Showing posts with label Leyland Hodgson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leyland Hodgson. Show all posts

October 23, 2025

The Invisible Man's Revenge.

Review #2450: The Invisible Man's Revenge.

Cast: 
Jon Hall (Robert Griffin / The Invisible Man), Leon Errol (Herbert Higgins), John Carradine (Dr. Peter Drury), Alan Curtis (Mark Foster), Evelyn Ankers (Julie Herrick), Gale Sondergaard (Lady Irene Herrick), Lester Matthews (Sir Jasper Herrick), Halliwell Hobbes (Cleghorn), Leyland Hodgson (Sir Frederick Travers), and Doris Lloyd (Maud) Produced and Directed by Ford Beebe. 

Review:
You may or may not remember that The Invisible Man wasn't exactly the Universal favorite. It took seven years from the release of The Invisible Man (1933) to merit a follow-up and, well, they never appeared in one of the Universal crossover movies, so you got The Invisible Man Returns (1940). Instead, you got stuff like The Invisible Woman (1940), a comedy feature (starring Virginia Bruce) and Invisible Agent (1942), a spy movie that happened to have Jon Hall play the title character. With this movie, Hall became the only actor to play an Invisible Man in multiple movies. The movie was directed and produced by Ford Beebe, a grab-bag man of directing various genres for cheap, whether as the Western with Overland Bound (1929), the serial such as Flash Gordon's Trip to Mars (1938) or the adventure with Bomba, the Jungle Boy (1949-1955). The movie was written by Bertram Millhauser, who had written for several mysteries such as four Sherlock Holmes movies. Previously, Beebe had directed a horror movie for Universal with Night Monster (1942).  Universal did one other Invisible Man, albeit as a spoof, with Abbott and Costello Meet the Invisible Man (1951). There were movies abroad that cribbed from the H. G. Wells novel such as The Invisible Man Appears (1949) and The Invisible Avenger (1954), which each had effects work by Eiji Tsuburaya and there was also the Japanese feature The Invisible Man vs. The Human Fly (1957). And then of course there was some overrated Universal movie in 2020.

Now we are in the realm of pushing mad scientists to the sidelines for tired plots about revenge. To put it out of the way, this is the weakest of the three Invisible Man movies. You would think a movie that relies on draining blood from people to maybe become visible again would have an effect on you, but nope, the whole thing is just played for mild-mannered scare. The story (77 minutes long) isn't even that involving either, since the lead character is presented as just a weird guy trying to get revenge, so even if his motives were interesting beyond "maybe" being screwed over in safari, he does his stuff in the most complicated of ways, because it isn't enough to target two people, no, he wants to get their daughter married to him as well. He gets rescued by someone and decides, yes, I'm going to give them a bit of a boost and try to help them win a game of darts too. The ending is sheer audacity in ridiculous: the loyal dog of the guy the Invisible Man kills ends up being responsible for his demise, because he just happened to wander all the way through. Hall in general is too bland to really make this path of "revenge" that interesting. Carradine at least looks enthused to not be in a Universal movie with makeup (he played Count Dracula a few times) but he isn't even allowed to really go off for curiosity. Sure, his plan to help a guy gain visibility (dog gets drained of blood) sounds mad but he is quickly disposed of anyway. To say nothing of the bland triangle between Hall, Curtis, and Hendrick is the easiest thing, because really, getting money sounds more compelling than having to get visible just so you can "get" a girl. Everything is stacked in just doing things in the corniest of ways that don't even make for a great showcase of invisible effects this time, save for a scene or two. As a whole, for a studio that pumped out stuff such as House of Frankenstein the same year as this, you get basically the same amount of rushed ham-handedness for a pretty tired movie. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

May 22, 2021

Dressed to Kill.

Review #1681: Dressed to Kill.

