Further, Americans preoccupied with World War II may have had little interest in a hero (Morgan) who consistently rejects commitment and whose only interest in France’s cause is financial, to help himself and his girl (Marie). Overall, critics called the film a fast, witty romance whose plot was merely “an excuse for some good scenes”.
Variety cited its inferiority to Casablanca and other Warner Bros. melodramas, but acknowledged the new film’s success in its characterization. Others even considered it a Casablanca remake; Time called it a “tinny romantic melodrama which millions of cinemaddicts have been waiting for ever since Casablanca.”
New York Variety was more mixed, citing “nifty productional accoutrements” but “too unsteady” a story line. The American film critic James Agee liked the film but felt Going My Way was better, because To Have and Have Not focused too much on “character and atmosphere” rather than on plot.
He was far more interested in Bacall’s performance than the anti-Fascist themes in the film. He further stated: “But To Have and Have Not is neither an action picture nor a Bogart picture.
Its story is, in fact, just a loosely painted background for a kind of romance which the movies have all but forgotten about—the kind in which the derelict sweethearts are superficially aloof but essentially hot as blazes … Lauren Bacall has cinema personality to burn, and she burns both ends against an unusually little middle. Her personality is compounded partly of percolated Davis, Garbo, West, Dietrich, Harlow and Glenda Farrell, but more than enough of it is completely new to the screen.”
Critic Pauline Kael wrote, “Howard Hawks directed this slickly professional, thoroughly enjoyable Second World War melodrama … Don’t be misled: it’s the Warners mixture as before—sex and politics—but better this time.”
The film was one of the top 10 grossing pictures of 1944. According to Warner Bros records the film earned $3,652,000 ($65,230,000 in 2025 terms) domestically and $1,605,000 ($28,670,000 in 2025 terms) foreign, coming close to the high earnings of Casablanca.
On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, To Have and Have Not has a 94% approval rating based on 36 reviews and an average rating of 8.10/10.
The critical consensus states, “With Howard Hawks directing and Bogey and Bacall in front of the cameras, To Have and Have Not benefits from several levels of fine-tuned chemistry—all of which ignite on screen.” Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned the film a score of 90 out of 100, based on 16 critics, indicating “universal acclaim”.
Awards
National Board of Review Awards Best Actor Humphrey Bogart
Analysis
Screenwriter and film critic Paul Schrader classified the film as noir, made during the first or “wartime” period of film noir. Some other scholars categorize the film as noir, while some don’t believe Howard Hawks ever made a true “noir”.
The names of the characters in To Have and Have Not are directly related to the quality of the characters. Characters that are meant to elicit sympathy from the viewer are known by their nicknames: Steve, Slim, Eddie, Frenchy, and Cricket. In this way, Hawks creates the illusion of a character by devoiding it of past and present social roles that may be associated with a surname. Villains or corrupted characters are called by their surnames such as Johnson.
Anti-fascism
According to English film critic Robin Wood, To Have and Have Not presents “one of the most basic anti-fascist statements the cinema has given us.” The film portrays anti-fascist themes common to the time period through its emphasis on individual liberty expressed through Bogart’s character and through its representation of people progressing and working together well. When he decides to join the resistance cause, Morgan reasons, “maybe because I like you and maybe because I don’t like them.”
The power of this anti-fascist statement comes because it’s instinctive rather than coming from an expected ideology. More generally, Hawks expresses a protest of authoritarianism and infringement of individual rights. Hawks, however, claimed he wasn’t interested in politics and the focus of the movie was on the relationship between Bogart and Bacall.
Regardless, the anti-fascist themes come through in the relationship between Bogart and Bacall. They represent the individual standing up to those who abuse their power.
According to Ian Brookes, during the scene where Bacall sings “Am I Blue?” with Hoagy Carmichael, her low-voice establishes herself as “one of the boys” and thus a “soldier” in the anti-fascist cause. Moreover, during this scene, the patrons at the bar represent different races and are racially integrated throughout the space, challenging the ideas of segregation and race during the time period.
The next song, Hong Kong Blues is reminiscent of Django Reinhardt’s pre-war version. This represents French resistance spirit as swing music became a symbol of resistance in France, because it was the only available example of American culture in France at the time.
