The Verdict (1946).

Review #2037: The Verdict (1946).

Cast: 

Sydney Greenstreet (Superintendent George Grodman), Peter Lorre (Victor Emmric), Joan Lorring (Lottie Rawson), George Coulouris (Superintendent John R. Buckley), Rosalind Ivan (Mrs. Vicky Benson), Paul Cavanagh (Clive Russell), Arthur Shields (Reverend Holbrook), Morton Lowry (Arthur Kendall), and Holmes Herbert (Sir William Dawson) Directed by Don Siegel (#893 - Dirty Harry, #920 - Invasion of the Body Snatchers, #1453 - The Shootist)

Review: 

There is good reason to view as many directors as possible when it comes to distinct presences of filmmaking, and Don Siegel is a clear one. The Chicago native started in the film industry within the library of Warner Bros. before he eventually rose to the head of their montage department, which would see him come up with montages for films such as Casablanca (1942). Siegel's career as a director started on pretty good footing, as his first short films with Star in the Night (1945) and Hitler Lives (1945) each won an Academy Award (the former for what is now referred to as Best Live Action Short Film and the latter for Best Documentary Short Film). The Verdict (1946) would be the first of countless films he would direct, which could involve noirs such as Riot in Cell Block 11 (1954), science fiction with Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) or five films spent with Clint Eastwood such as Coogan's Bluff (1968) that would prove influential for the star-turned-director. The movie is loosely based off the 1892 novel The Big Bow Mystery by Israel Zangwill, which had previously served as the basis for two films with The Perfect Crime (1928) and The Crime Doctor (1934). Peter Milne wrote the screenplay. Believe it or not, Greenstreet and Lorre appeared in eight films together. Greenstreet had been born in Eastry, Kent, England in 1879 and had actually tried to make his calling as a tea planter before his financial failures eventually led to acting. By the turn of the 20th century, he was doing his work on the stage, which he did on a regular basis in both Britian and America until he decided, at the age, of 61, to act in films. What better way to start a film career than with a first-time director in John Huston and various others in The Maltese Falcon (1941)? In the next eight years, he would appear in over a dozen feature films, and a number of them happened to feature Lorre, who worked for Warner Bros. in the time from 1941 to 1946. This happened to be the eighth and last film with both in key roles together (technically it is nine, since they were in Hollywood Canteen (1944) together, but that was a cameo bit).

What we have here is a locked room mystery that shuffles the layers around of what you think is a mystery winding down to the climax that finds itself wrapped in paranoia. The 86-minute runtime is the right amount to make a useful first crack for Siegel to hone his talent in something that makes an involving puzzle with seasoned pros (at least for those who are familiar with early 20th century character actor presences). Within its late 19th century atmosphere is a handy feature that wraps things up in the way you might hope to see from a puzzle that isn't so much a puzzle but an inevitability. Greenstreet is effective in the lead role as a man who is seemingly possessed to prove his worth as a man no matter where those decisions may take him in brimming and deductive work. Lorre is the ideal presence to pair him with, observant in the way only he could do in macabre interest in contrast to the looming somber nature of the lead. Coulouris makes a quality contrast to Greenstreet in slimy overconfidence that lingers every step of the way with the right sense of brimming timing. So, here comes the question that arises from the start: how is a man murdered when the door was locked and the windows were closed? Well, the surprise comes from the fact that the seemingly perfect crime is more than just jealousy and blackmail but is instead all about appearances and timing that is told in succinct and convenient fashion that seems about right for a B-level production. As a whole, The Verdict (1946) is a worthy first start for Don Siegel as director with a useful pairing in Greenstreet and Lorre to back up a mostly involving effort fit for curiosity in the now.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

She Devil (1957).

Review #2022: She Devil.

