La cinquième empreinte: Old school mystery that drags a bit

Is this thing worth your time?

Honestly, only if you have a real soft spot for black-and-white murder mysteries that feel like they were pulled out of a time capsule. If you’re looking for a tight, modern thriller, you will probably be bored out of your mind. If you love staring at old French interiors and listening to people talk in clipped, dramatic tones, you might actually enjoy the vibe.

Jacques de Nisson is the kind of guy who clearly asked for trouble. He’s rich, he’s arrogant, and he’s juggling a mistress named Lucie while trying to make a move on his lawyer’s wife. You know exactly where this is heading the second he appears on screen.

When the body turns up, the movie turns into a classic parade of suspicious faces. Every time the camera cuts to the butler, he looks like he’s hiding a secret life or a very expensive piece of jewelry. It’s a bit predictable, sure, but there’s something cozy about the way the inspector just wanders around waiting for a clue to drop into his lap.

The pacing is… well, it’s a crawl. There’s a scene where they’re discussing the crime in the parlor that just seems to go on for an eternity. I think I checked my phone twice before someone actually said something important.

Speaking of old mysteries, this felt a bit like the slow-burn energy you find in Criminel, but without quite as much bite. The focus on fingerprints is a major plot point, which is funny because it’s such a low-tech way to solve a case compared to the stuff you see in movies like Svengali where everything feels a bit more unhinged.

The acting is very theater-heavy. Everyone is projecting their lines like they're in the back row of a drafty hall. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it just makes you want to turn the volume down.

Some random notes from my pad:

• The lighting in the office scene is weirdly dark. I missed half of what was on the desk.
• The butler has this nervous tick where he touches his tie constantly. It’s a dead giveaway.
• Nobody seems particularly sad that Jacques is dead. Can you blame them?
• The ending is basically a lecture.

It’s not a masterpiece, and it definitely doesn’t have the kinetic energy of something like Speed Wild. It’s just a solid, slightly dusty whodunnit that probably looked a lot more impressive back when the world was a little less crowded with content.

Would I watch it again? Probably not. Am I glad I saw it once? Sure, it’s a decent way to spend a rainy afternoon if you don't mind a bit of fluff. Just don't go in expecting a revolution in crime fiction. It’s just a guy, a gun, and some fingerprints.