Cast: 
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Dr. John H. Watson), Patricia Morison (Hilda Courtney/Charwoman), Edmund Breon ("Stinky" Emery), Frederick Worlock (Colonel Cavanaugh), Carl Harbord (Inspector Hopkins), Patricia Cameron (Evelyn Clifford), Holmes Herbert (Ebenezer Crabtree), Harry Cording (Hamid), Leyland Hodgson (Tour Guide), and Mary Gordon (Mrs. Hudson) Directed by Roy William Neill (#846 - Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, #873 - Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon, #925 - Sherlock Holmes in Washington, #936 - Sherlock Holmes Faces Death, #1021 - The Spider Woman, #1040 - The Scarlet Claw, #1056 - The Pearl of Death, #1161 - The House of Fear, #1216 - The Woman in Green, #1262 - Pursuit to Algiers, #1620 - Terror by Night)

Review: 
It has been said that Basil Rathbone wondered aloud on the set with one vocal question: "Why am I doing this?" Dressed to Kill is the fourteenth and final installment of the Rathbone-Bruce Sherlock Holmes series. If one had to play a character for seven years that had three notable phases, one can probably see where Rathbone's quandary comes in. At least the shift from to B-movie didn't hinder the look of these movies, because even when Universal Pictures aimed them for the war-time crowd, the movies managed to retain a basic sense of enjoyable mystery. Four of the twelve Universal films had managed to fall into the public domain (with this being one of them, although searching for the others isn't too hard) because of a lack of copyright renewal, and they were even released with digital restoration and colorization (by computers). It is only in recent years that one can enjoy these movies in proper DVD/Blu-Ray releases, for which can credit the UCLA Film and Television Archive (who restored the movies from 1993 to 2001, with funding coming from UCLA, Hugh Hefner, and later Warner Bros). Prints don't always survive in great condition, so imagine having to come up with something where the best possible prints are from 16-millimeter transfers. At any rate, this movie was written by Frank Gruber and Leonard Lee, with the former writer responsible for the previous film with Terror by Night. This time around, the plot involves music boxes with printing plates put in them that are...ripe enough for murder. It basically is a cat-and-mouse game to figure out what the boxes and plates mean before one side can get all three boxes. It might seem a bit familiar to The Pearl of Death (1944), which involved a thief putting a stolen pearl into one of a select group of Napoleon busts that hired a killer to find the bust at the cost of the folks with the busts, and that movie credited the 1904 story The Adventure of the Six Napoleons as its inspiration. It also borrows an aspect used in previous movies with a femme fatale as one of the key adversaries. One can credit the fact that these movies don't become a parody of themselves and have a remarkable consistency that while not exactly better than average is at the very least one to respect with craftsmanship. 

It all helps to have a few offbeat moments. Rathbone gets to fall under danger with a whole thing about gas that seems quite silly when paired with an earlier scene about comparing notes of the music box with a friend (of course hearing that box over and over doesn't help) and Bruce gets to make duck noises...somehow there is a context to that (i.e. a girl getting beat up for a music box that cries when found by the duo). Ah but that isn't quite fair to him, because they the exact chemistry needed to make this series roll as it needs to, and one only wonders how the radio series must have felt for folks back then. Honestly this is an okay way to end the series. It lacks a a proper climax, and it seems a bit familiar, but it maintains the consistency that this series has had without being a putrid way to close out what generally worked best in those little moments (i.e. like the ones I mentioned earlier). 72 minutes isn't too much to ask with a familiar group of actors fit for a familiar style of movie. Rathbone and Bruce play their parts with what is needed in the textbook style of detectives that are definitive without looking stiffly bored in the proceedings, no matter if you've watched one or all of these before seeing this. Morison leads the group of adversaries with worthy energy that makes a capable threat to match the heroes without looking like a copy of the folks from before, able to match in diverting energy, and this works best in a scene paired with Breon, in which they share a few lines with each other that ends with a quality ambush. Worlock plays the other part of the threat just fine (this was his fifth appearance in the series) while Harbord plays things with stock calmness of a character that actually had appeared in a few of the original stories (in this series, it is Lestrade that got the attention with six appearances). At any rate, there is a general causal quality that Neill has honed without trouble. This was the penultimate film he directed (Black Angel came out just two months after this film), as he died later that year at the age of 59, having directed over a hundred movies. If you've seen one, you've nearly seen all the other films, but Dressed to Kill maintains itself to serve as the logical conclusion to a series that more often than not generated useful mystery and workable performances to make it worthy enough for those who are curious for what it managed to do in the span of seven years and fourteen films.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

October 10, 2016

The Ghost of Frankenstein.