Cast: 

Mari Blanchard (Kyra Zelas), Jack Kelly (Dr. Dan Scott), Albert Dekker (Dr. Richard Bach), John Archer (Barton Kendall), Fay Baker (Evelyn Kendall), Blossom Rock (Hannah, the Housekeeper), and Paul Cavanagh (Sugar Daddy) Produced and Directed by Kurt Neumann (#618 - Rocketship X-M, #710 - The Fly, and #832 - Kronos)

Review: 

You may or may not be surprised to hear that this falls under the web of film producer/cinema chain owner Robert L. Lippert. In 1956, he struck up a deal with 20th Century Fox that saw his Regal Films company make films that would be distributed by Fox. Lippert and Fox would do countless films together, and She Devil was released as a double bill with Kronos that had the same director in Kurt Neumann, who directed four features with Lippert as a producer (contrary to what it says in the film, which lists just Neumann as producer/director, since Lippert was trying to escape a rule about residual payments and TV). Both films happen to share the same cinematographer in Karl Struss, who shot various productions over the decades that ranged from Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) to The Great Dictator (1940). Regal managed to convince Fox to let them use their CinemaScope format for their films (which were in black-and-white), which they did under the name of "RegalScope". The film is based on the short story "The Adaptive Ultimate", written by Stanley G. Weinbaum, which first appeared in print in November of 1935, one month before Weinbaum's death from lung cancer at 33. Prior to this film, it had adapted to radio (1949) and television (1949, 1952, 1955). Kurt Neumann and Carroll Young wrote the screenplay together. The story and film are a bit different in little details. Her first act of trouble is killing an old man in a park for money that she gets away with by changing her hair color before the trial begins. Also, she apparently can intensify her beauty as a mode of adaptation, which she either uses on a politician (story) or a millionaire (film). Of course, the mode of trying to take her down is the same in story and film: carbon dioxide.

It really isn't a horror film as it sometimes is labeled with being "sci-fi horror". It seems a bit too closed in to be anything other than a mild thriller, mostly because they have established a threat so clear that the only way to win is basically cheating. I mean, you've created someone who is probably immune to getting diseases worse than tuberculosis that can heal from bullet wounds and change their hair color, so the fact that she has a small body count seems more of a surprise than anything. Sure, you could interpret the film as one of attempted liberation, because she really is someone who is given newfound power (by men) that simply takes what she wants. But really it is just the doomed idiocy of two folks who should know better than to look away at the threat that grows until it has gone on a bit too much (such as admitting to bonking someone on the head when asked). The movie can't really pull a dilemma that you haven't already thought you saw in "insert Frankenstein feature/ripoff". Hell, what's the point of having "devil" in your title? Blanchard had been cast in various supporting roles throughout the 1950s, such as Abbott and Costello Go to Mars (1953) along with various B-movies such as Son of Sinbad (1955). Sadly, she was diagnosed with cancer in 1963 and passed away in 1970 at the age of 47. Blanchard might be pegged as the femme fatale type if this was actually meant to be a noir, because she does prove quite entertaining in a role that overshadows everyone around her, one that sees her as both brunette and blonde in hair (truth be told, dark hair always looks better) while finding just how much it means to be alive and ready to get what they want. Undeniably, having the ability to take on a leopard and not have a lingering wound could make an interesting god complex, and yet the movie can only find the smallest of threats to establish with the destruction of a marriage, but Blanchard still shines in watchability right down to the end. Kelly and Dekker are just too ordinary in their foolishness to really make them interesting beyond the fact that they made the simple choice to not murder people and that's it. Granted, the killer is supposed to be interesting when it comes to stuff like this, but man, you need even the tiniest bit of tension or interest when they aren't on screen, which is surprising when one of the actors ended up starring in Maverick that same year and the other was known for various adversarial roles such as The Killers (1946). It probably seems a bit too convenient that the 77-minute run-time comes with an ending where the threat is basically neutered without much trouble (of course, they include a reference to religion within the last few minutes when wondering just what will happen to the neutered she-devil, which is rich when it is revealed that she has tuberculosis again). As a whole, the movie falls just a bit short to really make a consistent enjoyable time, but it surely would be a decent double feature with another B-movie where one can sit back and look upon the wide frames and see for themselves how much a lead performance matters for both good and terrible films.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Goin' to Town.

Review #2007: Goin' to Town.

