The Circus Queen Murder (1933)

“It’s a well known fact that cannibals differ from the rest of us in their dietary customs.”  5 June 2020

Police commissioner Thatcher Colt (Adolphe Menjou) has had it up to here with New York crime.  Wanting to get away and recharge the batteries, he sets off with his secretary for a vacation in the middle-of-nowhere upstate New York.  There, Colt runs into a traveling circus and murder.  Not much of a vacation.

It’s unfortunate that The Circus Queen Murder suffers from such a poor storyline, becuase there’s a lot here to like.  The film looks absolutely fantastic and the acting is as strong as you’ll find in a “B” from this era, but there’s not much to work with when it comes to the story.  First, the film’s title gives away far too much, destroying any hope of suspense.  Second, the killer’s identity is a given throughout the film, destroying any hope of mystery.  Third, the film’s pacing is a mess.  I’m convinced that director Roy William Neill did the best he could, but without much to work with, the film tends to bog down from time-to-time (who am I kidding - parts of the film are downright boring).  Fourth, our hero, Thatcher Colt, doesn’t really do much.  He knows who the killer is and he knows who the intended victim is, but does nothing about it.  He pretty much sits back and lets the murder happen.  Which leads to - fifth, the ending is complete bananas.  

In the end, the best I can rate The Circus Queen Murder is a very average (and maybe even generous) 5/10.

Finally, I’m not an expert on pre-code films, but I generally get a kick out of them.  It’s amazing to me what filmmakers could do and get away with in 1933 that they couldn’t just a couple years later.  Marital infidelity, blood, risque wardrobes, and even something as innocent as Colt and his secretary traveling together would have most likely been axed by the Code.  Interesting stuff.

5/10

Lured (1947)

"There's a homicidal maniac loose somewhere in the vast honeycomb of London.", 9 December 2015

A homicidal maniac is loose in London, murdering young women he meets through newspaper personal ads. When Lucy Barnard goes missing, her friend Sandra Carpenter (Lucille Ball) agrees to help Scotland Yard catch a killer. Along the way, however, she falls in love with number one suspect Robert Fleming (George Sanders). Despite all the evidence to the contrary, he can't be the killer, can he?

Despite all the flaws in Lured, it's just too much fun not to give it a positive rating. The cast is strong. I really enjoyed watching several of them play against character. Sanders usually played men in charge of their environment. It was interesting to watch him play a character who has lost control of his situation. Lucy is obviously best know for her work in comedy. While she a few funny moments in Lured, I was really impressed with her efforts in the more dramatic parts. George Zucco, an actor I know best playing Egyptian priests or mad scientists, gets a chance to do comedy. He's more than up to the task. Throw into the mix the talents of Boris Karloff, Charles Coburn, Sir Cedric Hardwicke, Alan Mowbray, and Alan Napier and you've got one impressive cast. 

Beyond the cast, other positives I found in Lured, include: fabulous costumes, nice cinematography, a witty script, and plenty of atmosphere. 

But as I said, Lured has it's share of flaws. Chief among them is that there's really not much of a mystery. I found it way too easy to spot the killer. And his motives are a bit muddled. If he did it because he loved Sandra, then why kill all the other women? If he did it because he loved Fleming (as some suspect), then why frame him? There's a lot of plot inconsistency. 

Finally, as much as I enjoyed watching Lucy and Karloff in their scenes together, it doesn't really fit with the rest of the movie. It almost felt like this part came from another film. These scenes really do nothing to advance the plot.

Even with the multiple problems, like I said, Lured is a fun movie. A 6/10 from me.

6/10

Poirot "Mrs. McGinty's Dead" #11.1 (2008) (TV)

"But I am afraid, Madame, that your female intuition; it has taken the day off.", 6 April 2011

James Bentley has been arrested, charged, tried, found guilty, and sentenced to hang for the bludgeoning death of Mrs. McGinty, a charwoman from whom James rented rooms. Almost immediately, however, the Superintendent in charge of the case starts to have doubts. He contacts his old friend, Hercule Poirot, to look into the matter. Poirot discovers that a crime committed long ago may have played a part in Mrs. McGinty's death. Has someone from the past come forward to commit murder? A couple of old photographs may hold the key.

