Richard Brooks wrote and directed this early example of the caper film. Stewart Granger plays a canny art thief who, with the help of an innocent Pier Angeli, tries to pawn off a reproduction to his client, Kurt Kaszner. The story is admittedly thin but there's some great repartee, especially amongst the troika of bad guys played by George Sanders, Norman Lloyd, and Mike Mazurki. And really, how can you go wrong with a threesome that sinister? Robert Surtees' cinematography is excellent and takes reasonable advantage of location work in Italy, Sicily, and Tunisia. All in all, its better than you might think (and certainly better than the other two reviews for the film indicate).
12 Reviews
Mediterranean Working Vacation
bkoganbing21 July 2009
In his second directed film, Richard Brooks filmed his own screenplay and you kind of get the feeling he would like to have had Cary Grant as his lead as he did in his first film, Crisis. I'm betting this film had to have been offered to Grant.
Failing to get Grant, MGM had its leads under contract in Stewart Granger and Pier Angeli. They did a reasonably good job in a caper film where the thief turns out to have a conscience.
Granger contracts to steal a valuable religious painting from a church in Palermo and makes good his escape to Tunis. Where instead of delivering it to fence George Sanders, he uses the old Granger charm to make copies and see if he can collect a few times on this robbery. Since nobody knows quite what Granger's game is, they have to wait and see including the police inspector Joseph Calleia.
The charm is used on young artist Pier Angeli and he even marries the girl. But she in the end has more effect on him than he on her.
MGM brought Richard Brooks and the whole cast over to Sicily and to Tunis with interiors filmed in their Cinecitta studios in Rome. So after going through that expense, why didn't they opt for color, given some of the beautiful locations they were filming at?
For Calleia and Angeli, this was a return home. For the rest of the cast it was a nice Mediterranean working vacation even though Brooks and Granger did not get along. I really do think Brooks must have seen this film for Cary Grant.
It's not a bad film, it does drag in spots and color would have been of immense help. Still Granger is every bit as charming as Cary Grant.
No matter what Richard Brooks thought.
Failing to get Grant, MGM had its leads under contract in Stewart Granger and Pier Angeli. They did a reasonably good job in a caper film where the thief turns out to have a conscience.
Granger contracts to steal a valuable religious painting from a church in Palermo and makes good his escape to Tunis. Where instead of delivering it to fence George Sanders, he uses the old Granger charm to make copies and see if he can collect a few times on this robbery. Since nobody knows quite what Granger's game is, they have to wait and see including the police inspector Joseph Calleia.
The charm is used on young artist Pier Angeli and he even marries the girl. But she in the end has more effect on him than he on her.
MGM brought Richard Brooks and the whole cast over to Sicily and to Tunis with interiors filmed in their Cinecitta studios in Rome. So after going through that expense, why didn't they opt for color, given some of the beautiful locations they were filming at?
For Calleia and Angeli, this was a return home. For the rest of the cast it was a nice Mediterranean working vacation even though Brooks and Granger did not get along. I really do think Brooks must have seen this film for Cary Grant.
It's not a bad film, it does drag in spots and color would have been of immense help. Still Granger is every bit as charming as Cary Grant.
No matter what Richard Brooks thought.
The title says it all.
mamalv8 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Title of the Light Touch is surely an indication of a charming tale of a thief who has no scruples and lures a young naive girl into a web of deceit. Pier Angelli is very good here, as the young artist taken in by an older, wiser, and unscrupulous Stewart Granger. She is totally in love with him and goes along with the art forgery plan. I like this movie, it is as said, light. Granger is suave and manipulative and of course George Sanders is just as charming as the dealer of stolen art. Some have said it does not take on the same chemistry as the Love in the Afternoon movie with Cooper and Hepburn, but I think it is just different. After all Cooper was a playboy seducing a young Audrey Hepburn. Here we have a man with a purpose who feels that the end justifies the means. Pier Angelli was sort of a sweet presence on the screen, probably because that is her in real life. Giving up James Dean destroyed her.
