A charity organization becomes a front of Nazi spy ring in England during the Blitz, Fritz Lang’s conspiracy theory-fused film-noir is based on Graham Greene’s novel, a taut if sketchy escapade about an innocent man’s dogged investigation of what is hidden under the plain sight, that said man is Stephen Neal (Milland), who is newly released from an asylum after being interned for assisted murder of his sick wife, here, Seton I. Miller’s script tones down Stephen’s crime, thus significantly attenuates his guilt which pervades in the source novel.

Stephen’s sanity has never been questioned, a new lease on life barely starts when he fetches up in a village fête organized by the Mothers of Free Nations charity, and inexplicably wins a cake due to sheer quirk of fate and far-fetched misapprehension, when the cake is bombarded along with a nameless assailant, Stephen, narrowly survives within an inch of his life, goes to London and starts his own derring-do to get the bottom of the incident, down the road, he meet an Austrian refugee Carla Hilfe (Reynolds), who runs the charity with her brother Willi (Esmond), friend or foe, a catenation of happenstances will determine that, only, circumscribed by a simplified approach to close the story with a happy ending, the suspension fizzles out in a jiffy.

Clear as day that Lang’s Hollywood knockoffs are unable to hold a candle to his Weimar years achievements, still, in MINISTRY OF FEAR, monochromatic allure and seamless mise-en-scène materialize from time to time, notably during a séance presided by a clairvoyant Ms. Bellane (Brooke), a femme fatale archetype, Lang proves he still has his impressionistic conceit in his genes, only the masterstrokes are at a premium in this second-rate output.

referential entries: Lang’s THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW (1944, 7.5/10); CLOAK AND DAGGER (1946, 6.5/10).

7.5~8分。 好萊塢工業(yè)化流水線一方面做到了雅俗共賞，一方面也抹殺了導(dǎo)演的個(gè)性，這也是朗在美國(guó)時(shí)期的作品不太被提及（以及很少被觀看/擁有知名度）的原因。

客觀來說，這部電影制作的還是很精美（如同電影中第一個(gè)懸疑點(diǎn)蛋糕），整個(gè)懸念的設(shè)置，鋪陳，開展，與解套也處理得引人入勝，但偏于娛樂化（必須通俗？）的設(shè)定還是讓劇情和人物的描繪顯得蒼白。

不過好萊塢的優(yōu)勢(shì)還是在如下這些細(xì)節(jié)展現(xiàn)的淋漓盡致：攝影，搭景，以及令人贊嘆不已的室內(nèi)陳列（尤其貝倫太太的房間，仿如教科書一般），單個(gè)鏡頭中隱藏的信息量之多，值得細(xì)細(xì)品味。

最后射殺兄弟的那一槍也是充滿創(chuàng)意，宛如神跡。這也是一位大師導(dǎo)演在大環(huán)境限制，在藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作低潮之時(shí)（年齡上應(yīng)該屬于高峰的年紀(jì)），突破枷鎖的嘗試。

片頭的時(shí)鐘母題也具有多重意向的表達(dá)： 1，殺妻/妻子死亡倒計(jì)時(shí) 2，自由/勝利解放倒計(jì)時(shí) 3，回憶/心靈折磨倒計(jì)時(shí) 4，將被謀害/危險(xiǎn)迫近倒計(jì)時(shí)

顯而易見的魅力和道德焦慮的混合物，電影版是一個(gè)令人愉快的有關(guān)偏執(zhí)狂的“冤枉的人”驚悚片。

《恐懼內(nèi)閣》是朗極其推崇的小說，曾想為自己買下它的版權(quán)，但沒有成功。當(dāng)朗看到制片廠的劇本后，企圖不履行合同。

完成的影片和小說有很大區(qū)別。在格林版中，邋遢的主人公剛剛獲釋，他是因給妻子實(shí)施安樂死而被關(guān)進(jìn)監(jiān)獄的。

電影中，這個(gè)人物則是個(gè)英俊的家伙，被判無罪。類似格林對(duì)大轟炸時(shí)期倫敦的幻影式描繪的東西，派拉蒙一樣也沒能獲得。最好的片段是那些暴力動(dòng)作，場(chǎng)面設(shè)計(jì)和攝影的新穎不凡。