By the time he started playing the title role in the 1951 season of The Adventures of Kit Carson, actor Bill Williams was thirty-six and had a respectably rugged face. A mere five years earlier, when playing dim-witted himbo sailor-on-leave Alex Winkley in Deadline at Dawn, he was so baby-faced I wouldn’t have believed he could transform so much in such a short time. This is a pretty important part of the plot, as the boy has to be so guileless that hardened city gal June Goffe (Susan Hayward) believes his innocence in the death of Edna Bartelli (Lola Lane), even when he’s not too certain himself. We in the audience, of course, know that Edna was alive enough to trade barbs with her blind, pianist ex-husband Sleepy Parsons (Marvin Miller) after she realized “the sailor” had taken her wad of cash and skittered off into the night, much to Sleepy’s annoyance. Deadline is another film in The Criterion Channel’s recently curated “Blackout Noir” collection, and the blackout experienced in this one is Winkley’s; he comes to his senses at a NYC corner newsvendor’s stall with way too much money in his pocket on a blisteringly hot night, and all he remembers is going up to Edna’s to fix her radio after being plied with alcohol. Alex Winkley stumbles into a dance hall and meets June and confesses that he stole money from a woman for no reason that he can recall, and she accompanies him back to the place so that he can return it, only for them to find her dead. To ensure that Alex doesn’t get clapped for the murder, they have to figure out who really did it before he has to catch his bus back to his naval base at dawn. 

Deadline at Dawn was the only film directed by Harold Clurman, a name I didn’t recognize. He was a stage director primarily, directing over forty plays for Broadway, and entered into an artistic partnership with playwright Clifford Odets early in his career, directing Awake and Sing! in 1935 for the Group Theatre, which Clurman had co-founded. Odets was a name I did recognize, if only from theatre department shelves; it is the nature of theatre that its writers’ legacies are longer and have more reach than its directors do. It makes sense that this film was penned by a playwright, in that it has a tighter ear for dialogue than it does for narrative coherence and consistency. Early in their overnight investigation, June and Alex meet a kindly cabbie named Gus Hoffman (Paul Lukas), who has a bit of a verbal tic that causes him to preface his observations with “statistics say” and derivations thereof. Better still, when June and Alex buy a cup of orangeade on the street but don’t drink any of it, the cashier bids them to come see him again by saying “Don’t drink our grapeade next time.” The film is peppered with all kinds of fun New Yawker types whose brief appearances tell a whole story about their offstage life: the irascible superintendent who doesn’t get paid enough, the lonesome man seeking to make a wife out of a dance hall girl, a frantic man with an injured cat, the boarding house matron who doesn’t want to rent to a woman because “Girls want kitchen privileges and they wash their things in the sink.” That’s the good stuff. 

The noir stuff, on the other hand, leaves something to be desired. The death of Edna Bartelli ends up having too many red herrings. The late Edna turns out to have been a blackmailer whose extortions eventually took her down. Our unlikely trio track down a woman who was seen leaving Edna’s building and confront her, but she was only there to confront Edna for blackmailing her husband and couldn’t have committed the crime. But did her husband? Did Sleepy Parsons? Could the killer be Edna’s lover Babe Dooley, a washed-up baseball player who periodically calls up to her window from the street like a drunken dog? Over the course of the film, the characters make far too many of what could charitably be called “Bat-deductions,” so named for the way that Adam West’s Batman could often parse together incomprehensible and unrelated “clues” into accurate conclusions despite no logical connection between the things. There’s a sequence in which Alex and June walk down to the corner from Edna’s place “because the killer might have done something like that,” then get drinks that they don’t finish, saying “Hey, maybe the killer would have bought a drink and then failed to drink it too!” It’s nonsensical, but how well the film plays for you will depend on what you want out of it. As a conveyance for delivering quippy dialogue and to show off Lukas and Hayward’s respective talents, it’s effective and fun. As a mystery film with a satisfying series of clues and payoffs, it’s less so. Perhaps the big reason for this is that the killer is someone we’ve come to like and trust over the course of the film, which means that the investigation, such as it is, was being guided by the guilty party for decent portions of it. It’s an emotionally convincing ending, even when it’s not necessarily a narratively convincing one. Enjoyable, but not a must-watch. 

-Mark “Boomer” Redmond