Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Rainey Dawn This is a good crime noir, it's surprisingly better than I was guessing it would be. The film grabbed my attention from the start until it ended, so I know I found enjoyment watching it.Two brothers: The older, Ed, likes his police work as a homicide detective and staying single while going after beautiful women - the fast, single type of life. The younger, Andy, is just starting out as a homicide detective and works with his brother, he is the type that likes a wife and good home - the simple family life.The older brother, Ed, is secretly seeing another one of his beautiful women and this one is rich and married - soon to divorce. One night the husband comes back home and the wife kills him while her boyfriend detective Ed was there and witnessed what really happened. Ed tells her "The truth would get you 20" and helps to cover up what happened. Guess who is assigned to the case: Ed and his younger brother Andy.9/10

secondtake The Man Who Cheated Himself (1950)"Yes, for one thing, a dame."A fast, curious, edgy crime film that depends on a fabulous, simple twist, which you learn right at the start and keeps you on the edge of your seat the whole time. The clash of two cops who are brothers begins innocently, and turns and builds in a very believable way, as the details of a murder are revealed. By the end, with a fabulous scene below the Golden Gate Bridge, it's a chase scene of pure suspense.Lee J. Cobb (more usually a brilliant secondary character) takes the lead as a cop who does his job with steady weariness, and yet when faced with a woman he loves too much, puts everything in danger. He's just perfect in his role, right to the last scene when you see him look down the hall with the same feeling he has at the beginning of the film. His kid brother played by the slightly quirky John Dall ("Gun Crazy") is all virtue, almost to the point of sweet sadness. And the two main women play believable supporting roles (especially Cobb's love-interest, who is selfish and panicky to just the right degree). This Jack M. Warner production was released by Fox but by the looks of it, it can't be quite a full budget feature movie, and because of that it is relentless and edgy, with no time for polish or emotional depth. Cameraman Russell Harlan ("Blackboard Jungle" and much later "To Kill a Mockingbird") does a brilliant job with great angles and framing. It isn't elegant, but it's visually sharp. Throw in a talented but little known director, Felix Feist, and some top shelf editing (by David Weisbart, one of absolute best) and you have just the mix you need for a small film much larger than life.This is a film noir in the usual sense of style, but also in substance--a lead male who is alienated and casting about for meaning in life, and a lead female who leads him astray.But in the end, what's it about? Crime? No. Love? Yes. The only subject that matters.Cobb: "Do you think I'd throw that away on a sucker play like this?"Dall: "Yes, for one thing, a dame."

deschreiber I agree that Jane Wyatt is horribly miscast here, particularly at the end, where she is revealed as a cold-hearted vixen playing the men for her advantage. Ole Jane just can't carry a part like that. She's made to play the good wifey, as she did so well on "Father Knows Best." Her natural aura of sweetness actually spoiled some of the plot effects. A tougher woman might have led us to believe that she really did intend to kill her husband, that it was not an accident, and might have hinted that she had some ulterior motive in forming a liaison with a homicide policeman. As it was, when she asked the cop if he wanted to marry her, it didn't make sense. Why would a rich lady like her want to become the wife of a policeman? And, by the way, how did they ever get involved in the first place? That might be more a hole in the writing than in her acting - it's hard to imagine any reason for such a rich, elegant society lady hitching up with a run-of-the-mill cop, especially while she's still married to another man - but a more slinky actress (Veronica Lake leaps to mind) could have bridged the gap in the plot with a few well chosen eyebrows raised, fleeting smiles, sidelong glances, and suchlike.The interplay between the cop trying to hide the crime and his brother trying to uncover it is the best part of the movie. I especially liked the moment when the brother is staking out the woman's house and sees his brother come out the front door. It struck me that a little more effort should have gone into developing and prolonging the awkwardness of that moment.The scenes in the derelict building are visually interesting, and excellent use is made of the sound of the wind and of footsteps echoing down the empty corridors. A first-rate ending.By the way, what's with all those Nash Ramblers (or some kind of car made by American Motor - I even saw a Studebaker) everyone is driving? Were they as funny-looking to people in 1950 as they are to us today?

GManfred As B movies go this was three-fourths of a good movie, done in by its confusing cop-out ending. To be honest, I still don't completely understand the denouement as it appears on my DVD. Dependable Lee J. Cobb gives it his best, just a few years before "On The Waterfront".On the other hand, Jane Wyatt does not, and gives a comatose performance she probably wished she could have back. The big surprise was John Dall, who as Cobb's younger brother/detective is a breath of fresh air. Makes you wonder why he didn't become a bigger star.I tried very hard to like this picture as it was a novel idea and it was working for a while. Sometimes filmmakers have a good idea but can't figure out how to end it (see "Harvey"). So disappointed was I that I dropped my rating to its present 6.