The Walking Dead (1936)

Not to be confused with the AMC horror series of the same name, this horror film does not have Rick Grimes and Daryl Dixon shooting zombies in the head, instead, we get a unique blend of horror, mystery and courtroom drama, not to mention the legendary horror icon Boris Karloff, all going towards making this an unforgettable cinematic experience, even after all these years. I give you, The Walking Dead.

Directed by Michael Curtiz, The Walking Dead isn’t your traditional horror movie as much its plot deals with organized crime and the plot follows the actions of a particular syndicate who needs an honest judge (Joe King) out of the way. The leader of this criminal enterprise is criminal defence lawyer Nolan (Ricardo Cortez), who has come up with a plan to have the judge murdered and ex-con John Ellman (Boris Karloff) framed for the crime, turns out that the judge had sent Ellman up the river years ago for second-degree murder, which makes him the perfect patsy for the crime as they can sell it as a revenge killing.  The fact that Nolan will be Ellman’s lawyer ensures that he will not be a fair trial.

 

“Don’t worry, if you get the chair I’ll make sure your grave gets fresh flowers.”

The only wrinkle in this diabolic plan is that there were two witnesses to the crime, a young couple who saw Nolan’s goons stuff the dead body of the judge into the backseat of Ellman’s car, but as they are too terrified of gangland repercussions they keep silent throughout the trial. Eventually these two “good Samaritans” grow a spine but when they finally decide to come forward they make the mistake of contacting Ellman’s crooked lawyer instead of the police and he is able to delay things long enough so that the poor man is electrocuted before the governor could give a stay of execution. However, Ellman’s story doesn’t end there – as if death was ever going to stop Boris Karloff – those two witnesses just so happened to work for  Dr. Beaumont (Edmund Gwenn), a renowned scientist who has discovered a way to revive the dead, and he uses this process to bring Ellman back from the dead.

 

I can’t possibly imagine anything going wrong with this.

As a surprise to no one who has ever seen a Universal horror movie before, Ellman awakens from his grave and embarks on a mission to seek justice and reveal the truth behind his wrongful conviction, but what is unexpected is that Ellman doesn’t go on some murderous rampage of revenge, not at all, instead he simply confronts them with one simply question “Why did you have me killed?” But how is the possible, Ellman didn’t know anything about the murder conspiracy prior to his death, so what has changed? Turns out coming back from the grave has some advantages, it seems Ellman has gained an innate sense of knowing those who are responsible for his death. Is this some kind of divine gift? We are left to wonder. While he doesn’t directly murder the conspirators the horrifying sight of his accusing eyes and his piercing question results in one of the conspirators shooting himself by accident, another into backing into the path of an oncoming train and a third having a heart attack and falling out of a window.

 

If I saw that face on a dark night, I’d probably jump out a window too.

Stray Observations:

• In the 1941 film The Monster and the Girl, a man is wrongfully convicted and after execution his body is given over to a scientist for experiments, leading to his brain being put inside a gorilla and it escaping and seeking revenge. It’s nice to know if the justice system fails we have mad science as a backstop.
• Reanimating a body is one thing but Ellman met his end in the electric chair and there isn’t much in the way of scientific mumbo jumbo to explain how his brain still functions after being fried.
• Boris Karloff played Frankenstein’s Monster, who was reanimated via electricity, so it’s kind of interesting that here he’s killed by electricity and revived in an even weirder fashion.
• After bringing Ellman back to life Dr. Beaumont asks if he has any memories of the afterlife, which is not a very scientific line of question, but even stranger is Beaumont is soon willing to risk Ellman’s life with a second operation in the hopes of learning “Secrets from the beyond.” I’m not sure Dr. Beaumont understands the Hippocratic Oath.
• The two witnesses who could have proven Ellman’s innocence just so happen to work for Dr. Beaumont as lab assistants, coincidence or lazy plot contrivance, you be the judge.

 

“We are cowards and also really bad lab assistants.”