It's hardly surprising I enjoyed this version of Mrs. McGinty's Dead so much. I've always enjoyed the book and I almost equally enjoyed this dramatization. It makes for a solid mystery plot. While it may not be entirely faithful to Agatha Christie's work, enough of the good stuff is still here. And really, what Christie adaptation could ever hope to be 100% faithful? The writing, the attention to detail, the cinematography, the lighting - all are what I've come to expect from the better episodes of the Poirot series. I've run out of superlatives to use when describing David Suchet. He's about as perfect for the role of Poirot as anyone could hope to be. Some of the other actors, including Zoe Wanamaker as the apple-eating Adrian Oliver and Mary Stockley as the uber-secretive Eve Carpenter also made significant impressions. Other than the botched and confusing handling of the pair of murderous backstories, Mrs. McGinty's Dead is about as good as I've seen in the entire series.

8/10

The Strange Case of Doctor Rx (1942)

Very little to recommend - even for fans of classic Universal horror, 25 February 2010

Private Detective Jerry Church (Patric Knowles) is asked to investigate the strange deaths of several recently acquitted men. The only clue is the mysterious calling card found on the body of each victim of a man known only as "Doctor Rx". Soon after taking the case, Church is on hand to see a man named Zarini acquitted, only to fall dead before he can leave the courtroom. To solve the series of murders, Church is kidnapped, his wife's life is threatened, and he is strapped to a table by Doctor Rx and prepped for an operation involving organ transplantation with a gorilla. Will Church survive this ordeal and unmask the killer?

As far as the classic Universal horror (and horror is used very loosely here) films of the 30s and 40s go, The Strange Case of Doctor Rx is about as bad as you'll run across. I place it at the bottom of the heap with the unfortunate She-Wolf of London. I described The Strange Case of Doctor Rx to a friend as a Charlie Chan movie without any of the charm or interest of a Charlie Chan movie. Knowles' Church doesn't make for a very effective or interesting lead. He's just too bland. Lionel Atwill is billed second, but he has so little screen-time you'll forget he's even in the film. And when Atwill is on screen, he's reduced to playing the role of the most embarrassing red herring I've ever run across. Gwynne is okay as the love interest / wife, but she can't save the film on her on. The highlights of the cast are Shemp Howard and, especially, Mantan Moreland. They have a scene together involving shooting dice that's laugh-out-loud funny. Moreland, as usual, steals most every scene in which he appears. Other weaknesses: the films plotting is plodding, the direction is pedestrian, the mystery isn't very mysterious, and the horror is pretty much missing altogether. As most everyone who has written about The Strange Case of Doctor Rx has pointed out, the one scene of real horror feels like it was cut from another film. Other than Moreland, the one bright spot worth mentioning is the "look" of the film. Like most other Universal pictures from this period, the movie looks like a million bucks. Overall, a very disappointing affair that I'll be generous to and give it a 4/10.

4/10

The Uninvited (1944)

"Mists gather here... and sea fog... and eerie stories...", 4 August 2009

I've watched at least three movies recently that, for whatever ridiculous reason, cannot be purchased on a R1 DVD. Two Hammer films, Twins of Evil and Vampire Circus, and The Uninvited. Okay, maybe I can in some twisted way understand the fate of the two Hammer films, but why oh why isn't The Uninvited available in the U.S. on DVD? Makes no sense at all. The Uninvited is a true classic in every respect. The plot involves a brother and sister, Roderick and Pamela Fitzgerald (Ray Milland and Ruth Hussey), who buy an abandoned, but remarkably well preserved, house on a cliff overlooking the ocean. The seller has a granddaughter, Stella Meredith (Gail Russell), who is totally against the sale of the house because it was her mothers. Shortly after moving in, strange noises and loud crying can be heard all through the house at night. Neither the dog nor the cat will venture upstairs – too frightened to take the first step. And there's a locked studio upstairs that always feels cold regardless of the temperature. If you can't guess already, the house is haunted (I know, a real shocker). The haunting seems to be that of the ghost of the Stella's mother, who Roderick is falling in love with (Stella that is, not the ghost of her mother). But why is she haunting the house? And why does Stella's life seem to be put in danger every time she visits? It's a mystery that demands to be solved.