Harry Morgan
A common theme of war films such as To Have and Have Not is the conversion narrative. An individual who originally does not want to be involved in the war effort eventually becomes converted through a changed attitude and accepts their duty as a citizen to participate in the war efforts.
Along with Harry Morgan’s transformation, the Humphrey Bogart persona changed along the years, making him an important casting decision for the film. Harry Morgan, the fisherman, represents the center of the story line of To Have and Have Not. According to Robin Wood, Harry Morgan represents, at the same time, the personality of Humphrey Bogart and the Hawksian hero.
Harry Morgan as a character represents a myth the audience accepts as real such as the heroes of Homer. Morgan represents the heroic ideal. Morgan acts on his own interests, yet is not self-indulgent, minding his “own business”. He does good because of the responsibility he feels he has for his personal alliances.
Morgan controls and establishes the morality of the film through the distinctness of what one does and what one is. Bogart’s character establishes that one’s personal identity is not determined by one’s actions if they do not allow it to happen. In the film, Slim steals Johnson’s wallet. Harry overlooks this to a point because he (Johnson) did not pay Morgan for his services as a boat captain.
When they are both approached by Morgan, Slim shows no shame, indicating her morality was not affected by her actions. Johnson, however, shows shame and doesn’t receive sympathy because he reveals he is defined by his actions. Bogart’s character is direct and blunt, yet makes an effort to not judge a person by their actions. Harry Morgan encompasses the qualities of the “Hawksian” hero due to his personal integrity, and at the same time, could be described as a Hemingway code hero because of his courage and loyalty.
One of the biggest differences between the film and the novel is the resolution of Harry Morgan. In the novel, Morgan is beaten down through the story line and perishes in the end. In the film, however, Morgan ends up a winner. This was specifically altered by Hawks because he did not like stories about “losers”.
Legacy
With some regarding To Have and Have Not as one of Hawks’s best, the film represents the only time two Nobel Prize winners, Faulkner and Hemingway, worked on the same film story.
Some of Bacall’s lines became renowned as double entendre; for instance, “You know how to whistle, don’t you, Steve? You just put your lips together and … blow …” (said while looking at him provocatively). This quote is ranked at #34 on AFI’s 100 Years…100 Movie Quotes list.
When Humphrey Bogart was buried, Bacall put a gold whistle with the inscription “If you want anything, just whistle” in his coffin, a nod to her line in their first film together.
Influences and adaptations
To Have and Have Not is noted for its similarity to earlier films Casablanca (1942), Morocco (1930), and Across the Pacific (1942). There are some similarities to the plot of the earlier Casablanca, and both stories involve the French Resistance.
Other changes from Hemingway tended in the same direction, such as the introduction of a sympathetic piano player as an important supporting character. Carmichael’s Cricket was not in the Hemingway book, and parallels Dooley Wilson’s Sam in Casablanca.
Several cast members from Casablanca also appear in the film; apart from Bogart and Dalio (Emil in Casablanca), Dan Seymour (Abdul in Casablanca) plays Captain Renard, whose name and position resemble Captain Renault in Casablanca. As in Casablanca, Bogart’s initially reluctant character assists husband-and-wife Resistance members.
To Have and Have Not was adapted as an hour-long radio play for Lux Radio Theater, with Bogart and Bacall reprising their screen roles. It was broadcast on October 14, 1946.
Warner Brothers adapted the novel a second time with the film The Breaking Point (1950) directed by Michael Curtiz, who was also credited for Casablanca.
This screenplay stayed closer to the novel; it bore little resemblance to the 1944 film. Screenwriter Ranald MacDougall and Curtiz were interested in creating a film better modeled after Hemingway’s novel. The film did not remotely resemble Casablanca.
Despite the film’s faithfulness to the novel, it remains less popular than To Have and Have Not, though Hemingway said the remake, “suited him”. The film was remade another time in 1958 by director Don Siegel as The Gun Runners. Siegel was reluctant to remake the film, but “needed the money”. The film was shot quickly and cheaply. According to author Gene D. Phillips, The Gun