Not intended to impress
misctidsandbits12 September 2011
Why do people feel the need to outline the plot, bandy about cast and crew names like they are insiders, mouth trade lingo and generally attempt to ape professional critics they have read or heard?? We can read all that stuff on the credits and from the places they lifted it. We have search engines on our computers too. I understand that real person reviews are solicited here, maybe with some sharing of things learned about the film. But, how about referencing the source so others can evaluate it on that basis. I think people mostly come here to find out what a regular viewer thought of the film.
On the film, I know it is not the best done by the actors. But I feel that when you like an actor, you like him/her in even a lesser movie. Enjoyed the combination of Granger and Sanders enough to want to watch and re-watch the movie just for that. To me, they have styles that are ever so delightful to watch in combo.
On the film, I know it is not the best done by the actors. But I feel that when you like an actor, you like him/her in even a lesser movie. Enjoyed the combination of Granger and Sanders enough to want to watch and re-watch the movie just for that. To me, they have styles that are ever so delightful to watch in combo.
strictly B-movie
SnoopyStyle27 September 2022
Thief Sam Conride (Stewart Granger) steals a painting from an Italian museum. He double-crosses his partner Felix Guignol (George Sanders) by faking its destruction in a boat fire. Their client Aramescue don't necessarily buy it. Sam comes up with a new scheme. They recruit innocent Anna Vasarri (Pier Angeli) to paint copies and sell them to unsuspecting customers who know about theft but don't know that it's supposedly destroyed.
This is a B-movie. It desperately needs a bigger star. Sam needs to be a slick charmer. Granger has an old-time leading man look with height. I don't notice his British accent. He seems more non-descript than anything. He had a long career, but I don't know much of his work. The premise holds some potential, but this can't exceed beyond its B-movie nature. I can see this being reworked with bigger stars in the two leads.
This is a B-movie. It desperately needs a bigger star. Sam needs to be a slick charmer. Granger has an old-time leading man look with height. I don't notice his British accent. He seems more non-descript than anything. He had a long career, but I don't know much of his work. The premise holds some potential, but this can't exceed beyond its B-movie nature. I can see this being reworked with bigger stars in the two leads.
A Heavy-Handed Script
boblipton2 February 2024
Stewart Granger is an art thief in partnership with George Sanders. Granger has stolen a prized mdonna from a church, and Sanders is arranging to sell it. Tired of the small profits, Granger claims the picture was lost on a boat. He and Sanders look for an artist to make forgeries ..... excuse me, copies, and settle on Pier Angeli. As Granger evades Sanders, two sets of willing buyers, and local cop Joseph Calleia, he and Sra. Angeli get married. When she discovers what her husband does for a living, she is aghast.
It's filled with Sanders' casually delivered, dreadfully cynical remarks, Sra. Angeli's fresh, sweet charm, and some lovely camerawork by Robert Surtees. Writer-director Richard Brooks' script lacks the light touch; none of his movies were notable for subtlety. But working with the well-oiled MGM machine, he could turn out a good movie. He does so here, although Stewart Granger despised him. With Kurt Kaszner, Larry Keating, Rhys Williams, Mike Mazurki, Norman Lloyd, and Hans Conried.
It's filled with Sanders' casually delivered, dreadfully cynical remarks, Sra. Angeli's fresh, sweet charm, and some lovely camerawork by Robert Surtees. Writer-director Richard Brooks' script lacks the light touch; none of his movies were notable for subtlety. But working with the well-oiled MGM machine, he could turn out a good movie. He does so here, although Stewart Granger despised him. With Kurt Kaszner, Larry Keating, Rhys Williams, Mike Mazurki, Norman Lloyd, and Hans Conried.
Part comedy, part suspense, all bad
helpless_dancer9 August 2002
Excruciatingly boring tale of a thief who steals a famous painting for another man and then double crosses him. Along the way a young woman is brought into the deal to create a forgery of the painting and she winds up falling for one of the crooks. This crushing bore went on interminably as the 2 groups went about trying to outwit each other and come into possession of the valuable piece of art. Worse than "Canvas", another stupid 'art theft' movie.
