Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

JohnHowardReid Complicated (multiple flashbacks within flashbacks) but highly engrossing, Sorry Wrong Number still packs a wallop - even with today's more blasé and less tolerant audiences. Litvak's driving direction with its remarkably mobile camera moodily prowling through appropriately lavish sets and strikingly noirish natural locations, superbly abets Lucille Fletcher's grippingly bizarre screenplay. Litvak isn't afraid to use close-ups either. And his players not only stand up to this relentless probing but offer some of the greatest performances of their lives. Both Stanwyck and Lancaster make formidable principals. Outstanding character study contributors include Shirley Ann Richards, Wendell Corey, Harold Vermilyea and the ever-reliable Ed Begley. Note Joyce Compton as the blonde who briefly interrupts Begley's all-alone-in-the-big-house phone chat; and director Anatole Litvak as a diner in dark glasses - As an inside joke, Lancaster testily turns to waiter Vuolo and pointedly asks: "Who is that man?").

Hitchcoc A wonderfully suspenseful movie. A hypochondriac woman lies in bed. Upon making a phone call, she inadvertently overhears a couple men planning a murder. She knows the time it will be committed. She does what she can but with so little information, the police can do nothing. She keeps making calls. Soon we are in flashback mode as she searches her brain for any inkling of what is going on with her husband who should have been back by this time. It's a matter of trying to figure out who the victim is going to be. We have the advantage of knowing the possibilities. Things get more intense as the time approaches. A real spellbinder for the ages.

Mr_Ectoplasma "Sorry, Wrong Number" follows a bedridden housewife (Barbara Stanwyck) who stumbles onto a phone call between two men detailing a murder plot. The narrative then delves into flashbacks detailing personal histories in order to unravel the truth.Adapted from the brilliant radio play, "Sorry, Wrong Number" is a classic thriller that has been oft- lauded by critics and audiences alike over the years. Stanwyck is the bittersweet anchor of the film, playing the neurotic and arguably vapid protagonist locked away in her Manhattan apartment. Supporting parts by Burt Lancaster as Stanwyck's missing husband, and Ann Richards as his would-have-been wife are both brilliant. Leif Erickson plays Richards' husband, with Ed Begley as Stanwyck's plutocrat father. The narrative is unraveled through flashback throughout the first half of the film, punctuated by effective voiceovers, before shifting to a profoundly dark and atmospheric final act that has Stanwyck isolated in her apartment. The conclusion is daring and unexpectedly grim, and Stanwyck dominates the screen for the entirety of the buildup. For a forties thriller, it is surprisingly hard-edged.Overall, "Sorry, Wrong Number" is a well-acted, well-shot, and remarkably grim film. Absorbing performances throughout combined with a twisting narrative that culminates in a tense and brusque conclusion make this an indisputable genre classic. 9/10.

Panamint From the first slam bang of the jarring musical theme this film seems to throw itself at the viewer too forcefully. After the opening an absolute torrent of words spill out, every second crammed with dialog, literally thousands of words, spoken by characters who seemingly never take a breath. OK, I understand that movies don't need to be Budd Boetticher or John Ford westerns, moving along almost elegantly with visual storytelling and camera work telling you as much as the dialog, but "Sorry, Wrong Number" goes too far in the opposite direction: it is a radio play stretched out with thousands of added words. The camera work in this film is technically alright but not used the way that a great director turns a film into art. Ms. Stanwyck is terrific but her character is immobile, an invalid, mostly speaking or listening to spoken dialog. All of the other actors are good, including an English actor who recites extensive dialog while blacked out in profile, standing like a statue and talking into a phone. In other words, everybody just stand and spew the dialog as fast as you can then move on to the next scene.A limited amount of location movement is done including some flashbacks but there is constant dialog, narration or the jarring theme overlaying most of it. We can visually follow what is going on as characters move around at the seashore and it could have been done with the sound of seagulls or surf or boat whistles or something atmospheric, but the director doesn't seem to trust his camera to tell the story. Hitchcock in "Vertigo" confidently features much moving around in automobiles, in and out of buildings, in a church/cemetery etc (not to mention the classic crashing surf scene) with little or no talking and mostly just the low bassoon sounds of Bernard Herrmann's musical score. Similarly, much of the actual story of Hitchcock's "Rear Window" is presented via his camera lens rather than spoken words. The end of the film is thrilling, as advertised, and it delivers. Overall, the radio-play styled acting is good but I expected to see more of a "film" classic, and was disappointed to find little artistic value here as film-making. Also, my ears almost hurt from the 128 minute wall-to-wall verbal assault. I think that the original radio play format would be the best format for this work. The lesson to be learned from all this is that if you are going to direct a film, trust your camera to help you convey some of the story ideas, you don't need to totally dominate the camera with added noise and talk.