A private plane, supposedly carrying $3 million, crashes outside the Tangier airport. The authorities find no bodies in the wreckage – neither pilot nor the courier carrying the $3 million. What happened to the people? An assortment of characters, who had been waiting on the plane, sets off to find the missing loot, including: Gil Walker (Jack Palance), friend of the plane's pilot; Susan Lane (Joan Fontaine), the missing pilot's fiancé and a recent arrival in Tangier; Danzer (Robert Douglas) and Goro (Marcel Dalio), two underworld types; and Nicki (Cornine Calvet), love interest to both Danzer and Gil. Who will get there first?While I like Flight to Tangier, I really wanted to love it. It's filmed in that gorgeous 1950s era Technicolor that never ceases to amaze me. The cinematography is often quite stunning. The movie probably looks a million times better than it has any right to. Sets and locations are perfect. I especially liked the way the filmmakers tried to recreate the tight quarters of Tangier. The costumes also look fantastic. The dresses, the mobster suits, and the police uniforms are all impeccable. The outfits worn by Cornine Calvet steal the show – wow! The acting is first-rate. Joan Fontaine is Joan Fontaine and gives one of her typical outstanding performances. Jack Palance is the young, reluctant hero. It's interesting to watch him play something other than the typecast baddie he would later be associated with. Calvet is new to me, but she more than holds her own with the other actors. Douglas, Dalio, and the always dependable Jeff Morrow give fine supporting performances. Flight to Tangier includes plenty of action with fist fights, police chases, plane crashes, gunplay, mystery, suspense, and more. There really are very few dull moments. It's got just about everything I could ask for in a movie.So, why don't I love Flight to Tangier? The answer is simple – the plot. To me, the plot is so unnecessarily complicated that it ends up being a weight on everything. It's a mess. Often, there's too much going on. A more streamlined focus and approach could have done wonders for the movie. And the plot falls apart in the final scenes. The movie sort of fizzles out and loses steam by the last act and sort of limps its way to the finish. Flight to Tangier deserved a bigger send-off.

Flight to Tangiers (1953)An odd Technicolor movie, not yet fully widescreen, with the impeccable Joan Fontaine being impeccable, and Jack Palance as his suspicious, quirky self. The setting is Tangiers, though the shooting is all in Hollywood. This is no Casablanca, for sure, despite the mixture of American expatriates in a North African port city. (There is even a point when Fontaine says, "America," and Palance clarifies, "Lisbon, then America," just as in Casablanca.)The plot overall gets far more complex than it needs to be, with a plane going down in an exciting beginning and then a whole slew of people having some interest in what went missing in the wreckage. The complexities are told more than shown (just by having characters talk to each other). As much as I wanted to love this movie (as much as I love Fontaine), I couldn't do it. And it even looks good--not only the color, but the light and sets."In America, do they think you're beautiful?" says a European beauty to the American Joan Fontaine."I don't know," Fontaine replies, and it sums her up, especially a decade after her flirting with the Academy Awards (she won one). I dwell on this because Fontaine rises above this middling movie. And there is an odd competition between the Euro girl and the American one, and Fontaine is made to outclass her even though the other is more clearly a young, voluptuous type. It's mostly silly stuff.The gorgeously lit night scenes, far too perfect for location shooting of the time, and the careful, luxuriating pace are wonderful in their own way. The color (including the famous Technicolor control of set design) is terrific in a way you forget is possible with modern movies, which look good but simply different than these 40s and 50s gems. One great little moment (that almost gives away the mood in the shooting behind the camera) is at 1:25:10 where the guy smoking and walking toward flicks the cigarette right at the lens. I guess this is the level of boredom I was at, too, noticing and caring. But the plot really doesn't hold water long enough to suck you in or make the movie come alive. The arms dealing, backstabbing, foreign intrigue stuff is not enough in itself, and when they drop the phrase "Iron Curtain" into the mix it feels like a last minute add on, not relating to the events in North Africa at all. The director, by the way, Charles Marquis Warren, is also the writer, and he has a slim reputation on both counts. This is one reason why. Fontaine devotees, give this a close look. Jack Palance devotee? Less essential, for sure, but interesting. The rest of you, I'm not sure I'd recommend it in particular.

This was the movie Carla Jean was watching in " No Country For Old Men" when Lewellyn returned with the drug money.Why did the Coen Brothers select this film? They certainly had seen this film and selected it for some oblique artistic reason or simply because they liked the movie. I've never seen this film. Is there some aspect of Flight To Tangier" that links it to "No Country For Old Men?"Would anyone disagree that the Coen Brothers are way too sophisticated and detailed oriented to simply throw any movie on a television one of their characters was viewing?.

Although this film is by no means an AFI classic, I was nonetheless surprised that it hadn't yet received a single comment. For what it is its fine, an enjoyable drama very much a product of its time (Cold War themes, etc.) The sets are laughably unreal, but the acting (and by that I mean Fontaine and Palance) compensates. Joan Fontaine is one of my favorite actresses and was the main reason for my watching this. She does seem to be having fun in a film that is quite a departure from her typical fare. I had never seen Corinne Calvet in anything before and I suppose she does all that is required of her, i.e. look buxom and speak in a breathy French intonation. She is the standard Tart-With-A-Heart character, and its interesting to note (spoiler) Palance's rejection of her attempts at seduction as an interesting indication of 50s morality: sexuality is something to be suppressed, not exposed. Ultimately she pays for her behavior. All in all an entertaining film, and I'm sure those who watch it will realize the type of film that it is going into it.