Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

richard-1787 I wonder how the conversation at Warner Brothers went the day they dreamed up this movie. Was it something like: "Hey, Casablanca was a big hit. I wonder if we could cash in on that? Let's try retelling the same story, and just change a few superficial things, so it isn't too obvious. You know, keep the story about the woman who has an affair with another guy during the war because she thought the man she was in love with had been killed. And then he comes back, and meets the interim guy, and there's jealousy and all that. Maybe have her pull a gun on the interim guy again, the way Bergman did on Bogart. That was a good scene! And then she finally goes off with her first love again. Something like that, you know, but we just change a few details. And say, we've still got Paul Heinried under contract. We can get him to play the guy who gets cheated on again. He was good at that. And maybe use Claude Raines again. We'll just change a few of the details." And so they did, and so Deception was born.This time, we see more of it through the woman's eyes, this time played by Bette Davis. And this time, the man and the woman weren't actually married before, so if she had an affair with another guy when she thought the first one was dead, there wasn't actually anything wrong with that. But the first guy still gets jealous.Did Heinreid get tired of playing the noble cuckold? I wonder.Did Davis object to having to play a watered down, less attractive version of a role Ingrid Bergman had already immortalized? This isn't a bad movie, though it is often VERY melodramatic. Unlike Casablanca, I don't know how many men could have sat through it.It shows the difference you get with even very fine actors when the script just isn't that interesting.

moonspinner55 Louis Verneuil's play "Monsieur Lambertheir", first filmed in 1929 as "Jealousy", became the last screen-teaming of Warners stars Bette Davis and Claude Rains; results are typically florid and predictably melodramatic. Paul Henreid is a European cellist who relocates to New York City after the war and is reunited with former flame Davis, a talented pianist; she quickly moves him into her luxurious apartment and marries him, forgetting to disclose that she has become the protégé (or rather, mistress) of a tyrannical, world-famous composer and conductor. The apparently-intimate relationship between Davis and the wittily snide Rains isn't disclosed in detail, but we are to assume he lavishes gifts upon her in the context of a sexual union (although there hardly seems to be any passionate energy between them, the writing being so frothy and hot-headed). Screenwriters John Collier and Joseph Than are far too wordy in their setting-up of what amounts to a maddeningly ineffectual plot. Somehow, between the classical music and the overheated performances, the picture is entertaining enough, but the old spark seems to be missing. Davis (pregnant in real-life) looks a bit haggard, and practically hands the film over to Rains, who is full of spite and malice. There are few principal supporting characters, and one eventually tires of the trio's tantrums. It's a fairly well-upholstered production, although literate in the sense that soap operas can be intelligent. Davis soon left Warner Bros., and one can see why: the magic is gone. ** from ****

T Y Almost impossibly dull, plodding story about a petty lover's quarrel between three music world denizens. In a decent noir (male audience), the movie would have shown the dramatic backstory that this tosses away with two lines of dialog in the first 15 minutes. It's tossed away as a favor to female viewers who want the entire running time devoted to class fantasy, women's fashions and the melodramatics of being the bauble whom two men are feuding over. Though calling Rains a 'man' here is pushing it. Rains plays the jealous teacher/lover as a pompous, effeminate poseur, along the lines of Clifton Webb. He's quite annoying. One sock in the jaw is all it would take to end that conflict! As a bonus it would shut him up.There are about 12 micro-drama/flare-ups that are all equally uninvolving. The conflict eventually lead to the belabored ordering of a pretentious meal in some restaurant, which is supposed to be grueling for Paul Henreid. It was grueling for me. You have to sit through scads of excruciating, inscrutable chatter to get to a murder. A tense moment is undermined by an inane radio commercial for a scrubbing product ("Remember, 'Drawrof' spelled backwards is 'Forward'") that draws guffaws instead of anxiety. And remember girls, when choosing between two men, the right guy is the one who tries to strangle you when he's upset. (!)The only trace of excitement here is the title. A pile of ham. A tremendous snoozer. Te De um!

secondtake Deception (1946)A marvelous chamber piece, in a way, involving orchestral music. The cast begins with two principals, played with usual intensity by Bette Davis and with usual restraint by Paul Henreid. This broods a bit and suggests trouble, and then comes the third player, who outdoes them both, in the form of Claude Rains. The rest of the movie is an interplay between the three, a push and pull and game of dodging and, of course, deception.So how to judge this kind of tightly woven enterprise? It feels as though William Wyler could have directed it, so polished and rich it all is. But this is a Warner Brothers drama, so there is another kind of layer of dark danger, and of a noir inspired lighting and camera-work. This visual aspect, in a way, is the real star of the film, which says a lot, considering the high level of acting involved. In all it's purely an entertainment, but at the highest level. The backdrop of classic music and classical musicians hasn't worn well over the years, but I grew up with this kind of scene and it brought back a lot of those vibes. A terrific movie within its own genre.