Cast: 

Mae West (Cleo Borden), Paul Cavanagh (Edward Carrington), Gilbert Emery (Winslow), Marjorie Gateson (Mrs. Crane Brittony), Tito Coral (Taho), Ivan Lebedeff (Ivan Valadov), Fred Kohler (Buck Gonzales), Monroe Owsley (Fletcher Colton), and Grant Withers (Young Stud) Directed by Alexander Hall.

Review: 

Mae West made twelve films as an actress, if you can believe that. She was 39 when she made her debut with Night after Night (1932), and it was a comic relief role that she wrote her own dialogue for. That isn't a surprise when you consider that the Brooklyn native, who had been involved in shows from a young age, had cultivated a reputation on the stage for several years before signing a short deal with Paramount Pictures. 1933 saw her rocket into film name status with the releases of She Done Him Wrong and I'm No Angel, both featuring her with Cary Grant. Her trip of stardom subsided after The Heat's On (1943), one of only two films that she did not contribute to the script or dialogue in any shape or form, although she continued to do work in the stage and clubs, free from the preening censor-happy boards that had hindered her later film work (let it be known that the only time I decry lewd amusement is when it isn't particularly funny, such as with, say, Myra Breckinridge). As such, Goin' to Town saw her write the screenplay based on a story by Marion Morgan and George B. Dowell. Not to be forgotten is Alexander Hall, a theatre actor from a young age who worked as a silent actor before eventually moving on to production of film with editing, assistant directing, and well, contract directing. He directed a handful of films from 1932 to 1956, with Here Comes Mr. Jordan (1941) probably being his most notable feature.

The point of picking films on a whim is not so much to give a spotlight to just the best films one has to offer but doing films that, well, will give someone a spotlight worth talking about and then see what goes from there. As a 74-minute attempt at musical comedy, it is fine. West dominates one's attention with her mannerisms and some of her lines that seem to hit and miss in the idea of curtailed risqué, as if the idea of a woman trying to become a lady while having fun with the bounds of courtship needs to be toned in some sort of way. But West always seems on her element, one who simmers what would probably a bland pot of plot with a lesser actress and makes it a worthwhile time (how can one go wrong with lines such as "Juge, wherever there's a man concerned, I always do my best"?). Her fun is our fun, if you get around to it, as if in some ways you might want to enjoy a film like comfort food (note: please do not think of actors as food). She even tries the opera with a staging of Samson and Delilah, which is somewhat funny to consider. Emery is probably the most interesting of the supporting cast, probably because one has to really not try to make a butler / assistant seem bland, and he keeps things on the level. Cavanagh makes do with tolerable material of just being someone that looks like the kind of person that could tolerate the antics that come from West being West and vice versa (which basically means not looking annoyed to be on screen as a second banana); Owsley, meant to be a fool willing to do a loveless marriage, is fine in that regard when briefly with West. Gateson makes a quality adversary, one who ices things with West as if she was a pest that needed to be taken out of commission. As a whole, the movie has a few decent gags when it comes to West remarking upon what seems odd her to her in the idea of people and "manners" when it comes to what really matters for titles. It might not be the first film one should go with to look upon West, but it serves as a decent middle ground of watchable entertainment for those who are interested in seeing her at work, whether as writer or actor.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Woman in Green.

Review #1216: The Woman in Green.

Cast: 
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor Watson), Hillary Brooke (Lydia Marlowe), Henry Daniell (Professor Moriarty), Paul Cavanagh (Sir George Fenwick), Matthew Boulton (Inspector Gregson), Eve Amber (Maude Fenwick), and Frederick Worlock (Doctor Onslow) 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, and #1161 - The House of Fear)