I just love discovering a classic like The Uninvited that I've never taken the time to watch. Every thing about the film is spot on perfect. While I could go on and on extolling the movie's virtues, I'll try to limit this to just a couple of real highlights. First, the movie's got a boatload of atmosphere. It's so thick you feel like you can cut it with a knife. It gives you that kind of eerie feeling that doesn't leave once the lights go on. But The Uninvited is more than just a horror movie. Director Lewis Allen flawlessly mixes in romance, comedy, mystery, and drama. And the amazing part is that it all works – especially the mystery elements of the story. Even without the ghosts, the mystery of the house and Stella and her mother would have been enough to keep me interested. The special effects are another area that deserves mention. I've often argued in the past that some of the best ghost stories are those that don't really show anything. You know, the less is more argument. Well, in The Uninvited, we actually get to see what's causing all the problem. And to my astonishment, this also works. I was expecting something cheesy, but instead saw an image that looked like what a ghost might look like. Finally, it's impossible to discuss The Uninvited without mentioning the acting. This is probably the best performance I've ever seen from Ray Milland. He's amiable, care-free manner fits nicely into the film. I also enjoyed Ruth Hussey. She has a Myrna Loy quality to her that I liked. The others, including Gail Russell, Donald Crisp, and the scene stealing Dorothy Stickney, hold their own.

If you're a fan of classic horror (or even just a fan of classic films) do yourself a favor and seek out The Uninvited. You'll kick yourself for not doing it earlier.

9/10

Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation (1939)

"You go and fetch the bobbies.", 15 May 2009

A team of archaeologists uncover a real treasure – the Crown of the Queen of Sheeba. From Egypt, the crown is to be transferred via steamship to San Francisco. But it won't be an easy journey. There are plenty of would-be thieves who would love to get their hands on the priceless jewels contained in the crown. Fortunately for all involved, Mr. Moto is on hand to guard the crown on its journey. However, that doesn't mean someone won't try to get their hands on the treasure.

After the disappointment of Mr. Moto's Gamble, I went into Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation hoping for the best, but, admittedly, fearing the worst. But within the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that features anything to do with archaeological digs in Egypt. And seeing Moto disguised as a German archaeologist (Imagine that, Peter Lorre playing a German?), the beginning scenes really drew me in. While the movie may have quickly shifted to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as enjoyable. Dark, sinister characters lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; sophisticated and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of elements found in a lot of the really good 1930s mysteries that I love. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's got 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill in a nice little role, comic relief from G.P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a return to form for Mr. Moto. I've already mentioned his disguise in the movie's opening scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out near the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't even mentioned the wonderful performance turned in by Lorre. Any way you look at it, Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation is a winner.

As much as I hate that the Mr. Moto series had to end after this installment, it's understandable when you think about it. WWII was just around the corner. And after Pearl Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note.

8/10

Mr. Moto's Gamble (1938)

"It's most unusual to shoot oneself in the back and without a gun.", 14 May 2009

Mr. Moto's Gamble has a fairly straight forward plot - when a boxer is murdered in the ring with a mysterious poison, it's up to the even more mysterious Mr. Moto to solve the case.

