The Unsung and Almost Forgotten Director D. Ross Lederman's Career Spanned Four Decades and is Awash in B's Filled with Mind Numbing Transitions while Compiling Sometimes Drastic Dramatic Changes in Tone and Presentation that Make You Pay Attention.In this One for Example, the First Act is Film-Noir, Completely Night Time, Shadows Lurking Everywhere and Sinister, Creepy Villains About. But when the Framed Man Escapes from Prison, a Reporter who was Exposing Corruption at the Highest Level, with His Pregnant Wife Along, Ends Up in a Small Town "A Democratic Town", the Feel of the Film Snaps into a Drama of Socialism where Payment for Health Care is Not Expected, and is Happily Included with a Place to Live and a Job.It is this Type of Jarring Juxtaposition that is Trademark Lederman. The Middle Act is Complete with a "Charmer" Child that Sings and Hangs About with a Negro Servant Given Many Lines and is a Good Friend to the Tantalizing Tot. Another Lederman Rule Shattering Flourish. Then in the Third Act Things Tense Up Again for Another Foray into Crime and Punishment when a Blackmailer Shows Up and Not Only Demands Money, but Wants the Wife to be More "Friendly". The Director Again with a Scene that Bends Hollywood Tradition.Sure the Ending is Abrupt and the Film is Not Wholly Realized and is Not as Successfully Rendered as Some of the Director's Other Entertaining and Hard-Hitting Quickies, but has Enough Against the Grain Goofiness to be Worth a Watch and Overall Lederman Showing Why His Movies are Not Quite the Same as His Hack Contemporaries.

A crusading reporter is framed, sent to jail, but escapes to make a prosperous life in a new town, only to be blackmailed by an old cellmate he's double-crossed. Despite the promising plot elements, the crime movie lacks needed grit, surprising for a Warner Bros. production. As a crusading reporter, Ames (aka Andrews) is much too bland to spark proceedings. Things pick up in final scenes, but by then it's too late. There's good support from McDaniel (Kit) and Harmon (Blake), but I'm with those who find blonde tot Hale on the annoying side. She's over-doing the aren't-I-cute bit. And catch that climax; it's like they had 30-seconds to tie up every loose end. I expect the production was rushed to accommodate burgeoning wartime audiences eager for escape. Now, I don't know about Dust Be My Destiny (1939), but the plot has a distinct resemblance to 1941's Strange Alibi, except the fall guy here is a reporter instead of a cop. A re-make wouldn't be surprising considering a speed-up on the programmer assembly line. Anyway, this 50-some minutes is easily passed up, especially if you've already seen the superior Strange Alibi.

According to IMDb, "I Was Framed" is a remake of the 1939 John Garfield films "Dust Be My Destiny". However, if you read the summary of the Garfield film, it pretty has nothing to do with "I Was Framed". I also saw the Garfield film and although a bit of the plot is the same, I cannot see that one is a remake of the other at all. However, for the life of me, I KNOW that "I Was Framed" is a remake (or some film is a remake of it), as I recognized so much of the film--especially the scene where the reporter is set up for a drunk driving arrest. I KNOW I've seen it...but what film?! If you know, let me know--I just know is it NOT "Dust Be My Destiny".The film is about a reporter who doggedly pursues criminals who are high officials. However, these folks are very powerful and very dangerous and Ken (Tod Andrews) is bound to get the worst of it. Yet he continues his one-man crusade until eventually the mob IS able to get him out of the way by framing him for a crime and getting him sent to jail. He makes his escape midway through the movie--and at this point the film fizzles. Instead of quickly working to prove his innocence, most of the rest of the film is a dull account of he and his wife hiding from the law...only to find out in the end that the cops caught the real criminal behind the drunk driving setup some time ago--but they couldn't find Ken to tell him until then! Huh?!The bottom line is that the film has some very good elements and is slick--since it's a B-movie from Warner Brothers. But it also is unsatisfying and the plot seems to meander--like it needs to be rewritten. Worth skipping but not terrible either.

This COULD have been a nice tight - if poorly acted - little Grade B/C film noir piece if someone had had the brains not to devote a solid 20-30 minutes to Patty Hale, whose poetry/song/supposed-light-comedy stints brought me to the point of nausea. This entire film looks to be nothing more than a vehicle for her. How very very sad.I also found it unexpectedly funny re: the wife having her baby, although she was slim as a green bean in all her immediate before birth shots. I can only guess that it may have had something to do with the censors at that time.But still - nothing ruins this little flick more than little Patty Hale.