Rarely seen -- and now we know why
Jim Tritten4 July 2002
This could have been a reasonably good picture. Plot is fairly decent and location shooting is an added dimension. It is writer/director Richard Brooks second attempt at direction -- he got better. Stewart Granger has been better. The age difference between Grander and the young and naive Pier Angeli is simply too great and does not work like it did with Gary Cooper and Audrey Hepburn in "Love in the Afternoon." Kurt Kasznar is probably working as hard as he could in his first film since appearing as an uncredited child star, but I could have seen Sydney Greenstreet in his role instead (had that legendary actor not been done with films). I liked George Sanders -- but I ususally like him in almost anything. He is the one saving grace to the film. Joseph Calleia does a good job but see him instead as Sgt. Pete Menzies in "Touch of Evil." Same with Mike Mazurki -- see him as "the" Moose Malloy in "Murder My Sweet" instead. "E" web site says the film is not available on tape or DVD and does not provide you an opportunity to vote for it. Not much to recommend.
Intriguing Characters & a Suspenseful Plot
cjguerrette30 January 2024
Don't read the "Storyline" - it has too many spoilers.
Intriguing Characters & a Suspenseful Plot: I'm rating this movie a "10" in the hope of improving the ridiculously low 5.8 rating. It certainly deserves at least a 7. It's suspenseful, clever, and definitely enjoyable, especially if you don't know too much content ahead of viewing it. My husband & I both found "The Light Touch" to be well-acted, entertaining, and to have a worthy script. Some descriptions include "comedy" in the classification. Though there are some amusing lines, it's far from a "comedy." Interesting contrast in the cast of characters, to be sure!
Intriguing Characters & a Suspenseful Plot: I'm rating this movie a "10" in the hope of improving the ridiculously low 5.8 rating. It certainly deserves at least a 7. It's suspenseful, clever, and definitely enjoyable, especially if you don't know too much content ahead of viewing it. My husband & I both found "The Light Touch" to be well-acted, entertaining, and to have a worthy script. Some descriptions include "comedy" in the classification. Though there are some amusing lines, it's far from a "comedy." Interesting contrast in the cast of characters, to be sure!
Tedious, slow-paced movie!
JohnHowardReid15 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Producer: Pandro S. Berman. Copyright 26 October 1951 by Loew's Inc. A Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer picture. New York opening at the Capitol: 16 January 1952. U.S. release: 7 December 1951. U.K. release: 12 January 1952. Australian release: 3 March 1952. 9,613 feet. 107 minutes. Cut to 93 minutes in the U.S.A. and Australia.
SYNOPSIS: Two unscrupulous international art dealers and an unsuspecting young artist are involved in the theft of a religious painting. Setting: Italy, Sicily, and Tunis. — Copyright summary.
COMMENT: An art theft drama is nothing new, but this one commences promisingly. Unfortunately, it quickly but firmly deteriorates into a routine rival gangsters fall-out with each other scenario, and that time-worn scenario then leads to a climax of sheer bathos.
It's a shame to find competent players like George Sanders, Mike Mazurki and sleepy-eyed Norman Lloyd, involved in this tedious, slow-paced movie. True, all three deliver wonderfully skilled impersonations of villainy, but all their good work is mostly upset by the slow-paced direction of Richard Brooks, plus the presence of both Stewart Granger and Pier Angeli.
For some reason – maybe Granger simply couldn't get along with Dick Brooks. Anyway, this so-called Light Touch was only Brooks' second movie and no doubt he was still finding his way, although he had handled both his writing and directing chores with admirable distinction in Crisis. Or maybe Brooks and producer, Pan Berman, just didn't get along. But whatever the cause of the problem, Granger just walks through his role for the money. And as for the lovely Pier Angeli, acting-wise she is a total disaster.
OTHER VIEWS: The leading players adhere to conflicting styles: Pier Angeli gives a natural and charming performance which emphasizes the story's more serious side; Sanders is artificial, mannered and occasionally amusing; Granger brings little humor to his part and makes Conride all too convincingly unsympathetic. - Penelope Houston.
SYNOPSIS: Two unscrupulous international art dealers and an unsuspecting young artist are involved in the theft of a religious painting. Setting: Italy, Sicily, and Tunis. — Copyright summary.
COMMENT: An art theft drama is nothing new, but this one commences promisingly. Unfortunately, it quickly but firmly deteriorates into a routine rival gangsters fall-out with each other scenario, and that time-worn scenario then leads to a climax of sheer bathos.
