Verdict:
Can we please discuss the poster. Nowadays, you get discussions about misleading trailers, cut in a way to make you believe that the movie is one thing, when it is, in fact, something completely different. This poster might be the worst offender I’ve seen so far. Bogart is shown tilted at an angle, wielding double pistols, with the words “explosive” and “blazing” written next to him. Maltese Falcon is a detective story. Throughout the entire film only one shot is fired.
The story is supposed to be about a golden falcon statue, but the movie does not mention or show it nearly often enough. This could have been a much more exciting treasure hunt than what it ended up being – a straight detective story.
It is competently shot and has the proper period music, with the recording quality leaving something to be desired but otherwise perfectly acceptable. The noir genre brings with it the key lighting and strong contrast. What is rough, however, is the disjointed way in which this movie’s plot treats the characters and their dialogue.
As the movie progresses, the conversation between the main male character and one of the ladies indicates a romantic relationship between them, but this comes as a complete surprise because the movie had not built up their relationship in that way, so the romanticism comes out of nowhere, and it ignores another relationship introduced at the beginning of the movie.
A new character suddenly shows up more than halfway into the movie for a few seconds, and from then on, his name becomes an important part of the plot, even though he was never properly introduced, so you start wondering if you missed a scene or something.
It also has that convenient bit where the bad guy decides to explain everything, because the plot calls for it. There are several times when a character talks on the phone and talks in a manner that explains what is being said on the other side. Monologues are nice and all, but it also sounds cheap and lazy, especially when it happens over and over.
It is a shame because the film is well-acted and the dialogue can be smart. I normally don’t like Humphrey Bogart as an actor. He has this extreme jerky way of overacting, and I can’t stand it. However, this movie doesn’t have much of that, and Bogart plays an interesting ambiguous character, a cynical scoundrel with a bone to pick.
One of the bad guys is played by Sydney Greenstreet. This old round fellow is adorable and speaks in the most amusing British manner. The movie could stand to lose Humphery Bogart, but not this guy.
The movie’s reputation is primarily in cementing the noir genre, with its dark mood and stark lighting.