It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

I don't believe there's an American actress who has turned in a finer set of performances as Bette Davis did from the late 1930s to the late 1940s. But by 1950, her star was in decline. The scripts were not as good. Some of her performances seemed a tad over the top. But she was still a force to behold...and enjoy.It was a dark and stormy night. Well, it wasn't stormy. But it sure was dark! Much of the early part of this film is so dark that I would guess the studio lighting was by flashlight (and only 1, at that). Really, this film has an awfully cheap look to it. The film also suffers from atrocious cinematography or significant deterioration of the film stock...or both (at least in the print shown on TCM).Another problem here is Gary Merrill's facial and body hair. Yes, I'm serious. From scene to scene his 5 o'clock shadow varies from heavy to light. And, if he were still alive, I'd suggest he shave his chest for the cinema! Shades of the Wolf Man! This must rate as one of Bette Davis' worst films. How she ever selected this -- particularly after her recent success in "All About Eve". Think it's just my misguided opinion? Many reviewers feel it's what led to a sharp decline in her career! So who is responsible for this being such a monstrosity? I'd like to blame the director, Irving Rapper, but he directed Davis in "Now, Voyager" (1942; one of her finest films), and "The Corn Is Green" (1945). I don't know much about the writer, Val Guest, so I'll heap a pile of blame on him. But in regard to both jobs, I've seen better in high school plays.And then there are the actors. If you want to see Bette Davis overact, and act poorly, this is your chance. I adored her in the 1940s, but here she had lost her touch. And Gary Merrill...well, I remembered him as being a decent television actor...but perhaps I have a faulty memory, because here he is just terrible. Emlyn Williams...truly annoying here. Anthony Steel as a boy friend of two women...forgettable. Barbara Murray as one of those women...forgettable.I don't know if I've ever given a "1" before, but this is one of those films you watch to see just how bad it is. Enough said.

In New Yorkshimore, the adulterous writer of mystery novels Janet Frobisher (Bette Davis) is surprised by the stranger George Bates (Gary Merrill) that is waiting for her inside her isolated house nearby a lake seeking out her husband George Preston. Bates tells Janet that her husband and he had robbed a bank; however her husband panicked in the heist and shot a guard. Janet tells that she is alone and surprisingly reveals that she had poisoned her husband and shows his body in the office. Out of the blue, her nosy next door neighbor Dr. Henderson (Emlyn Williams) pays a visit to her and George introduces himself as Janet's estranged husband that was traveling in Himalaya. Then they decide to dump the body in the lake, but Janet's secretary Chris Dale (Barbara Murray) and her fiancé and Janet's lover Larry Steven (Anthony Steel) arrive for the weekend and George dispose the corpse alone. Along the next days, the situation becomes tense with the quartet while Dr. Henderson snoops the house. When George kills Janet's horse Fury, the cynical writer plots a plan to gets rid of the inconvenient George. "Another Man's Poison" is a theatrical film shot practically in one location with a plot about murder and adultery that is indeed a witty mouse-and-cat game. The fantastic Bette Davis plays the role of a devilish selfish woman that only loves her horse Fury. Emlyn Williams performs an irritating character and only in the end there is an explanation for his annoying attitude. The conclusion is ironic and the black-humor is moralist in a certain viewpoint. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): "Mulher Maldita" ("Damned Woman")

It's fascinating to watch the wife and husband duo go at each other playing anything but a loving married couple. What makes this, of all of Bette Davis' movies rich is that the set is her own home; and, what a place it is. Not a palace, but a very British type of country home.Davis' & Merrill's acting is superb; the plot is thick; the script worthy of Davis' fantastic articulation & conveyance of attitudes contrary enough to part the Red Sea.Everyone's got their favorite Bette Davis film, if they're a fan of the US classics from Warner Bros.. Mine is this "Poison...," because it's the 4th time the dynamic duo act together but the first time they both have leading roles; it's filmed in their own home which reveals so much about Davis' tastes & I could feel her comfort with the set; the mystery.crime.drama is unsettling; and to the end, I watched wondering how Davis would get out of the ugly situation in which Merrill's held her.There's something very different about this movie because Davis put on the production herself outside of a domineering studio. Considering the year & women's social inferiority in the workplace, even in Hollywood, it's remarkable that Davis pulled "Poison..." off so well.

This is quite the oddball movie. As previous reviewers have mentioned, it is based on a play and the entire movie has that "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" feel to it. It's also in need of some serious restoration. The quality is rather shabby and the over all film is very dark. Bette is filmed in some unflattering angles throughout, especially the very last scene in the movie. I also found the music to be distracting and made me wonder if the composer was watching the same movie as I was. One particular ominous scene had a "Let's go romp in the fields" happy music playing. The movie starts out quite slow, but slowly picks up some steam. Although somewhat enjoyable, I'm still debating whether I should add this to my movie collection.