I'm shocked at the number of positive reviews for Mr. Moto's Gamble on IMDb. Because to me...well, I found it extremely disappointing. I enjoy Mr. Moto and I enjoy Charlie Chan, but I can't say I cared for this mish-mash of the two. For those unfamiliar with the story behind Mr. Moto's Gamble, it was originally intended to be a Charlie Chan film. But when Warner Oland backed-out, some of the scenes and action were rewritten for Peter Lorre and Mr. Moto. As I indicated, the end result left me underwhelmed. Mr. Moto is not Chan. He's more mysterious, he's more athletic, and he's more exotic. So trying to put Moto in a Chan film is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole - it doesn't work. And listening to Lorre/Moto try to deliver one of Chan's trademark euphemisms just ends up sounding silly. Add to that the fact that almost 10 minutes of the already brief 72 minute runtime is made up of boxing scenes (something that I never seem to enjoy) and you end up with a movie that I couldn't help but dislike. If I have to say something positive I would point to the performance of Keye Luke. But even he's not near enough to save Mr. Moto's Gamble in my eyes.

Sorry, but a 4/10 is about the best I can give this one.

4/10

The Death Kiss (1932)

A reunion for Lugosi, Manners, and Van Sloan, 29 April 2009

It's a plot device that's been used many times since, but The Death Kiss may have been the first time an actor was killed on set when someone fired a real bullet instead of blanks (at least it's the first I know of). Studio writer Franklyn Drew (David Manners) takes it upon himself to "help" the police find the killer – whether they actually want him snooping around or not. It seems that Drew has a thing for the film's leading lady, Marcia Lane (Adrienne Ames), a prime suspect because of her past relationship with the dead man. With lots of clues, red herrings, and no shortage of suspects, Drew's got his work cut out for him.

The Death Kiss is far from being a great movie, but for a low budget poverty row thriller/mystery, it's not half bad. One of the more interesting aspects of the film is the reuniting of Dracula alums Manners, Bela Lugosi, and Edward Van Sloan. Unlike Dracula, however, this is Manners' film with his scenes and importance far out-stripping his better known co-stars. In fact Lugosi is given very little to actually do other than stare suspiciously and mysteriously at anyone who gets within his gaze. Another positive aspect is the relationship between Manners and Ames. They work well together and make a very believable couple. First time director Edwin L. Marin does a more than adequate job with this early talkie. He seems to have an understanding of the medium and how to use it. The plot includes plenty of twists and turns to keep the viewer's interest. And the final outcome and reveal, though dependent upon coincidence and a bit of dumb luck, is more than satisfactory.

5/10

Michael Shayne: Private Detective (1940)

"I'll bet if you walk in your sleep, you need a bicycle.", 3 January 2009

Lloyd Nolan is Michael Shayne, a private eye hired to keep an eye on a young woman with a penchant for gambling. Shayne intends to save her from herself but ends up as the prime suspect of a murder. Shayne will have to act fast and untangle a web of gambling, drugged horses, a jilted lover, an overly zealous mystery fan, and a dead body if he's to stay out of the County Jail.

I had never heard much about the Michael Shayne movies before I found a set of four on DVD. Being a fan of 1940s era mystery/thrillers, I decided to give them a chance. And the ridiculously low price didn't hurt matters any. I was hoping for something along the lines of Charlie Chan or The Thin Man. While I didn't enjoy this, the first in the series, as much as the better known movies I mentioned, Michael Shayne: Private Detective is a decent enough watch and worth the 77 minutes I put into it Lloyd Nolan gives a solid, albeit unspectacular, performance. The problem – while Nolan is a good actor, he is not what I would call a leading man. Nolan is joined by a capable cast that includes Douglass Dumbrille, Elizabeth Patterson, and Donald MacBride (who seemed to make a career out of playing the beleaguered, put-upon police inspector). Much of the movie has a feeling or atmosphere about it that many of the "light" detective movies of the period had that I find appealing. This feeling was almost undone, however, by a plot that seemed a little overly complicated for a throwaway B-movie. Maybe I was just too tired when I watched, but I found it difficult to follow – not that any of it was that interesting to begin with. So in the end, while I've given Michael Shayne: Private Detective a 6/10, I can't say I'm not a bit disappointed. Here's hoping the next three in the series are even more entertaining.

