Murder in Reverse

Murder in Reverse (also styled Murder in Reverse?) is a 1945 British thriller film directed by Montgomery Tully and starring William Hartnell, Jimmy Hanley and Chili Bouchier. It is based on the story Query by "Seamark" (Austin J. Small).

A successful film in its time, Murder in Reverse was shown at the British Film Institute on the big screen in June 2010 to great success, selling out the auditorium.

Plot
Tom Masterick, a stevedore in Limehouse, London, is married with a young daughter. He discovers that his wife has been having an affair with a man named Fred Smith. In a fit of rage, Masterick fights Smith in a saloon bar, and the fight spills out onto the streets, leading to a high stakes chase on a docks crane, which ends with Smith falling to his apparent death. Despite no body being found and Masterick 's insistence that he did not commit murder, he is found guilty and sentenced to death, which is later commuted to 15 years in prison, despite his insistence that he saw Smith alive after his apparent death.

Upon his release, Masterick is determined to uncover the truth about Smith’s fate and the events that led to his wrongful imprisonment. He discovers that his wife had disappeared with Smith and that their daughter, Jill, had been adopted by Masterick's close friend and newspaper editor, Sullivan, who had tried unsuccessfully to change public opinion in Masterick's favour during his early incarceration. Sullivan fears that revealing the truth about Masterick's past could hurt Jill, who has no memory of her real parents. Jill, who is in a relationship with junior reporter Peter Rogers, becomes involved in the case and believes Mastrick is the victim of a miscarriage of justice, oblivious he is her real father.

Following private investigation, Masterick finds his former wife, now abandoned by Smith and living in poverty. She advises where Smith can be found, but is unsuccessful in her attempt to reconcile with Masterick, who is only driven by his desire for justice and sets out to find Smith.

Masterick finds Smith running a public house and in an act of duplicity, convinces him that he is not out to avenge him. Following a conversation, the two agree to split any compensation that Masterick believes he will receive for his wrongful imprisonment. They visit Crossley, the prosecution barrister at Masterick's trial, now a judge, who is entertaining guests at a dinner party. Masterick explains that there has been a miscarriage of justice, and the victim is alive and well, standing next to him. However, the judge is unwilling to help, citing the passage of time and the legal technicalities surrounding the case.

Frustrated and desperate, Masterick fatally shoots Smith in front of the judge and his guests, seeking revenge for Smith's failure to come forward during the trial. In the epilogue, Sullivan remarks that Masterick cannot be convicted of murder since he already served a prison sentence for it. The killing was, in effect, a "murder in reverse."

Production
The film was shot at Elstree Studios, and on location including Dartmoor prison. It was among the first films directed by Montgomery Tully, who had previously worked on many short films during World War II.

Release
The film saw a general cinema release rather than having a West End showing, due to being an independent production. Hartnell made a personal appearance at the film's showing in Glasgow's Regal and Coliseum Cinema in October 1945.

Box office
According to trade papers, the film performed well at the British box office in 1945.

Critical reception
Reviewing the film in 1949, The Philadelphia Inquirer praised it highly, describing the film as building to "a tricky climax which leaves the audience breathless and virtually able to write its own ending". They particularly highlighted the performances of Hartnell as "extraordinarily good as the betrayed husband", while noted other cast such as Slater, Sheridan and Bouchier as being "excellent".

The Saffron Walden Weekly News also praised the film as an "amazing story", noting that Hartnell gave an "outstanding performance".

The Middlesex Advertiser and County Gazette also praised the film highly, describing it as a "really first-rate adventure yarn filled with vivid characters brought to life by a lengthy cast of experienced British players".

It was considered a "good British film" by the Birmingham Post, who remarked that it was "a change to find a picture which has the courage to treat a serious matter seriously".

Chibnall and McFarlane in The British 'B' Film describe the film as "a well-received, uncompromising thriller."

In British Sound Films: The Studio Years 1928–1959 David Quinlan rates the film as "good", writing: "Harsh, well-directed thriller."

Leslie Halliwell said: "A reasonable crime entertainment of its day which seemed to introduce a new star, but it hasn't worn well."