With Michael Curtiz at the helm, each scene is crafted with precision and is allowed to slowly build tension as the plot carefully unfolds and the revenge plays out. The film’s blend of crime drama and science fiction, with a nice helping of the supernatural, creates a neat little tapestry for our characters to wander through, in a story that raises thought-provoking questions about justice, redemption and the boundaries of scientific experimentation. Another excellent aspect of The Walking Dead is its atmospheric and moody cinematography by Hal Mohr, and while this horror entry doesn’t have foggy moors or a Gothic castle it is still able to create a sense of foreboding and unease through its use of shadows, dimly lit sets and a haunting musical score by Bernhard Kaun.

 

This is the kind of world where you’d expect to see Karloff lurking in the shadows.

Boris Karloff’s portrayal of John Ellman is exceptional and despite being a resurrected corpse he brings sense of depth and empathy to the character, making him both sympathetic and terrifying at the same time. Karloff’s physicality and expressive eyes enhance the unnerving nature of his performance, creating an unforgettable on-screen presence. But Karloff is not acting alone here as the supporting cast also deliver commendable performances, particularly Edmund Gwenn as Dr. Beaumont and his portrayal of a conflicted if well-meaning scientist – one with questionable ethics – adds an intriguing layer to the narrative. The interactions between Karloff and Gwenn’s characters are captivating, as the two men navigate the moral implications of their actions.

 

And by morality, I mean Gwenn’s character has none.

In conclusion, The Walking Dead is another horror entry that showcases Boris Karloff’s immense talent and exemplifies the golden age of horror cinema, with its atmospheric visuals, compelling performances and intriguing storyline, it has rightfully earned its place as a must-watch for fans of the genre. While the pacing may be a tad slow by today’s standards, its ability to evoke chills and engage the audience’s imagination is a testament to its enduring appeal.

The Invisible Ray (1936) – Review

In this 1936 offering from Universal Pictures we find Karloff giving a rather understated and subdued performance as the film’s villain.  In this outing he’s almost a tragic figure and only becomes the stereotypical “mad scientist” when something goes drastically wrong, but The Invisible Ray doesn’t just provide us a fun take on the genre it’s also the third pairing of screen legends Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi.

Directed by Lambert Hillyer, The Invisible Ray is a classic science fiction thriller from 1936 that contains an imaginative plot, stellar performances, and stunning visual effects, even by today’s standards there is solid work here. Set in a world of scientific exploration and discovery, the film follows the brilliant but enigmatic astronomer Dr. Janos Rukh (Boris Karloff) who has invented a telescope that can look far out into deep space, into the Andromeda Galaxy, and photograph light rays that will show the Earth’s past. Despite the fact that his theories having been discredited among his fellow scientist-colleague over the years he invites a group of them up to his observatory to witness the proof of his discovery, this group consists of Dr. Felix Benet (Bela Lugosi), Sir Francis Stevens (Walter Kingsford), Lady Arabella Stevens (Beulah Bondi) and her nephew Ronald Drake (Frank Lawton), all who become so impressed with Rukh’s device that they quickly invite him to join their expedition to Africa.

 

With this group, I expected a murder mystery to break out.

This expedition to Africa is to uncover a mysterious element known as Radium X which is believed to have been deposited by a meteor that Rukh witnessed crashing to Earth millions of years ago via his unique telescope.  Needless to say, things don’t go all that smoothly on the expedition, with an obsessed Rukh taking off on his own, with only a few native porters to do the heavy liftin, and leaving his wife Diana (Frances Drake) back at camp so that she can fall in love with Ronald Drake.  As to  Benet’s own bizarre work in the field of astrochemistry, it makes even less sense than a telescope that can photograph ancient history by capturing light rays from distant galaxies. Unfortunately, Rukh does discover the meteor but its prolonged exposure to Radium X not only causes him to glow in the dark but has also grants him the ability to kill with a mere touch.

 

On the plus side, he’ll never need a Night Light again.