6/10

A Blueprint for Murder (1953)

A nice performance from Jean Peters, 1 January 2009

After the mysterious death of his niece, Cam Cameron (Joseph Cotton) begins to suspect that the child's stepmother may be responsible. When the autopsy reveals the presence of strychnine in the girl's system, he's convinced that his dead brother's wife, Lynn Cameron (Jean Peters), is the only person with both a motive and the opportunity. Cam now begins to fear for the life of his nephew. He's got to act fast because Lynn intends to take the young boy to Europe.

While I've given A Blueprint for Murder a positive rating and I readily admit I mostly enjoyed the film, much of what I've got to write about is going to seem negative. As good as it is, it has far too many problems to be called great. A Blueprint for Murder is about the most straight forward mystery/thriller I've run across. And that's part of its biggest weakness. There's no mystery regarding the killer's identity. It's made quite clear early on that Lynn killed her niece. There seemed to be a half-hearted attempt to use Cam as a red-herring, but anyone with half a brain could figure out in 3.2 seconds that Cam couldn't have committed the crime - he wasn't there. Maybe I just imagined the light of suspicion being pointed at Cam because I so wanted to be thrown some kind of curve ball. Even though the killer is known, director Andrew L. Stone is able to wring some tension out of the final scenes as Cam tries to prove Lynn is a killer. You get the feeling that even though you know Lynn is responsible for the girl's death, she just might get away with it. These scenes are, however, undermined by an ending that's terribly rushed with action that, unfortunately, takes place off-screen. Too bad, because A Blueprint for Murder could have been much better.

One of the real highlights for me in A Blueprint for Murder was the acting. The performance of Jean Peters as Lynn Cameron is enlightening. I'm not overly familiar with her work, but she's marvelous as the apparent caring, wonderful parent who is hiding a cold, unfeeling heart. I may have to look for more of her work.

6/10

Sherlock Holmes "The Case of the Cunningham Heritage" #1.1 (1954) (TV)

Nice introduction to the series, 11 December 2008

"The Case of the Cunningham Heritage" is a nice introduction to the 1954 series creatively titled Sherlock Holmes. Ronald Howard plays Holmes and Howard Marion-Crawford is Watson. Both are more than adequate in their roles and present a nice change of pace for viewers more familiar with either the Rathbone films or the Brett television series. Howard gives Holmes a bit more humanity (for lack of a better word) than I've seen elsewhere. As for Crawford, fortunately he doesn't play Watson as the bumbling fool as Nigel Bruce often did. The pair is very capably joined by Archie Duncan as Inspector Lastrade. The Lastrade role is much larger than what's often found, but the character makes a nice foil for Holmes.

Being the first episode, "The Case of the Cunningham Heritage" is more concerned with character development than anything else. There's a murder, but it's hardly worth going into. The murder and its solution are ancillary to the viewer getting a feel for the characters. I, for one, appreciated this aspect of the episode. It sets a solid foundation for future installments. And, at less than 30 minutes in length, there's not much time for an overly involved mystery anyway.

Overall, not a bad way to get things started. I think a 6/10 is about right for this episode. I'm looking forward to watching the rest of the series.

6/10

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

Bones "The Santa in the Slush" #3.9 (2007) (TV)

Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like the rat-chewed body of Santa Claus!, 26 November 2008

What an excellent way to kick-off the Holiday Season! The wife and I have been making our way through the first three seasons of Bones and so far, "The Santa in the Slush" just might be one of my favorite episodes. In this one, Booth and Brennan are called in to investigate the death of a man they later identify as Kris Kringle. In full Santa regalia, Kringle is found dead, his body decomposing, lying in a sewer. Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like the rat-chewed body of Santa Claus!

