I suppose Warner Brothers was trying to make hay out of "Casablanca" which, in 1944 when "Passage" was filmed was still very far from becoming one of, if not the greatest American film;I say it was. Yes, as I viewed it thanks to Mr. Turner, I did feel a bit "Casablankish" but it was merely spotty, illusory but not serious. In no way can "Passage" compare to "Blanca" yet I found it, although a bit corny at times, quite entertaining. Bogart's cynicism, the linchpin of "Blanca" is quite obvious because his main duty was to get back to France to see Michèle Morgan rather than to fight Nazism while the rest of his fellow escapees from Devil's Island were true blue patriots. Vive la France and so on and so forth. Bogart, on the other hand, was framed by his "beloved" France which resulted in his sweating out the brutality of French Guyana in all its splendor. Although missing the incredible Ingrid Bergman, this film does offer some of the "Blanca Boys" such as Peter Lorre and Claude Rains. By the way, even though Lorre was an odd looking little guy, in real life he was one of Bogie's best friends thanks to his boozing and then losing money in card games.Some of the battle action at sea is interesting but as phony as phony can be--it's quite obvious those scenes were shot in a gigantic bath tub on the Warner lot.Incidentally if a reader hasn't visited Hollywood and taken a tour or two through the studios,allow me to tell you this as my wife and I were aboard a tram touring Universal Studios. Those wartime battle scenes at sea were actually shot using miniature ships and planes sailing in and hovering over large barrels of water.All in all, "Passage" could never be rated, at least by me, as BAD just by virtue of Humphrey Bogart's starring role. The guy didn't become an icon for doing nothing.
Review of Passage to Marseille
