outbreak or contagion-type of story is intrinsically dramatic because it brings people together - or, on the flip-side, it drives people apart and shows what self-interested idiots people can be some/most of the time. I don't know if Kazan meant for this to have deeper sociological meaning like On the Waterfront. Maybe the hunt for the people who've come in contact with the infected is a euphemism for Communism, or maybe not, it doesn't seem as cut and dry to me as in the latter film.In any case Panic in the Streets is engaging and enjoyable as a no-frills thriller, a picture that uses human nature and the lack of speaking up about something grave and dangerous as a way of forward momentum - who will speak up first, who won't - and if you want a simple cops and criminals chase story you get that also. I think it holds up most of all due to the performances though, even including the story, since Widmark, Panace, Mostel et al beef up the material with the kind of emotion that I'm sure Kazan was great at coaxing out of his actors (whether it was making them relaxed enough or getting them into the 'method' of it in the case of Palance I don't know).

ppilf A very good movie directed by the talented Elia Kazan. There were a few non-professional actors, and a bit of the script and scenes seem a little corny, even amateurish, but overall, the directing, film editing, sound, camera work, and production were great. The overall story itself was also very good, maybe just a tiny bit over the top for film noir. But the acting performances by Richard Widmark, Jack Palance, Paul Douglas, Barbara Bel Geddes, Tommy Cook, Zero Mostel, and the other professional actors were all great.Now for the real attraction. I thought Jack Palance was outstanding in this film, which was his feature film debut. Although the character he played ("Blackie") was a very bad (but smart) criminal, and he didn't have a lot of scenes, Palance's acting performance was fantastic. There are several scenes in this movie that are now on my all-time favorites list because of Palance's presence. I liked Palance in the "City Slickers" films, especially the sequel, but I never realized that he was such a talented actor in his early years. This film made me a Jack Palance fan, and I began buying early films that he was in.

tomgillespie2002 When an immigrant is found shot to death in the docks, the cause of death is given as gun shot wounds. The coroner, however, notices signs of something far more sinister - the pneumonic plague. Lt. Commander Reed (Richard Widmark), a doctor with the U.S. Public Health Service, is brought in to investigate the matter and contain any possible signs of infection. With the backing of the mayor, Reed faces scepticism from the police, and namely Captain Tom Warren (Paul Douglas), with whom he is forced to conduct the investigation with. With a prediction of 48 hours until the disease starts to spread, Reed and Warren are forced into a desperate rush to find the killers with next to nothing to go on.In contrast to the usual genre traits of film noir, Panic in the Streets makes the fine comparison between crime and disease, being very much one and the same. In order to prevent a deadly outburst, Reed must trace the dead body back to the intimidating Blackie (played with chiselled brooding menace by Jack Palance, he credited as Walter Jack Palance), who in the climatic scenes, scuttles across the floor as he desperately tries to evade the pursuing police like the rats that brought the bubonic plague to Europe in the 1300's. It's almost a strange subject to tackle within the confines of film noir, but if anything, heightens the intensity of the film, and with Elia Kazan's fine direction, the film becomes a fine metaphor for inner-city crime spreading like a cancer.Coming three years after his shockingly evil turn in Henry Hathaway's Kiss of Death (1947), that earned him an Oscar nomination, here Widmark is our hero and the man standing in the way of mass infection. Rather than the quick-tongued, hard-drinking and chain-smoking anti-hero's of most noirs, Reed is the one voice of sanity, fighting the system and finding comfort with his wife (played by Barbara Bel Geddes) at home. The few scenes that see Reed talk with his wife are a stark contrast and a welcome break from the documentary-style realism of Reed's investigations, a technique carried on from Jules Dassin's ground- breaking The Naked City (1948). Beginning with a smoky card-game played out with sweaty heavies (including Zero Mostel in a fantastic slimy role), the New Orleans' streets are shot in high contrast black-and- white, with sweeping cinematography that brings to mind the majestic tracking shot from Touch of Evil (1958).Although it pains me to say it - given his unforgivable outing of his friends and colleagues in the House Committee on Un-American Activities as being communists, leading to the black-listing and career deaths of many great artists - Kazan is a master of his medium. Yes, it's far from being one of the all-time great noirs, but Panic in the Streets is simply a finely polished and expertly paced thriller, squeezing out tension from the tiniest of moments, and bringing real originality to the genre. This is the not the Hollywood noir of Humphrey Bogart, but an honest and gravelly depiction of a city from the mayor down to the scum, with a apprehensive lone hero beating at its heart.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Rodrigo Amaro Lt. Cmdr. Clinton (Richard Widmark) is a military doctor who has the ungrateful duty of tracking down the killers of a mysterious foreign man who carried a deadly plague and now this disease might be spreading around the city, and Clinton must find everybody who had contact with the deceased in less than 48 hours before the news and the disease cause panic in the streets. Elia Kazan's "Panic in the Streets" is a good and original story at the time of its release about the difficulties of medical, political and law enforcement institutions in their mission of controlling things before they get out of control. In the story, Widmark's character not only has to find these guys, but he has to deal with bureaucracy among politics, journalists who sees in this case a great story to be published and that might alarm the people in a bad way, and the only help he's gonna get is with some people in the crowd who might have known the mysterious man, and help of a chief of police (Paul Douglas) who's not much cooperative at first so it's gonna take time to solve things but they don't have enough time to fulfill their task.The treatment given to the story wasn't too much interesting with its division of characters and situations. The chase for the "infecteds" was the most thrilling and interesting part of the plot; while the others involving Clinton's family and the bad guys played by Jack Palance and Zero Mostel, almost dragged the film into a boring and tiresome experience. Looking at the film in its surface it's very plausible but with some arguable problems. These guys are out there, they had contact the infected man, they walk to several places, talk to other people and they're spreading the plague, so how come only they had the disease and almost no one else does it too? I mean, the script was too much light and positive (yeah, I know it's the 1950's so they couldn't be so depressive showing that a disease could devastate a whole city), it wasn't realistic enough in this matter and it should be. People complain about the energetic "Outbreak" (1995) but that was a more effective film than this one, it had action, suspense, and also a run against the clock in order to stop a disease that was killing thousands of people. The climatic ending was great, with a long chase in the docks; and some dialog exchange between Douglas and Widmark was brilliant, funny and thoughtful. For what it tends to do it is a very good film and nothing more than that. But we know that Kazan has better works than this. 7/10