There are other episodes of Bones that are more realistic, that take their subject matter more seriously, and that toy more with the emotions of the viewer – but there are few that are this much fun. A lot of the usual drama is pushed to the side in favor of a more comedic tone – and with excellent results. Don't misunderstand, I realize there is a touch of comedy in almost every episode, but here it takes center stage. And just the notion of a temp agency specializing in Santas and Elves is hysterical. The interplay between Bones and Booth was never better. The subplots dealing with Bones' attempt to give her father his dream Christmas in jail and Booth's desire to spend the Holiday with his son add just the right touch of humanity without ever becoming schmaltzy. Altogether, this is one fine episode of a wonderful show. A 9/10 seems right to me.

9/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939)

"Mr. Holmes, you're the one man in all England who can help me.", 25 November 2008

Of the half dozen or so different takes on The Hound of the Baskervilles that I've seen, this one is my favorite - just barely edging out the Hammer film from 1959. Why? There are a number of reasons I could cite.

1. Acting – The 1939 version of the Hound of the Baskervilles has to have one of the strongest casts ever assembled for a Sherlock Holmes film. It's a veritable Who's Who of 1930s/40s horror/thriller stars. Basil Rathbone, Lionel Atwill, John Carradine, Wendy Barrie, and Eily Malyon all give outstanding performances. Even E.E. Clive appears in a small but enjoyable role. And Nigel Bruce, whose bumbling Watson could really get on my nerves, gives one of his best performances as Holmes' sidekick.

2. Atmosphere – If there's something that filmmakers from the 1930s knew how to do and were especially adept at, its creating atmosphere. From the fog shrouded moors to the dangerous London streets, there's enough atmosphere in The Hound of the Baskervilles for two or three movies. The cinematography and lighting go along way to helping create this feeling. It's something that seems lost on many of today's filmmakers.

3. Direction – While nothing outstanding, Sidney Lanfield is nonetheless solid in the director's chair. One key is the pacing he gives to the film. The movie moves along quite nicely with very few moments that slow things down. Sure, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may veer away from the original source material, but it's for good reason. The film would have been too slow and, ultimately, quite dull had it stuck too closely to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's work. I've read the book, but as much as I enjoy it, I realize changes have to be made for the screen.

While there are a number of other things I could mention in The Hound of the Baskervilles that appeal to me, I'll stop here before this thing gets out of hand. In the end, I've always found this a solid production and a very enjoyable film. I've got no problems rating it a 9/10.

Finally, one thing that has always seemed odd to me is the appeal of The Hound of the Baskervilles. Don't misunderstand, it's a good story. But I'm not sure I understand why it has been filmed more often than any other Sherlock Holmes story. Why would a plot that has its main character (Holmes in this case) disappear for about half the movie be the most famous and most often filmed story from the character's casebook? Like I said, it's just always seemed a bit odd to me.

9/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

"Do as the legend tells and avoid the moor when the forces of darkness are exalted.", 23 November 2008

From what I understand, The Hound of the Baskervilles was to be the first in a series of Sherlock Holmes films from Hammer Film Productions. For whatever reason, the film didn't do what Hammer was expecting and they decided to scrap any further Holmes movies. Too bad, because I really enjoy this version of the famous story and would have enjoyed seeing Hammer take their turn with some of the others. And I would have enjoyed the opportunity to see Peter Cushing again play the famous detective while still in his prime. I can only imagine what might have been.

As for the movie itself, Hammer's The Hound of the Baskervilles plays as loose and free with the original story elements as any other I've seen. It doesn't necessarily hurt my enjoyment, but those seeking something that follows the book to the letter would be better off looking elsewhere. Because this is Hammer, the horror aspects of the story are quite naturally highlighted – and to good effect. Cushing makes a wonderful Holmes. Not only does Cushing act the part, in my mind anyway, he looks the part as well. I often go back and forth about which Holmes' portrayal I enjoy more – Cushing or Rathbone. Andre Morrell makes for as good a Dr. Watson as you're likely to find. The rest of the cast, including Christopher Lee and Francis De Wolff, is as solid as any that Hammer ever assembled. I get a real kick out of Miles Malleson's delightfully forgetful Bishop. Finally, and unlike a lot of the more stage-bound Hammer productions, The Hound of the Baskervilles benefits from some excellent location shots. All together, this is one very enjoyable film. If it weren't for Rathbone's The Hound of the Baskervilles, this would be my favorite version of the story – even with (or should that be because of) the numerous deviations from the source material. The Hound of the Baskervilles is also in my top 5 favorite Hammer films as well. A 9/10 seems about right to me.

