User Reviews

Alfred Hitchcock opens this film with a shadowy monologue, reminding viewers that truth is often more terrifying than fiction and offering the following as proof. Mostly culled from a real situation, The Wrong Man is the tale of an innocent working-class father who’s railroaded through the legal wringer as the victim of mistaken eyewitness testimony. There’s a lookalike stickup artist on the loose, and in a day and age where most of the adult male population wears a fedora and trench coat, simply being tall, thin and nervous is sufficient evidence to raise suspicion. Proving his innocence may not be enough, anyway, what with the monetary demands of living paycheck to paycheck and his wife’s ensuing nervous breakdown. Easy to see why such an accusation could be a scary proposition for anyone at or below the median income line, with the famed director doing his best to turn the screws and let us feel the pressure. Hitchcock went out of his way to ground this production in reality, shooting several scenes on-location and even enlisting some of the actual participants to play themselves. It’s an admirable effort, and a fascinatingly intimate look at the gears of the justice system in 1950s New York, but as a drama it falls short. Beyond the suspense of the looming trial, there’s almost nothing here. The accused and his connections are thoroughly whitewashed, ideal citizens without the hint of a doubt, which makes them dull and unremarkable. Their struggle (even the wife’s overnight mental collapse) is a flat, somber trudge, devoid of emotion, which concludes with a dry anticlimax that robs the carefully-orchestrated tension of its release. There are points to be made here, pertinent even today, about the unfair influence of wealth in the system and a detective’s enthusiasm for filling empty holding cells, but those are quickly noted and brushed aside. Instead, we linger on the suspect (ably portrayed by Henry Fonda), his wife (less admirably depicted by Vera Miles) and their glacial pursuit of truth, justice and/or foregone conclusions. The rich noir textures and challenging, dynamic camera angles belong right alongside Hitchcock’s other greats, but the story is a slog and the outcome feels dreadfully tacked-on. No fun at all.

This film will have a more resonant effectiveness if you are very sure of what you expect from it as a viewer. And therefore its quality as a whole depends on it. This is something that happens with any movie, but one with Alfred Hitchcock as a director carries a very different weight. The suspense and drama are modest and I think that's why this film is considered one of Hitchcock's most underrated works. Still, even with its lack of a little more excitement, I really think it should be more appreciated. Far from amazing or anything like that, but I think it was good.