Review: 
This is the eleventh film of the Sherlock Holmes series of films with Rathbone and Bruce, release three months after the previous film. If you're at all familiar with how these things go for these features, you'll probably find yourself satisfied with this installment. Anyone looking to jump in these films out of random will also find themselves with a workable winner in any case - it won't be much of a waste in any case with a run-time of just over an hour in 68 minutes. I do think the title is pretty amusing, given that this is a black-and-white film, and I don't think anyone even mentions green at any point. Then again, with a focus on severed forefingers (not shown, obviously), blackmail of rich people, and hypnotism, one won't really think about that too much. It doesn't have much in terms of deep mystery, but it is a decent experience in entertainment at least, having a few interesting sequences. Rathbone is as efficient as ever, never seeming lost in the shuffle or disinterested in getting the best out of what he can with the scenarios presented - consistent as one can. Bruce plays up to the standard of his second fiddle character with comic relief - some of which that works, some that doesn't, with two easy moments easy to highlight you can judge for yourself. One involves him being a skeptic of hypnotism and its effectiveness, opening stating his doubts when at a presentation, only to have him subsequently tricked into being hypnotized and taking off his shoe and rolling his pant leg. The other is him leading the way to "rescue" Holmes while the other authorities arrest the others, including him hopping up on a ledge to get him down. Whatever the case may be, Rathbone and Bruce are around to keep things steady.

This is the third film with the character of Professor Moriarty (The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939), played by George Zucco, and Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon (1942), played by Lionel Atwill), with each having the same type of fate for its villain: falling off a great height. This is the third different actor to play the role, but it also happens to be his third appearance in the Holmes series, joining the tradition of re-using actors for multiple appearances (as is the cast with Brooke and Cavanagh). Daniell proves fine, with one key highlight being a sequence in which he sneaks into Holmes' place in order to have a conversation with him midway through the film, warning him about further pursuit into the mysterious killer. Of course his final fate is a bit ridiculous, since he tries to escape jail by jumping from one ledge to another - while wearing handcuffs, and he then just falls down to death. I guess just having him go to prison didn't pull the final punch they wanted. Brooke is okay as the person referred to in the title, although she isn't really too particularly compelling with the hypnotism aspects. This is the second of four films you can find in the public domain (alongside Secret Weapon and the last two films of the series - Terror by Night and Dressed to Kill), which makes them readily available. In recent years, they were digitally restored and given computer colorization by Legend Films; the Universal films had for decades deteriorated in terms of cellulose nitrate film, requiring restoration from the UCLA Film and Television Archive, which took eight years to restore the twelve films from 1993 to 2001. As a whole, this is a decent film among other okay films of the Holmes cycle with Rathbone and Bruce, being just as well to recommend as other features for anyone looking for a bit of quick mystery.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The House of Fear (1945).

Review #1161: The House of Fear.

Cast: 
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor Watson), Aubrey Mather (Bruce Alastair), Dennis Hoey (Inspector Lestrade), Paul Cavanagh (Dr. Simon Merivale), Holmes Herbert (Alan Cosgrave), Harry Cording (Captain John Simpson), Sally Shepherd (Mrs. Monteith), and Gavin Muir (Mr. Chalmers) 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, and #1056 - The Pearl of Death)

Review: 
The House of Fear is the tenth film of the Rathbone-Bruce series of Sherlock Holmes movies, released seven months after the previous installment in March 1945. It would prove to be the first of three Holmes features released in 1945 - the second (The Woman in Green) was released in July and the third (Pursuit to Algiers) was released in October. The credits state that the film was based off the 1891 story "The Adventure of the Five Orange Pips" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, although it seems the only thing the film took from it was the orange pips, which are present in letters sent to a group of men (all seven of which who have life insurance policies) living in a castle prior to their deaths, one by one. The mystery itself is a bit shaky, but at least there is some atmosphere present and a fairy game ensemble cast to push the film towards respectability, even with a collection of cliches (house on a cliff, spooky servants, secret passageways, odd villagers, etc). One wonders how to describe Rathbone playing a role that he played consistently for six years (in film and on radio) that defined him without feeling like a broken record; he does a fine job with the material he is given without feeling tired, and that's the best thing that can happen for this film. Bruce is at task to deliver the qualities expected from being the second banana to Rathbone, giving off some comic relief (most notably a bit with an owl), but at least he does play some part in the final deduction for the better. Mather plays the nervous one okay, and the other members of people in the castle are all okay, although there really isn't much of a villianous presence besides Shepherd creeping about while giving the men their letters. Hoey also does a bit of stumbling about as Lestrade in his fifth go at the role, of which he did six times, appearing in Terror by Night the following year. On the whole, it's not hard to see that the filmmakers were pretty comfortable with how they were making these mystery films as efficiently and quickly as possible (taking only a few weeks to make on cheap b-movie budgets) - with this one running at just 69 minutes. It isn't too ridiculous nor too boring to spend some time with. If you are a fan of the series of films with Rathbone and Bruce, this one will prove just fine for viewers and it works fine for anybody looking to pass some time with a film that has some good old-fashioned mystery cliches - right down to its title. The film isn't the best or worst of the series, being a middle-of-the-road kind of movie that is alright on its merits.

