Lured (1947)

Pretty women of London are being murdered, lured by an ad in the personal column. When the friend of pretty Sandra (Lucille Ball) goes missing, she agrees to act as bait for the investigation.

Lurid is classified by IMDb as Film-Noir, but I reject that label. While it does have some noir elements, it completely lacks the most important ones. A remake of a French musical romance, it keeps a rom-com undertone. That original film was inspired by a real-life case that became the last public execution in French history. Lurid was a financial failure, no doubt caused by the studio changing the title to Personal Column during its initial run. Apparently Lured sounded too much like Lurid.

Many old friends visit us here. Everyone’s favorite lecherous old man, Charles Coburn is the decidedly non-lecherous chief inspector. Batman’s Alfred Alan Napier makes an appearance, and personal favorite George Zucco has a sizable role, both appearing in their tenth film I’ve covered. But somebody please tell me what Boris Karloff is doing in this picture! My guess is he was under contract and his name was needed for promotional purposes. His small and inconsequential scene gave him forth billing. But let’s talk of George Sanders.

Before agreeing to work for the police, Sandra sets up an interview at a fancy club owned by Sanders’ Fleming, but doesn’t show. Fleming falls for her based on her voice and the chase is on. Always playing the notorious cad, Sanders was wonderful in this role. It is his performance here that, despite story issues, makes the film worth watching. Villain or not, he is wonderful in all of his roles.

Much has been said of Lucy’s less than stellar early film career and here is yet another example. Not bad, should have been better, and sabotaged by the studio with the title change. But 35 is a bit long in the tooth for a woman striving to achieve A-list status during that era. Not for a man, but certainly for a woman. Despite lots of leading lady talent, it just didn’t happen for her. But things worked out for her in the end. AMRU 3.5.

Sherlock Holmes in Washington (1943)

A British secret agent flies to Washington DC to deliver top secret plans but is captured along the way. Sounds like a case for Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone), and to a lesser extent, Doctor Watson (Nigel Bruce). George Zucco plays a bad guy yet again.

Not much of a mystery this time. No big third act reveal. Minor mysteries, like where did he hid the microfilm, are revealed early in the second act. From that point all we have is a cop drama. Since we know Homes wins in the end (oh, spoiler alert!) it’s not terribly interesting.

Henry Daniell plays a secondary baddie to Zucco’s big boss. I’ve seen him in six other films including Voice of Terror. He’ll be in another Holmes film. I presume its The Sea Hawk (1940) he is most known for, but he has appeared in a ton of excellent films.

The real headline here is that our heroes actually visit America. He even takes a tour of DC. I still find it slightly jarring to see him in the twentieth century, so I wasn't charmed by their jaunt across the pond. I am guessing WWII had something to do with that decision.

The consistency of tone of these films makes it much like a TV show. Even the background actors return in different roles. As remarkable as the consistency is, clearly some episodes are better than others. In Washington was fine, but otherwise unremarkable. AMRU 3.

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939)

Dr. Moriarty (George Zucco) is released from prison because, you know, reasons, and vows one last plan to ruin Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) before retiring. Why he says this to Holmes directly is beyond me. Anyhow, Holmes is appropriately suspicious when two cases cross his desk. The captain of Scotland Yard asks for help when he receives a vague threat regarding the Crown Jewels. But that’s not nearly as interesting as the hot young woman (Ida Lupino) who fears for her brother’s life because of a silly drawing. Suspicious boyfriend is suspicious.

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes was based on a 1899 stage play which starred a young Charlie Chaplin in a small role. Cratchit boy Terry Kilburn plays that character here. I understand the two stories bear little resemblance. One strange thing here is that Holmes lives not at 221B Baker street with boy-toy Watson (Nigel Bruce) but instead in a great mansion with servants and stuff. The films opening was overshadowed by the Nazis invading Poland the same day. Way to ruin a party, Hitler!

Despite this story being new to me, it falls short of The Hound. There was the atmosphere and amusing moments, but little mystery. Because of some inside information it’s not hard for us to guess the outline of Moriarty’s plan. Sherlock, however, is mostly perplexed. Rather than solve the mystery, he follows all the wrong leads, then runs to the climax to wrestle with Moriarty.

Amusing and entertaining, The Adventures is a fun watch and worthy successor to The Hound. It was the last for 20th Century, the franchise being picked up by Universal three years later (with some changes!) AMRU 3.5.

“You've a magnificent brain, Moriarty. I admire it. I admire it so much I'd like to present it pickled in alcohol to the London Medical Society.”

