Criminal Lawyer

An ambitious, dynamic district attorney(Lee Tracy) is called upon to prosecute the mob boss(Eduardo Ciannelli)responsible for his lofty appointment. Most of the courtroom scenes are hard hitting and emotionally draining, other wise the story line is quite hackneyed and obvious. Other cast members of note are:Betty Lawford, Margot Grahame and Frank M. Thomas.

Not exactly film-noir and truthfully a subpar crime flick.

Criminal Lawyer is a hackneyed romance mystery featuring Lee Tracy doing his Jimmy Walker act and the forgettable Margot Grahame showing why she is just that.

Barry Brandon (Tracy) is one hot shot confident lawyer when he runs afoul of mobster Denny Larkin. Looking to even the score Larkin backs Brandon into a corner by involving his girl Madge (Grahame). With the courtroom as backdrop the absurd climax commences.

Tracy's cocksure charm and elegance wear thin after awhile, his staccato barking turning to hot air that makes the film lose steam and ultimately derail with a cloying , tremulous Tracy yapping on mawkishly to the denouement. Grahame remains comatose most of the way, Ed Cianelli threatening and for some odd reason Erik Rhodes shows up as Top Hat refugee Rudolpho Tonetti (Bandini here) to mainline some man crush humor into the pic. Criminal is an apt description of this one.

What a shame that the great Lee Tracy was toiling in low rent pictures like this when he should've been a big star in his very prime at this stage in his career. There are glimpses of his motor-mouthed talent in the courtroom scenes and there is some electricity in his terse, mutually contemptuous confrontations with tight-lipped mob boss Eduardo Ciannelli, but the script is subpar and the editing (particularly during the climax) is downright dreadful. The film has no grab or soul and Tracy's moral reversal rings terribly false.

During much of his career, Lee Tracy played one of two basic characters...the snappy talking newspaper man or a snappy talking lawyer. This is one of his lawyer films and the part seems like it was written with him (or perhaps Warren William) in mind.

In this story, Brandon (Tracy) is a defense lawyer whose only concern seems to be winning cases. One of his biggest and most influential clients is Larkin (Eduardo Ciannelli) and he assumes he knows and understands Brandon. He thinks Brandon is evil...and is more than willing to do whatever this mobster tells him to do. This isn't exactly the case...for Brandon it's all about winning. So, when Larkin pulls some strings and gets him appointed as the Assistant District Attorney (soon to become the DA), he thinks Brandon will throw cases at Larkin's request. But Brandon takes to this job like his last...and wins case after case and his main focus is setting himself up to become the state's next governor. So, when a case comes involving Larkin as the defendant, Larkin is sure the case will be botched....and Brandon might just do it. Or, could he be willing, for the first time, to actually do something because it's the right thing?

This is a very good film and Tracy and Ciannelli make it that way. The film has two female leads...though neither is especially strong nor well written. Instead, the film is all about these two inflexible men and their date with destiny. Well worth seeing...well directed and exciting. In fact, I only saw one thing I hated in the film and that was seeing Brandon cross examining a witness and badgering her until he confesses in front of the entire court her guilt...which ONLY happens on "Perry Mason" and in movies!

I have to say I was disappointed to see only criticism of this movie!

I only came upon it by chance but this short movie was intriguing to me!

I disagree that the plot was "subpar" & thought the acting was adequate & the plot reasonably well constructed!

This is after all, over 70 years old!!!

How could it hope to compete with multi-million dollar modern productions???

But it presents the evolution of the clever but unprincipled lawyer who switches allegiances without justice!

It asks ethical questions ahead of its times!!!

Until the lawyer finds in his cleverness, his own demise is imminent!

Then swings the attack for a riveting conclusion!

It doesn't answer all the questions it prompts!

But I don't think that was its purpose!

I was impressed by "Criminal Lawyer" & I believe it has aged well!

If only I could say that for some who consider themselves wise because they are old in years!!!