Next Review: Overlord (2018).

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Scarlet Claw.

Review #1040: The Scarlet Claw.

Cast: 
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor Watson), Gerald Hamer (Alistair Ramson), Paul Cavanagh (Lord William Penrose), Arthur Hohl (Emile Journet), Kay Harding (Marie Journet), Miles Mander (Judge Brisson), David Clyde (Sgt. Thompson), Ian Wolfe (Drake), and Victoria Horne (Nora) 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, and #1040 - The Scarlet Claw)

Review: 
The Scarlet Claw was the eighth film in the Sherlock Holmes series (and sixth released by Universal) that featured Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. Although the film is not an adaptation of any of the stories by Arthur Conan Doyle, the film has some similarities with The Hound of the Baskervilles, which had already been adapted into a film (#583) with Rathbone and Bruce five years prior. Qualities that the two share involve a terror that is painted with phosphorescent but also a terror of the supernatural that inspires fear, an escaped convict on the loose, and drawing the killer out through making the villain believe that Holmes has left. In any case, the earlier film (and novel) are both better than this film, although this movie is actually fairly entertaining in its own right. It is usually cited by some critics as the best of the twelve Sherlock Holmes films released by Universal, and I can't really doubt that assessment. John P. Fulton provides the "special photography" for the movie, and the effect used to show the glowing figure that menaces in the mist for the first half of the film is fairly clever. The sets (meant to evoke a Canadian village) for the film do a fine job in making for a somewhat moody feel that feels a bit different from other prior films to the film's advantage. It's hard not to like Rathbone and Bruce in their roles as they just blend in fairly seamlessly. Hamer proves to be a decent villain for the film, and Cavanagh and Hohl also provide fair performances. The plot seems to be constructed well, managing to not have anything too out of the bend. At 74 minutes, this is an easy one to recommend for people, particularly for people wanting more adventures with Sherlock Holmes. It isn't anything too groundbreaking or great, but it will prove satisfactory for viewers on the whole.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: House of Wax.

Review #271: House of Wax.

Cast
Vincent Price (Henry Jarrod), Frank Lovejoy (Tom Brennan), Phyllis Kirk (Sue Allen), Paul Picerni (Scott Andrews), Carolyn Jones (Cathy Gray), Roy Roberts (Matthew Burke), Angela Clarke (Mrs. Andrews), Paul Cavanagh (Sidney Wallace), and Dabbs Greer (Jim Shane) Directed by André de Toth.

Review
House of Wax is actually a remake of the 1933 film, Mystery of the Wax Museum (And by sheer coincidence this would be remade again in 2005.) However, I haven't watched the original, which means I'll be a bit lenient on this film. How is this film that just so happened to be filmed in the biggest gimmick of the 50's (3-D? Oh course!) and nowadays? It's allright. Even though I'm watching it on a TV and not in 3-D (This was the second 3-D feature, the first being Bwana Devil.), it is still a treat to watch. The scene I find memorable is when a person is using a paddleball into the camera, to give an effect of 3-D (Ironic given the director of this film was blind in one eye) Vincent Price does a spendid performance (My second time reviewing him, first being #230 - The Great Mouse Detective.) The film is interesting at times, with Price the main star and the one with the most fun.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.