The Cat and the Canary (1939)

Per instructions, a rich man’s last will and testament is to be read in his spooky old mansion, at midnight, ten years after he died. Standard operating procedures, really. The will states that if the sole heir dies or is proven crazy within 30 days, the estate will go to a person named in a second envelope. Also, pretty boilerplate. After the hot, hot heir is named, everyone is forced to stay the night. Oh yea, and there might be a deranged murderer on the loose.

Taken from the same source as the silent classic (as were a couple others), this version was reformulated to showcase budding starlet and Chaplin main squeeze Paulette Goddard, and Bob Hope. It’s success prompted the studio to star the same pair in another comic horror The Ghost Breakers, rushed to theaters just seven months later. Despite how that sounds, that feature was also successful.

The tropes so associated with haunted house movies are in full force here. Secret passages, scary hands from behind things, real eyes watching from paintings, plus all that stuff described in the premise. This all may have been invented either by the source play or the silent version.

Hope was witty, Goddard was charming, and the story holds up. At it’s heart it is a comedy, but it is still faithful to the horror genre: a plausible element of the supernatural and a sense of fear for both the characters and audience. Amusing, interesting, creepy to a point, and an enjoyable watch. AMRU 3.5. The 'cat' was the escaped lunatic.

Cicily: Don't big empty houses scare you?
Wally Campbell: Not me, I used to be in vaudeville.

The Mummy's Hand (1940)

A down-on-his-luck anthropologist (Dick Foran) comes across an ancient vase in a bazaar that may hold the key to the location of the tomb of a princess. He convinces his good buddy (Wallace Ford) to buy it and they take it to the Cairo Museum, but it is declared a fake by Dr. Andoheb (George Zucco). Turns out, however, that the good doctor moonlights as the newly anointed High Priest of Karnak and isn't too keen on whitey pillaging the sacred artifacts of his homeland. Not to be deterred, our heroes con a magician (Cecil Kellaway) into financing their expedition.

Let's have some mummy back story, shall we? Way back when Kharis (Tom Tyler) tried to steal the sacred Tana leaves in order to bring his true love, Princess Ananka, back to life. He is caught, buried alive, and said leaves were used to keep him that way to ensure his torture. The tomb our heroes are looking for is hers, but the mummy they find is his. And Andoheb gives it a mega-dose of Tana to turn him into "an uncontrolled monster, a soulless demon with the desire to kill and kill".

It's a comedy, ladies and gentlemen. Not a pure comedy, but certainly played for laughs in equal measure to thrills. Ford played something akin to Costello to Foran's not Abbot. Foran is more leading man then straight man. Gosh, think he'll hit it off with the magician's pretty daughter? Yes, of course. Don't be stupid. Perhaps you remember Ford as Phroso the Clown in Freaks.

Why did it take eight years for a sequel? I'm guessing the Frank and Drac show ran a bit thin and they needed to expand their horror horizons. Here's where they'd use the word "Reboot" had it existed. Why his 'hand'? Not sure. Maybe because he would get more use of his arm and foot once he got more of that luscious tana oil. Not much for laughs or thrills, nor much originality in the story. Maybe I should try to track each time the lumbering monster carries away the fainted maiden leaving the heroes to frantically search for her. Still, it was worth watching. AMRU 3.

Word of note: when planning the "theme" for this October, I had decided on vampires. Then I thought Mummies. Finally I decided on witches. Then I watched this. Way to stick to a plan, Fred.

House of Frankenstein (1944)

Or, Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man 2.

Not really, but almost. The evil doctor Niemann (Boris Karloff) and his faithful assistant Igor ... I mean Daniel (J. Carrol Naish) escape from prison, commandeer a travelling circus, and head for Visaria in order to take up the good doctor Frankenstein's work. Said circus also happens to feature the bones of Dracula (John Carradine), which if you take the stake out, his evil body reappears.

While searching for Frankenstein's notes in his demolished mansion, they stumble across the body of the Monster (Glenn Strange) and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr). Stop me if you heard this one before. Anyhow, Niemann promises Daniel a proper body so that he can woo this hot gypsy chick, promises to keep Dracula's coffin safe during the day, and promises Wolfie that he will kill him. Instead, the douche, he totally uses his new circle of friends to work on his real project: getting the monster back to full strength and killing the people who sent him to prison. And what would a Frankenstein flick be without Lionel Atwill in there someplace. Once again, he plays an inspector.

So, Karloff took a break from Broadway to appear in the movie, but apparently Lugosi wasn't free. Seems he took up Boris' role. Therefore, Carradine becomes a lackluster Dracula. And speaking of which, what, was he in the movie a whole four minutes? The only reason I can imagine for his appearance is to make the movie poster more crowded with monsters and to introduce him for the next movie. I understand there was a thought to include The Mummy as well, but that would have been ridiculous.