It's a shame to find competent players like George Sanders, Mike Mazurki and sleepy-eyed Norman Lloyd, involved in this tedious, slow-paced movie. True, all three deliver wonderfully skilled impersonations of villainy, but all their good work is mostly upset by the slow-paced direction of Richard Brooks, plus the presence of both Stewart Granger and Pier Angeli.
For some reason – maybe Granger simply couldn't get along with Dick Brooks. Anyway, this so-called Light Touch was only Brooks' second movie and no doubt he was still finding his way, although he had handled both his writing and directing chores with admirable distinction in Crisis. Or maybe Brooks and producer, Pan Berman, just didn't get along. But whatever the cause of the problem, Granger just walks through his role for the money. And as for the lovely Pier Angeli, acting-wise she is a total disaster.
OTHER VIEWS: The leading players adhere to conflicting styles: Pier Angeli gives a natural and charming performance which emphasizes the story's more serious side; Sanders is artificial, mannered and occasionally amusing; Granger brings little humor to his part and makes Conride all too convincingly unsympathetic. - Penelope Houston.
Not one of Granger's better films...thanks to the script.
planktonrules28 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
"The Light Touch" is one of many Italian films made during the 1950s-70s which starred English speaking actors. Often they were American and often they were British...such as Stewart Granger and George Sanders in this one. Sadly, while both are fine actors, the script just isn't very good.
Shortly after the film begins, Sam (Granger) steals a valuable painting. It's quite easy...too easy. However, he has silent partners in the caper (I'm not sure why, as he does everything himself) and he doesn't want to share, so he arranges an accident and tells them the painting was burned. They, of course, don't believe him and he claims he can get a talented artist (Pier Angeli) to make a copy and they can sell that.
While the setup isn't terrible, the film really isn't good. This is because Sam is a career criminal and clearly a sociopath...but by the end of the story he has a change of heart and returns the stolen painting...much like the end of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas". Now this ending worked with the Seuss book because it was written for kids...but such a trite ending in this film really ruins it.
Shortly after the film begins, Sam (Granger) steals a valuable painting. It's quite easy...too easy. However, he has silent partners in the caper (I'm not sure why, as he does everything himself) and he doesn't want to share, so he arranges an accident and tells them the painting was burned. They, of course, don't believe him and he claims he can get a talented artist (Pier Angeli) to make a copy and they can sell that.
While the setup isn't terrible, the film really isn't good. This is because Sam is a career criminal and clearly a sociopath...but by the end of the story he has a change of heart and returns the stolen painting...much like the end of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas". Now this ending worked with the Seuss book because it was written for kids...but such a trite ending in this film really ruins it.
Another entertaining movie from the director of "The Professionals" Richard Brooks
jordondave-2808513 October 2023
(1951) Light Touch
ADVENTURE/ THRILLER
Co-written and directed by Richard Brooks, this is yet another enjoyable Stewart Granger movie as he plays a professional thief, Sam Conride who manages to successfully steal an expensive painting from a Vatican church. He then felt to be double crossed from the buyer who then attempts to manipulates a very young lady painter, who could duplicate original works! What I've just describe to you is only just the beginning with it's many twists and mishaps happen along the way with some ingenuity! Another thing I enjoyed about this movie as opposed to the others are that the story never lags or drags any emotional punch meaning that's all business- the movie just gets to the point! The only drawback of course like most black and white movies made during this era was the imposed 'do the right thing' type of ending! This movie is more of a 85% in terms of it's entertainment value but 80% is still a very good rating.
Co-written and directed by Richard Brooks, this is yet another enjoyable Stewart Granger movie as he plays a professional thief, Sam Conride who manages to successfully steal an expensive painting from a Vatican church. He then felt to be double crossed from the buyer who then attempts to manipulates a very young lady painter, who could duplicate original works! What I've just describe to you is only just the beginning with it's many twists and mishaps happen along the way with some ingenuity! Another thing I enjoyed about this movie as opposed to the others are that the story never lags or drags any emotional punch meaning that's all business- the movie just gets to the point! The only drawback of course like most black and white movies made during this era was the imposed 'do the right thing' type of ending! This movie is more of a 85% in terms of it's entertainment value but 80% is still a very good rating.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