Dr. Benet is able to develop a counter agent to the Radium X poisoning and while this does hold the lethal element’s toxicity at bay, as long as Rukh keeps taking a daily dose of the serum, it does have a rather distressing side-effect on Rukh’s mental health and he soon becomes consumed by a twisted desire for revenge, believing his colleagues robbed him of his discovery. This mad belief sets in motion a diabolical plan to hunt down each and every one of his colleagues, including his wife who he believes has betrayed him in the most hurtful way possible, and soon he is stalking the streets of Paris with his glowing hands of death. In this film’s 79-minute running time we will learn the answers to such questions as “Will true love prevail?” and “Can Benet and the police find a way to stop this madman and his death touch?”

 

A glow-in-the-dark Jack the Ripper.

Stray Observations:

• In a case of strange casting, Englishman Boris Karloff plays a Hungarian scientist while Bela Lugosi, who was actually a Hungarian, plays a Frenchman. You’ve got to love Hollywood casting decisions.
• In an early sequence we see the meteor landing on Earth somewhere around the southwest coast of Africa but later a magazine article announces that our heroes are off to Nigeria to find the meteor, which is over 1,000 miles away from where we saw it land. They’d be more likely to find Dr. Livingston than that meteor.
• The set for Dr. Rukh’s laboratory appeared as that of Ming the Merciless in Flash Gordon (1936) and Countess Zelaska’s castle in Dracula’s Daughter (1936).

 

It’s important to have the proper setting for mad science.

One of the film’s strongest attributes is its atmospheric and visually striking presentation, its black and white cinematography effectively capturing the eerie and dark undertones of the story and wonderfully enhanced by the evocative use of shadows and contrast. Additionally, the special effects, particularly the depiction of Radium X’s lethal effects and Dr. Rukh’s transformation are commendable for the era, showcasing the technical prowess of the filmmakers. Another notable aspect of the film is its exploration of the moral choices faced by the characters as Dr. Rukh’s transformation from a well-intentioned scientist to a tormented and vengeful figure nicely highlights the dark side of scientific ambition and the slippery slope into madness. It was also nice to see Bela Lugosi playing the good guy for a change and his portrayal of Dr. Benet was a turn from his previous mad doctor in 1935’s The Raven.

 

“Is that a death ray or are you just happy to see me?”

The Invisible Ray successfully blends elements of horror and science fiction, exploring the dangers of unchecked scientific progress while also raising ethical questions about the pursuit of knowledge and the potential consequences of meddling with forces beyond our control, thought to be fair, scientists in these movies are always dealing with forces beyond their control, and the film’s thematic depth adds an extra intellectual layer to the thrilling narrative.  The plot is well supported by Boris Karloff’s standout performance as Dr. Janos Rukh, brilliantly portraying the character’s descent into madness and obsession and his physicality and expressive face make him a perfect fit for the role, allowing him to convey both the tormented soul and the cold-blooded menace that Rukh later becomes. 

 

The Uncanny Karloff!

Universal’s The Invisible Ray is a timeless gem that showcases the talents of two iconic actors of the horror genre at the top of their game, with the film’s thought-provoking and visually captivating tale demonstrating the allure of early science fiction cinema. Fans of classic movies and Mad Science, or those simply interested in the origins of the genre, will find this Karloff/Lugosi pairing to be an engaging and entertaining experience, one that provides a glimpse into the creative visions of the past.

The Raven (1935) – Review

There have been many movies based on the works of Edgar Allan Poe but with this early offering from Universal Pictures we get a nice spin on things, a mad doctor with an obsession for the works of Edgar Allen Poe is twisted and turned when his fixation on a woman he saved on the operating table becomes murderous, add Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff into the mix and you are talking horror gold.

