THE MASK OF DIMITRIOS
US, 1944, 95 minutes, Black and white.
Sydney Greenstreet, Zachary Scott, Faye Emerson, Peter Lorre, Victor Francen, Steven Geray, Florence Bates, Eduardo Ciannelli, John Abbott.
Directed by Jean Negulesco.
The Mask of Dimitrios is based on a novel by the popular thriller writer, Eric Ambler (Journey Into Fear). Made during World War Two, it has the atmosphere of countries of eastern Europe and the Middle East which were out of bounds for travellers at the time: Greece, Turkey.
The film begins with a body washed ashore, that of Dimitrios Makropoulos, played by Zachary Scott in his first screen role. The next year he was to appear with Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce.
Peter Lorre plays a writer who is investigating the life of Dimitrios and follows the tracks of his career around the different countries. Faye Emerson appears as a dancer who tells her story to him. He is joined by a sinister character who has different motives for seeking out Dimitrios. He is played in his customary manner by Sydney Greenstreet. Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet had made an impact in such films as The Maltese Falcon and Casablanca and were staples of some of the thrillers at Warner Bros during this period.
Director Jean Negulesco had made a number of B-budget thrillers. This was his first A film and was followed by such effective thrillers as The Conspirators and Three Strangers. He made a number of very competent and interesting films during the late 40s and early 50s including Johnny Belinda, The Mudlark, Phone Call From a Stranger and Titanic. With the coming of Cinemascope he moved into lush romantic comedies including How to Marry a Millionaire, Three Coins in the Fountain and Woman’s World.
1. Was this a good thriller? Did it retain audience interest? A thriller of the forties in style, characterization, sets and studio work, black and white photography? What thriller conventions did it use and how well?
2. The significance of the title, emphasis on Dimitrios, the theme of the mask?
3. The importance of the thriller structure, the discovery of the body, audience expectations, tracing Dimitrios’s life, the nature of the flashbacks, the discovery of reality? The suspense effect?
4. How credible was the plot? The exotic characters and exotic settings? The aura of mystery about the people and their exploits?
5. How repellent a character was Dimitrios? Audience response to his memory, loathing, his exploitation and use of people, lack of feeling, discovery of his being alive?
6. Reaction to the initial murder? His lack of regard for human feeling? His work as a spy? His using the girl and her money?
7. The importance of the Bulic sequence, his trapping him, manoeuvring his smallness and greed, his love for his wife, using him and driving him to death? Audience sympathy in this sequence?
8. Leyden and why he was interested in Dimitrios, as a writer, as a man in himself, his relationship with Peters, his putting the pieces of the puzzle together? The audience looking through his eyes?
9. Peters and Sidney Greenstreet's style? The coincidences of his presence? His participating in the search? The truth about Dimitrios? The final vindication?
10. How important was the showdown and the melodramatics of the shooting?
11. The effect of the showdown on Leyden, on Peters?
12. How much thriller involvement did the film ask of the audience, how much human involvement?
13. The film has some status as a classic. Does it deserve it?