A few interesting points: As this movie mostly takes place in "Visaria", which sounds like "Vasaria" where Ghost Of was set, the evil doctor house is that of the other brother's, and he was the least evil of all the Frankenstein's. Nobody from the actual family appears, unless you count the Monster. George Zucco had a small part as the circus owner. I had to go online to find out what role he played. It was all too brief. And, Chaney, Strange, and Naish all died in 1973. Chaney and Naish's collective last movie was the schlocky Dracula vs. Frankenstein, which I totally have to watch.

Thirteen years after the advent of Universal's reign as the king of horror, we are seeing their demise. The appearance of a large, slow moving creature isn't enough to scare audiences anymore and compensating with a monster mash has limited appeal. There is one more, however, but I will explore that with the Dracula line. Eventually.

Despite this, I actually found House Of to be a bit of a rebound for the franchise. It was fun. Doesn't touch the early work, but every bit as good as Son Of. AMRU 3.5.

Dead Men Walk (1943)

The Evil Elwyn Clayton is dead, murdered by his twin brother, the good doctor Lloyd Clayton. But evil doesn't stay dead long. Elwyn rises, with help from his faithful servant Zolarr, as a Vampire! Dr. Clayton's niece Gayle, played by the hot Mary Carlisle, is in danger. She is to be married to the wooden Dr. Bently, but o'll dad has plans to make her his vampire servant.

After Dr. Clayton realizes his Evil brother is a vampire, he knows he must find the body during the daytime and burn it. He does everything he can, including searching the entire town for the body. No, wait. Everything EXCEPT actually search for the body. Instead he just rubs his chin. Until the end, that is, when he searches for it AT NIGHT! Way to go, Doctor Action.

This film has a lot going for it. George Zucco as both Claytons, the hot Mary Carlisle in the last movie of her career, and even Dwight Frye (Dracula's Renfield) as Zolarr. Less than seven months after this film came out, Dwight would be dead, another happy customer of the Christian Science Healthcare Plan. One wonders if health concerns explain his muted performance. Fern Emmett, looking like a simple minded and good intentioned Elmira Gulch, was a crazy townswoman who knew Elwyn had risen. Three and a half years later, she too would be dead.

The story was fair, the script ok, the setting good. Why was the movie so ... flat? First might be the quality of this public domain film. The contrast seemed a little weak. A good filmmaker can do wonders with black and white, shadows and highlights. See The Day The Earth Stood Still. This movie didn't have any of that. A black screen is good for dark, brooding dialog, but no good for fight scenes. I also think it could have been edited a little better.

What it was truly missing was a proper score. A good score goes a long way to build suspense and creepiness. The score was a total dud.

I fell asleep during parts of Dead Men Walk, so I watched it again online, skipping the parts I saw. I wanted to like this movie, but I never felt involved with the characters. George Zucco was great, but his vampire fell flat. Put a proper soundtrack on this film and clean it up, and you'd have a real good movie. I wanted to give it a 3, but as it is now, the best I can do is a 2.5.

Watch it here.

Dr. Renault's Secret (1942)

Dashing Young Doctor American (Shepperd Strudwick) goes to a small village in France to visit his young hottie fiancee (Lynne Roberts), who lives with her uncle, the mysterious Dr. Renault (George Zucco). Dr. Renault's manservant, the mysterious Noel, meets him at an inn, where they stay the night because the bridge has washed out. Also in attendance is the mysterious Rogell, Dr. Renault's ex-con gardener. A drunk crashes in dashing American's room, so he swaps with him. That night, drunk man is mysteriously strangled. Mistaken identity? The Police think so. So was it the strange Noel or Rogell, the angry ex-con? Or was is somebody ... no, you can rule out everybody else.

Life goes on at Dr. Renault's house and the plot thickens. What is Rogell up to, and what's up with the strange Noel? Dr. Renault seems charming enough. But he has a secret (apart from making crappy cars). A secret so dark, it's worthy of naming the movie after it. What to know what the secret is? You could watch about three quarters of the film, but if you're in a rush, you can just read the back of the DVD box.

Damn! They totally blew most of the mystery out of this film! They suck. But this film didn't. The acting was good, the sets were beautiful, and the sense of atmosphere was wonderful! Exactly what you want from an old B horror film! It was a real treat. It kept you guessing who the real bad guy was until the very end. I don't want to blow any of the story, but I'll say this:

Dashing Young Doctor American is a wuss in a fight. Also his medical specialty is the frontal lobotomy. That's where you correct a personality disorder by sticking an ice pick into someones eye and scrambling their brain. How charming!

J. Carrol Naish plays a nuanced Noel. We're never sure what to think of him. Fear him or feel sorry for him? Can't be sure. I never heard of this movie before I picked it up, but I'm glad I found it. It's everything you want from an old B horror film! AMRU 3.5.