Directed by Lew Landers and released in 1935, Universal’s The Raven is a captivating and atmospheric Gothic thriller that immerses viewers in a world of mystery and suspense. Set in early 19th-century England, the film follows a brilliant but tortured surgeon named Dr. Richard Vollin (Bela Lugosi) who is obsessed with Edgar Allan Poe’s poem, “The Raven.” The horror begins when Vollin becomes infatuated with a young dancer, Jean Thatcher (Irene Ware), who is gravely injured in a car accident, and Vollin comes out of retirement and performs the surgery when the girl’s father Judge Thatcher (Samuel S. Hinds) pleads for his help. Unfortunately, while the surgery was a rousing success Vollin becomes obsessed with Jean and his desire for her soon spirals into madness and he will let no one stand in the way of his claiming her.  Not her boyfriend Dr. Jerry Halden (Lester Matthews) and especially not her father, but love is not his ultimate go as his Poe-fuelled obsession results in a desire to torture all parties, with poor Jean and Jerry are locked in a room with crushing walls and Judge Hardin placed under a device inspired by Poe’s “The Pit and the Pendulum.”

 

It’s nice when a hobby turns out useful as this.

Of course, no self-respecting mad scientist can function properly without a disfigured assistant at his side and in the case of The Raven that role is filled by Edmond Bateman (Boris Karloff), a bank robber on the run after killing two guards and then escaping from San Quentin, who is advised by one of his criminal associates to seek out Dr. Vollin and see if the good doctor could perform plastic surgery to alter his looks. Vollin informs Bateman that he will perform such surgery if Bateman helps him murder and torture a few annoying individuals, which sounds like a fair deal to me, but when Bateman posits the theory of why he became criminal, stating “I’m saying, Doc, maybe because I look ugly… maybe if a man looks ugly, he does ugly things,”  which gives Vollin the brilliant idea of giving Bateman a very memorable face, instead of a nice unassuming visage he disfigures half of the man’s face by damaging his seventh cranial nerve.  This results in Bateman reluctantly submitting to Vollin’s demands so that the doctor will hopefully undo the procedure. Which sounds like a plan, it’s not like Vollin seems at all untrustworthy or totally off his rocker.

 

How could anyone doubt this man?

Stray Observations:

• For someone who has been in a terrible automobile accident Jean Thatcher looks in surprisingly good shape, sure she has nerve damage but I don’t think her make-up even got smudged.
• If the only chance to save your daughter’s life relies on an Edgar Allan Poe-obsessed Bela Lugosi you’d best start making funeral arrangements, also, book bulk graveyard plots as well.
• Dr. Vollin illustrates the fact that if you have a pipe organ in your home you must play Bach’s Toccata in Fugue in D-Minor.
• Jean Thatcher does an interpretive dance to Edgar Allan Poe’s poem “The Raven” and I have to wonder “Did she want to drive the Poe-obsessed Vollin over the edge?”
• It’s never explained why or how a world-renowned neurosurgeon became known to the underworld as someone who could provide plastic surgery for criminals looking for a new face.

 

“This is how I funded my medical schooling.”

Bela Lugosi’s portrayal of Dr. Vollin is masterful, showcasing his ability to portray complex characters with depth and intensity and his transformation from a respected surgeon into a deranged and vengeful madman is both chilling and mesmerizing. Then as an added bonus, we have Boris Karloff delivering a strong performance as Bateman, a criminal who becomes entangled in Vollin’s wicked schemes and his empathetic and tragic figure is a nice counterpoint to Lugosi’s mad scientist. On the technical side of things, the film’s cinematography by Charles Stumar deserves praise for its moody and atmospheric visuals with its shadowy and Gothic settings, coupled with the use of stark contrasts, create a sense of foreboding that keeps viewers on the edge of their seats. The atmospheric lighting and eerie sound design further enhance the film’s overall sense of dread and suspense. Then there is the nice work by legendary make-up artist Jack Pierce who was on hand to provide Karloff’s gruesome appearance.

Note: In the stage play Arsenic and Old Lace, Boris Karloff plays a killer who has plastic surgery to change his features, unfortunately, this results in him killing a man because “He said I looked like Boris Karloff” which is a pretty nice meta-joke for a 1930s play.

The Raven excels in building tension and maintaining a constant air of mystery and while the script at times seems a little melodramatic, it is well-crafted and keeps the audience engaged throughout. The film also effectively explores themes of obsession, madness and the corrupting power of revenge, drawing inspiration from Edgar Allan Poe’s works in the most horrifying ways possible. One of the film’s standout moments is the climax, which delivers a thrilling and suspenseful showdown between the characters, with its final act providing a satisfying culmination of the story, with unexpected twists and turns that leave a lasting impact.

