Charlie Chan in Shanghai (1935)

"Spider does not spin web for single fly.", 29 November 2008

Charlie Chan arrives in Shanghai to help an old friend with opium smugglers. But when his friend (One thing you learn if you've seen enough of the Chan films – it sucks to be one of Chan's old friends. You've got the lifespan of a fruit fly!) is murdered, Charlie realizes just how dangerous his quarry is. With the help of #1 son Lee, can Charlie catch a killer and put a stop to a ring of drug smugglers in the process?

As far as Charlie Chan movies go, Charlie Chan in Shanghai is what I would call slightly below average and one of the weakest of the Warner Oland Chan films. It's watchable enough if you like these movies, but it's nowhere near as good as the best of the series. While it's got most the usual trappings you would expect from a Charlie Chan movie, it lacks an effective central murder case with all the red herrings, suspects, and intrigue that entails. The ring of drug smugglers doesn't provide an adequate substitute. One interesting aspect of Charlie Chan in Shanghai is the development of a more human, caring version of Charlie Chan. First, we get to see Charlie sing a neat little song to the children on board the ship he's traveling. Second, Charlie seems to show a great deal of affection for his son Lee. While both are oddities, neither event is unwelcome.

6/10

Mad Love (1935)

"I have conquered science! Why can't I conquer love?", 27 February 2008

Renowned surgeon Dr. Gogol (Peter Lorre) is madly obsessed with an actress named Yvonne Orlac. The feeling, however, is not mutual as Yvonne is married to a pianist named Stephen. When Stephen's gifted and talented hands are crushed in a train wreck, Yvonne begrudgingly seeks Gogol's assistance to save her husband's career. Seeing an opportunity to get in Yvonne's good graces, he agrees to help Stephen. Gogol replaces Stephen's mangled hands with those of a knife throwing murderer only recently put to death. But Gogol's plans for Yvonne backfire when Stephen's new hands prove to have a mind of their own.

Overlooked for far too long (probably because it wasn't part of the Universal packages that so many television stations bought and aired), it's good to finally see Mad Love getting so much richly deserved praise. It's a classic in every sense of the word. There are so many facets to the movie I could write about, but, in the name of brevity, I'll try to control myself and limit my comments to two items. The first is the film's look. Technically, Mad Love is nothing short of brilliant. Director Karl Freund was first and foremost a cinematographer – as Mad Love proves. Freund knew how to shoot a scene. As an example, take a look at the scenes set in the hallway and stairwell of Dr. Gogol's house. They may be insignificant to the overall movie, but you can see the care and effort Freund put into those moments. These scenes are like a painting come to life with their stunningly beautiful mix of light and shadows. Or, take the better known shots of Gogol dressed as the dead knife thrower. Not only are the special effects some of the most frightening of the 30s, the lighting in that scene goes a long way to creating the desired effect. It's an amazing piece of work.

Peter Lorre's performance is the other aspect of Mad Love that jumps out at me. Lorre has always been a favorite of mine, but I consider his work in Mad Love the best he ever did. Lorre does more without words in this movie than most actors would be capable of. For example, Gogol's repressed longing for Yvonne is clearly evident on Lorre's face without him even having to utter a word. Or, take the scenes in the operating room. The slow building madness in Lorre's eyes as the surgery progresses is clearly evident. And once again, Lorre doesn't have to utter a word. I consider Lorre's performance in Mad Love to be one of the best in the annals of horror. Brilliant! And I don't know who came up with the idea of the shaved head to go along with Lorre's bulging eyes, but it was a winner. It only serves to highlight Lorre's already expressive features.

As I indicated previously, if I allowed myself I could write for days on Mad Love. But I won't. I suppose I could end this by mentioning what has to be the most common criticism of Mad Love that I've read – the comic relief. But why let something that insignificant ruin what is otherwise a perfect movie?

10/10

Charlie Chan in Paris (1935)

"Optimist only sees doughnut. Pessimist sees hole.", 26 June 2006

Charlie Chan in Paris is another solid entry in the Charlie Chan series. In this one, Chan is hot on the heels of a gang of bond forgers. The criminals' trail takes him from the night clubs of Paris to the cities famous sewers. And the sewers in Charlie Chan in Paris are as uninviting a place as Chan ever visited. There's a real sense of menace and danger in these scenes. Warner Oland is as good as ever. Ably assisting Chan is son Lee played by Keye Luke. He may not have been the only son to come to his father's aid in the series, but Luke was by far the best, least annoying of the bunch. Unlike later Charlie Chan films where the offspring are there for little more than comic relief, Lee actually helps his father and saves his life on more than one occasion. The rest of the cast is good, but nothing outstanding. The mystery elements of the story are enjoyable. The criminals' identities will keep you guessing up to the very end.

I suppose that this is as good a time as any to write about my feelings on the racial aspects and controversy surrounding the Charlie Chan films in recent years. Growing up, I'm not sure if I realized Warner Oland wasn't Asian or not, but it didn't matter. Through Chan, Oland taught honesty, self respect, and the importance of education. He taught this young fan of the importance of accepting all people, regardless of race, including Asians. I think these are good important lessons to learn regardless of Oland's ethnic origins. There's an unfortunate scene in Charlie Chan in Paris where one of the characters attempts to make a joke at Chan's expense by speaking to him in pigeon English. Chan quickly turns the table on him with class and grace and makes the would-be jokester the butt of his own joke. Good going Charlie!

8/10

The 39 Steps (1935)

"What are The 39 Steps?", 15 June 2006

What a wonderful film! In this early effort, Alfred Hitchcock shows why he would one day become arguably the greatest director ever. You want mystery – The 39 Steps has got it. You want comedy – The 39 Steps has got it. You want intrigue – The 39 Steps has got it. You want a little romance – The 39 Steps has got it. It's all here and wonderfully done. And the best part, it's aged rather well. The actors speak in a natural tone and rhythm and it doesn't have that "stagey" feeling that so many early mystery/thrillers seem to have.

And talk about influential. I doubt it was the first, but The 39 Steps sets out the blueprint of the "wrongly accused man on the run trying to find the truth" that has been copied countless numbers of times. The number of films that have followed this formula is staggering. Even Hitchcock himself would revisit this formula over and over again. Why mess with a winner?

The only negative thing I can say about The 39 Steps and the only reason I don't rate it a 10/10 is my problem with the lead actor, Robert Donat. It's not that he's particularly bad, but he's just not a very likable guy.

9/10

Charlie Chan in Egypt (1935)

Nice entry in the series, 6 March 2005

Charlie Chan arrives in Egypt and, as expected, a murder soon takes place. The murder in Charlie Chan in Egypt is among the most clever than I've seen in a Chan film. And, Chan's method of discovering how the murder was committed is equally clever. The mystery here is fairly straight forward without a lot of red herrings.

The sets in Charlie Chan in Egypt are among the best of the entire series. The Pharaoh's tomb is very impressive.

Two notes on the cast - first, look for Rita Hayworth (under her real name) playing a servant girl. She doesn't add much to the story, but it's interesting none the less. Second, There is a lot of criticism of the Stepin Fetchit character. While I understand and can see the racist stereotype, that is not as much of a problem with me as the character in general. He seems out of place. I find nothing he does to be funny or enjoyable. It's only annoying to me.

7/10