9/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1988) (TV)

"It's an ugly, dangerous business, Watson.", 22 November 2008

This version of The Hound of the Baskervilles is the third I've seen in the past week or so. It's also a first time viewing for me. My initial reaction – I'm somewhat disappointed based on many of the reviews I've read on IMDb. While I enjoyed it much more than the 1978 abomination, I much preferred the 1983 version – also a TV movie. There's little doubt that Jeremy Brett makes a fine Sherlock Holmes (though having grown up with Rathbone, he gets my vote for the best) and Edward Hardwicke wisely plays Watson less the bumbling fool. The rest of the actors are at least adequate, though I thought Fiona Gillies was horribly miscast as Beryl. The authentic looking locations, both moors and other sets, add a lot to the production. But the weakness in the film is in its direction and pacing. Had director Brian Mills kept things moving at a better pace, it might have been more enjoyable effort. As it is, there are some stretches that are difficult to get through. After a nice start and a decent enough third act (although it did feel a bit rushed), the middle portion of the movie grinds to a halt. Finally, who thought it would be a good idea to color the hound a glowing green color in post production? It reminded me of something you might see from a poverty row studio of the 1940s.

6/10

Murder Over New York (1940)

"I'll never go on a case like this again without a gat.", 19 November 2008

On his way to a police convention in New York, Charlie Chan runs into an old friend from Scotland Yard, Hugh Drake. Drake, now employed by military intelligence, is hot on the heels of a saboteur named Paul Narvo. Drake asks Chan to pay him a visit while he's in New York to talk over his case. Chan makes the visit only to find that his colleague has been murdered.

If you look through my reviews, it should become apparent that I'm a fan of Charlie Chan. That's why it pains me to admit that I don't really care for Murder Over New York as much as most other fans seem to. Part of the problem is the whole WWII spy angle. I've never much cared for this type of plot when watching a Chan film. I should also point out that I have the same problem with the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films that deal with WWII espionage. I'd much rather see my favorite film detectives solving murders than chasing spies.

Beyond my issues with the plot, I've always had a real problem the solution to the case. There is no way that the audience could hope to play along with Chan and come up with a solution. The movie cheats far too much. There is information known only to Chan that comes up after the killer is identified. All I ask is that movies of this type play fair.

From my rating, it's probably obvious that even with the problems I have with the film, I still enjoy it. I mean it's still Charlie Chan after all. Sidney Toler is as enjoyable as ever. Victor Sen Yung is as good, if not better (meaning less annoying), than in some of the previous installments. The rest of the cast is more than serviceable with a fun cameo from Shemp Howard. Like all the other Chan films, this one looks much better than it should. The cinematography is solid. Finally, considering all the problems I pointed out that I have with Murder Over New York, it's a bit odd that I've probably seen it more than any other Charlie Chan film. That's got to count for something.