Question: How do you go about finding a contractor to build you a house with hidden passageways, rooms that can be lowered like an elevated car, install various torture devices like a bladed pendulum, and a room where the walls close in to crush its occupants?

What is a little disappointing is that not only did Karloff get top billing over Lugosi in this outing he also received twice the salary, which is terrible when considering the fact that Karloff was clearly a secondary character and the whole movie centres around Lugosi’s Poe-obsessed madman and not the disfigured henchman. Karloff does give an excellent performance as an escaped convict, who Lugosi mutilates into becoming his reluctant murder accomplice, but he doesn’t even enter the movie until almost the halfway point.

 

“Exactly how are you the star of my movie?”

It should be noted that this movie also nicely escapes the “In name only adaptation” problem that plagues many adaptions of Poe’s work by utilizing a nice twist on the source material, this is not a literal depiction of any of Edgar Allan Poe’s stories, instead, it’s about a man obsessed with the author and his works. Overall, Universal’s 1965 release of The Raven is a must-watch for fans of classic horror and mystery films. Its atmospheric visuals, exceptional performances, and chilling storyline make it a timeless gem and remain an important film in the horror genre, showcasing the talents of two iconic actors, Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi.

The Black Cat (1934) – Review

This brilliant pre-code horror film pits the iconic Boris Karloff against the incomparable Bela Lugosi in their first screen pairing, with Karloff playing the personification of Lucifer while Lugosi as a man obsessed with revenge, but this film not only stars two of Hollywood’s greatest screen icons it’s also has a plot that deals with Satanism, necrophilia, and torture, which were not subject matters normally seen in Hollywood movies of the time.

The plot centres around a young honeymooning couple, Peter Alison (David Manners) and his newly wedded bride Joan (Julie Bishop), whose fateful encounter with Dr. Vitus Werdegast (Bela Lugosi) aboard the Orient Express leads to disaster when their bus loses control and drives off the road.  They are forced to take the injured Joan on to the home of Hjalmar Poelzig (Boris Karloff), the man who Werdegast has come seeking revenge, and our two love birds are now caught in a web of murder and betrayal. Turns out that during the war Poelzig betrayed his command which resulted in the deaths of thousands of Austro-Hungarian soldiers and Werdegast’s imprisonment, not to mention the fact that he also stole Werdegast’s wife and daughter, both named Karen (Lucille Lund), after telling them he was dead. Fifteen years later, Werdegast has come to find out what happened to his family and to get finally get his revenge on Poelzig, unfortunately, as it is the “Dark of the Moon” our newlyweds have arrived just in time to become part of a Satanic ritual and thus revenge is put on hold.

 

Hungary, come for the beautiful scenery, stay for the ritual sacrifice.

One of the film’s standout aspects is its exploration of psychological horror as the plot of The Black Cat delves deep into the darkest corners of the human psyche, exploring themes of guilt, madness and the consequences of wartime atrocities. It challenges the audience’s notions of good and evil, blurring the lines between protagonist and antagonist in a way that was quite daring for its time. Lugosi’s Dr. Vitus Werdegast is quite the complicated character because even though he’s come to get revenge upon Poelzig, who not only stole the man’s wife but later married his daughter – and that’s not getting into the whole Satanic cult thing and the fact he has a hallway of victims persevered in all their beauty within glass cases – yet Werdegast is no hero as he’s willing to jeopardize the lives of both Peter and Joan so that his plans for revenge can play out.

 

“Excuse, but are you two gentlemen playing chess with our lives?”

