This is indeed an odd flick and I assume Bogart agreed to star in it because it more closely represented his real-life political and social beliefs. Because of this, it appears to be a sincere effort--unfortunately, it just doesn't grab the viewers. I assume that MANY who saw it in 1949 were VERY disappointed because instead of the tough guy Bogart, he is a lawyer who decries the evils of slums and how it produces career criminals. This social crusader Bogart must have REALLY gone over well with those who wanted the tough guy! My problem is that blaming society is too easy an answer and that really turned me off as I watched. Plus the rhetoric was just too ridiculous and over-the-top. Secondly, it just didn't convince me--if Derek's character or the events leading up to the crime were better written, I might have gone along with the premise. As it was, Derek WAS a punk and deserved to be severely punished. The film would have been MUCH better if the attempts to gain sympathy for the criminal had been deserved. Sure, he had a tough life, but ultimately, he executed a cop and was a menace. This connection and empathy just isn't there--as the writers did a lousy job of creating a flawed character worth saving--Derek was not worth the crusade. So overall, a slightly worse than average flick, though for Bogart a sincere effort but a miss nevertheless.