6/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1983) (TV)

A rock solid effort, 18 November 2008

This 1983 version of The Hound of the Baskervilles, Sherlock Holmes' most famous mystery, is a rock solid effort. I enjoyed it immensely. And when you consider the fact that it's a made-for-TV film, it's even more amazing to me just how good it really is. I say amazing because I simply cannot imagine an American made-for-TV production equaling this British effort. Highlights for me include the acting (including nice performances by Ian Richardson, Brian Blessed, and Denholm Elliot), the location shoots (the authenticity of the movie is greatly enhanced by shooting on real mires and bogs), and a steady hand in the director's chair (the pacing of the film is just one of the movie's outstanding features). In fact, I've got very little to complain about. Sure, Donald Churchill all but takes his Watson into Nigel Bruce territory, but it's a minor distraction. Some of my favorite set-pieces included the hound attack in the fog, Holmes' gypsy impersonation, and the flashback sequence. Overall, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may not be my favorite and it may not be completely faithful to the source material, but it's a good show and well worth the effort to seek out for any fan of Sherlock Holmes.

One final word on The Hound of the Baskervilles (1983) – I've got one small complaint about the DVD I viewed (R1 DVD from Image). Maybe it was just the copy I had or maybe it was the monitor I was watching it on, but several scenes were a bit too dark. A few times I had difficulty seeing what was going on. Like I said, maybe it was just me, but I thought I would put the warning out there just he same.

8/10

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1978)

"In the name of all the flocking blind cripples, I beseech you", 17 November 2008

I've seen a number of different film adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles, so I thought I might enjoy a spoof of this familiar story. Also, I've seen some of the other work Peter Cook and Dudley Moore did together and thought they might have a chance at success with such a project. My reaction, well if you've been on IMDb for any length of time, you've probably seen the well thought out response "It Sux" when someone is asked about their opinion on a given film. Well, "It Sux" pretty well sums up my feelings to the abomination that is The Hound of the Baskervilles. It is a complete waste of time and effort. I can't imagine how two talented individuals like Cook and Moore could have concocted such a disaster of a film. It's nothing short of a chore to sit through the thing. It's the complete opposite of funny. In addition to Cook and Moore, there's a good cast assembled including Joan Greenwood, Denholm Elliot, Hugh Griffith, and the usually entertaining Terry-Thomas. I actually started to feel embarrassed for these talented actors. What were they thinking? And where in the world did the scenes taken from The Exorcist come from? I don't remember any pea soup spitting in Doyle's original work.

I actually bought The Hound of the Baskervilles on DVD. I'm glad it only set me back $3, because the 2/10 I've rated the movie may actually be overstating things a bit.

2/10

Castle in the Desert (1942)

No phone! No lights! No motor cars!, 1 August 2008

While I admit that the Chan films of Warner Oland are, as a group, superior to those of Sidney Toler, that doesn't mean that some of the Toler films aren't rock solid and as good individually as anything Oland made. Three that immediately come to mind are Charlie Chan at Treasure Island, Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum, and this film, Castle in the Desert. (By the way, why isn't the title Charlie Chan and the Castle in the Desert? It would have made sense to me.) In Castle in the Desert, Charlie is summoned to a strange, isolated castle in the middle of the Mojave Desert. But no one in the house will admit to having sent of Chan. His presence is, however, quickly needed when in no time at all Charlie finds himself up to his elbows in murder, poison, deadly arrows, red herrings, and suspects galore. What could be more fun!

I've seen someone use this phrase before to describe a Charlie Chan film and I think it fits Castle in the Desert – "It's a crackling good mystery". As I've indicated, all of the necessary ingredients for a fun outing with Chan are here. In fact, Castle in the Desert is really more like two mysteries in one. While the solution to the first is fairly obvious, it's still a lot of fun and just an appetizer for the more difficult and dangerous mystery to come. This was Toler's last Chan film for Fox and, by the time this one was made, Toler could have played the role in his sleep. He seems so at ease with the character. The rest of the cast is enjoyable with Henry Daniell and, one of my favorites, Douglass Dumbrille standing out in support. Another bonus for Castle in the Desert is that Victor Sen Yung as #2 son Jimmy Chan isn't anywhere near as annoying as he is in some of the other Chan films.

Overall, Castle in the Desert is a nice finale to the Chan films at Fox. Nothing that would come later at Monogram is anywhere close to matching it. I've got no problem rating this one a strong 7/10 verging on an 8/10.

7/10