Review #845: The Ghost of Frankenstein.

Cast
Lon Chaney Jr. (The Monster), Cedric Hardwicke (Dr. Ludwig Frankenstein/Henry Frankenstein), Ralph Bellamy (Erik Ernst), Lionel Atwill (Dr. Theodore Bohmer), Béla Lugosi (Ygor), Evelyn Ankers (Elsa Frankenstein), Janet Ann Gallow (Cloestine Hussman), Barton Yarborough (Dr. Kettering), Doris Lloyd (Martha), and Leyland Hodgson (Chief Constable) Directed by Erle C. Kenton.

Review
The original three films (#072 - Frankenstein, #394 - Bride of Frankenstein, #844 - Son of Frankenstein) are all entertaining, with Boris Karloff making for a superb monster. This is the first film without Karloff playing the role, with Chaney (who we saw in #260 - The Wolf Man) now taking the role. His performance in this one isn't as interesting, mainly because he never speaks, mainly just lumbering around, more than he did in the last one. The monster this time is wearing a suit (unlike that fur coat from the last one...don't ask how he's back to the suit), and it's a shame that there isn't much to him, save from lifting a girl to try and get a ball midway through the movie. At least Lugosi returns once again, though it isn't as memorably creepy this time. The lines at the end where he talks about living forever are pretty chilling, though. It really a movie only interesting at the end, when the Monster gets some sort of brain surgery. It is a quick movie at 67 minutes, but there really aren't too many great moments to it. I do find it funny that there is another Frankenstein around to operate on the monster (and that the ghost looks like him, too), but also funny that when he looks at the original Frankenstein's notes that it shows clips from the first film. Hardwicke does okay, but he isn't as fun as the other two Frankensteins. The effects are adequate, but it is clear to note this was the first Frankenstein movie made as a "b-picture", with lower budgets and reuse of actors. It's not a bad flick by at means, but it really doesn't seem to do anything new, which is probably why the next film would be a crossover between a familiar monster...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

May 19, 2016

Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror.


Review #798: Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror.

Cast
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor John H. Watson), Evelyn Ankers (Kitty), Reginald Denny (Sir Evan Barham / Voice of Terror), Thomas Gómez (R.F. Meade), Henry Daniell (Sir Anthony Lloyd), Montagu Love (General Jerome Lawford), Olaf Hytten (Admiral Sir John Fabian Prentiss), and Leyland Hodgson (Captain Roland Shore) Directed by John Rawlins.

Review
Following two excellent Holmes films (#583 - The Hound of the Baskervilles, and #721 - The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes) were released by 20th Century Fox in 1939, Universal Studios bought the rights from the Doyle estate to make films about Holmes - updated to the present day. In fact, the opening title card talks about how Holmes (and Watson) is "ageless, invincible and unchanging", with this movie being about Holmes trying to take down a Nazi agent using propaganda through the radio (which did occur during the War). It is an interesting premise, but I can't resist to wonder if there were other movies dealing with plots like this. There is at some sort of mystery to the film, and the movie does move quickly enough, at 65 minutes (if you wonder why I always mention the length of a movie as positive/negative, it's merely a way to try and justify how the movie does with regards to pacing, or if a movie is too long or too short to try and enjoy, for my taste anyway. In this case, the movies does a fine job in terms of satisfying its goal of telling a story with a short length).

While it is a b-movie, it is at least a movie that tries its best to be entertaining while dealing a subject as serious as treason during wartime, not coming off as cheesy, nor too overblown (it's interesting to note that the movie ends with a title card stating to buy war bonds). Rathbone and Bruce are consistent as ever, making for a fine duo that play well off each other. Ankers is also pretty decent, making a good contribution to the plot. Denny (there really isn't spoilers if the movie is over 70 years old, so no complaints) is okay, coming off as so unassuming that you really don't think he's the villain, because...well, it is strange to presume that a member of the "Inner Council of British Intelligence" would be behind all of this - unless he was an impostor, because Holmes is a master at deducing that sort of thing, and it helps that I'll let it slide unopposed. It's a movie that is fairly passable for its time, even if it isn't as enjoyable as the previous films. Bottom line: Take it for what it is worth.

Countdown: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.