User Reviews

This film starts out encouragingly enough when 2 murdered bodies are found by the leading man in a house with a blind man playing a piano. You get some idea of the confusion to follow when our hero wipes his prints on items by the dead man but then leaves a trail of fingerprints throughout the house.Additionally the blind man hears him going about the house,so why didn't he hear the murders? After that all is confusion and the actual murderer introduced until late in the film which entails a lot of explanatory dialogue.Despite this and running through the film a second time I still don't quite understand what the plot was.

The credits of this inconsequential potboiler claim that Michael Cronin adapted the script from his own novel, which raises hopes swiftly dashed of a coherent plot. Maybe some of the pages got stuck together before he adapted it.

Characters slide in and out (notably Valentine Dyall and The Blind Pianist) without impacting on the narrative and everyone talks too much without taking anything very seriously. But the extensive location photography by veteran cameraman Geoffrey Faithfull is a breath of fresh air, everyone (especially the ladies) looks immaculate and there are plenty of familiar faces to keep you diverted.

What a mess of a movie! The first few minutes were fine with some good location filming and a voiceover by the main character which explained why he was walking along the beach towards a large house and windmill. He discovered two bodies in the house but from that point I simply couldn't follow what was going on. One thing's for sure - if you don't want to be a murder suspect don't go rummaging around for documents, leaving a trail of fingerprints. If no one saw you approach the house you take the money you think you're owed and get out quick.

The next hour was a total mess. I have no idea who several of the characters were or how they came to be involved. Who was the blind pianist who popped up wherever the script required him to? Why did the character Walter never reappear after his one scene despite being at the other end of a phone? Why did Hugh McDermott's character think the blind man drove off in a speedboat? By the end of the film I was totally confused as to who was working with who or what they were doing. The murderer was revealed but as to his motives - who knows?

If the voiceover had continued for the whole film this may have helped explain the plot. On the other hand it may have just confirmed that none of it made any sense.

The acting was pretty suspect too, particularly that of the star Hugh McDermott who gave an extremely unconvincing performance.

I've given this film three stars but only because I did enjoy the location filming in Sussex and London.

This is the second film on Renown's Crime Collection Volume 3 DVD set and is probably the poorest to appear on any of the first three volumes. There are a few forgotten gems to be found, such as The Third Alibi on Volume 2, but you can't expect them all to sparkle.

Johnny is on the spot alright, but it makes for less than thrilling film with the blind character being the only high spot.

A word of advice Johnny. When you stumble on two dead bodies, get whacked on the head by a blind man's cane. Do not stop in the outside of the pub for a drink with blood falling from your head. You will only become a person of interest to the police.

At least Johnny Breakes finds romance as he goes about trying to clear his name.

This is a low budget B British thriller. The story is a mess, Hugh McDermott is bland with some kind of mid atlantic accent.

JOHNNY ON THE SPOT is one of the worst British crime films I've seen. Everything about it says that it's an entirely derivative effort with zero effort made in terms of writing, acting, and direction. The guy who wrote and directed it, Maclean Rogers, also helmed a handful of serviceable detective potboilers including some of the Paul Temple series, but this is his worst yet.

The film features the charisma-free Hugh McDermott as a guy who's released from prison before immediately blundering into a murder scene. He's apparently treated as a suspect by the non-existent police force, and must clear his name, with only the clue of an old blind man to go on. The plot that follows is completely incomprehensible and I still didn't have any idea what was happening as the credits rolled. Nothing about the film rings true, and it all feels obscured and murky.

The only interesting thing about JOHNNY ON THE SPOT is that a few of the supporting actors are well known from the period. Valentine Dyall, Ronald Leigh-Hunt, and Ronald Adam all make appearances here. The fresh-faced Scottish starlet Elspet Gray was married to British comedian Brian Rix, while McDermott appeared in the same year's DEVIL GIRL FROM MARS.

A heavily laden, talkative crime drama, which left me none the wiser as to understanding the plot or even some of the characters. The blind pianist pops up every so often but there is no reason as to why he's involved in this muddled and confusing storyline. I'm not sure why the character 'Walter' played by Valentine Dyall suddenly disappears, as there was no explanation. The lack of a cohesive and accessible narrative of events must have left film goers at a loss as to what exactly was going on. The storyline would have been so much better with two British male leads but the films of the 50's demanded that at least one American actor to help with the distribution of the film in both the U.K. and the US. Thus we have Hugh McDermott and Paul Carpenter, who play the two Americans, exchanging cliched 'Chicago cops and dialogue' to give the film a gritty edge - but they end up trying too hard to establish their American cultural identity. Their tiresome American slang simply identifies them as cultural 'fish out of water' in a quintessentially English rural location. Another problem with the casting is that there are no youthful looking actors. Both men look middle aged, as does the main female star, Elspet Gray, who comes across as disinterested spectator. She has a difficult role as her part is largely sedentary, playing a one dimensional, middle class character, who seem totally emotionally detached as to the events which are taking place.. The whole thing is a mess.

One of the worst acted movies I've ever seen and I've seen tons of British crime thrillers. Thriller does not apply here. The girls are attractive and chirpy, small consolation.