Stray Observations:

• An American mystery novelist going on his honeymoon in Europe is almost guaranteed to end badly, people in certain careers should know what locations to avoid, in fact, Peter later reflects “Next time, I go to Niagara Falls!”
• Sharing a train compartment with Bela Lugosi is a pretty big red flag that you are travelling into danger, and while Lugosi is not the villain of this picture his plans for revenge make him complicit in the horrifying events that follow.
• Boris Karloff’s diabolic satanist doesn’t live in some spooky castle or Gothic manor, instead, his home is something more akin to the modernistic style of Frank Lloyd Wright.
• Peter and Joan are newlyweds but Poelzig gives them separate rooms, I’ll never understand how a film that deals with torture, incest and necrophilia will still have a problem showing two people sleeping together.
• Poelzig plays Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D minor on a pipe organ because that’s one horror cliché that never goes out of style, of course, this film wins points for being only the second feature to utilize this piece, the first one being the 1931 adaptation of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
• The Satanic prayer Poelzig chants during the black mass scene contains random phrases in Latin including “cum grano salis” which means “with a grain of salt” which is a fair comment on Satanism.
• On the film’s title card it states “Suggested by the immortal Edgar Allan Poe Classic” but this movie has absolutely nothing to do with Poe’s story about a cat being accidentally bricked up with a murdered spouse.

 

The film does feature a black cat, among other dark things.

Director Edgar G. Ulmer later admitted that the story was credited as an adaptation of the Edgar Allen Poe story of the same name simply to draw public attention, despite the fact it had nothing to do with the plot of this movie, and this kicks off a long line of movies based on the Poe’s works that have little to do with the source material and being “In Name Only” adaptations. Despite being only “loosely based” on Edgar Allan Poe’s story – it does feature a black cat but no one gets walled up – the movie immerses viewers in a sinister world of hidden secrets and twisted obsessions. Lugosi and Karloff both deliver powerful and magnetic performances, their on-screen chemistry adding an extra layer of intensity to an already gripping narrative.

 

There is intensity and there is Lugosi versus Karloff.

Ulmer’s direction in The Black Cat is a masterclass in atmospheric storytelling. The film effectively uses shadowy visuals, stunning production design, and hauntingly beautiful cinematography to create an oppressive and foreboding atmosphere. Every scene is meticulously crafted, revealing the director’s keen eye for detail and his ability to create tension through subtlety. The performances by Lugosi and Karloff are nothing short of mesmerizing and Lugosi’s portrayal of Dr. Werdegast is hauntingly tragic, with his signature charm and commanding presence. Karloff, on the other hand, delivers a chilling and enigmatic performance as the enigmatic Poelzig, his screen presence oozing with malevolence and menace.

 

No one does “oozing malevolence” like Boris Karloff.

The Black Cat is one seriously dark piece of filmmaking, with director Edgar G. Ulmer and cinematographer John J. Mescall creating a world of creepy atmosphere and building dread, with our two hapless honeymooners caught in the crossfire of an old feud between bitter enemies, a feud that threatens ritualistic rape and human sacrifice. This is a truly horrifying tale and one can’t help but be appalled by Karloff’s menacing Satanist, especially when he admires his hallway of preserved corpses. And one can even sympathize with Lugosi’s emotionally tortured psychiatrist, a man who is pushed to the brink of madness, despite dangers his plans will have on his innocent companions. Over the years Lugosi and Karloff teamed up in eight films but The Black Cat is easily their greatest partnership as both actors give fantastic performances in a movie that pushed the limits as to the level of horror that could be brought to the screen.

 

What’s a little skinning alive between friends?

In conclusion, The Black Cat is an enduring cinematic achievement that stands the test of time. It showcases the immense talents of Lugosi, Karloff and Ulmer, pushing the boundaries of the horror genre in the 1930s. If you’re a fan of atmospheric and psychologically-driven storytelling, this film is a must-watch, offering a haunting journey into the depths of darkness that will leave you captivated until the very end.

Murder in the Zoo (1933) - Review

Who doesn’t like a trip to the zoo? You get to feed the bears, visit the Reptile House, and even watch the monkeys play with themselves, but murder isn’t usually part of the tour, which is why Paramount’s Murders in the Zoo stands out because who other than Lionel Atwill would use a zoo’s inhabitants as a murder weapon.

The idea of an insanely jealous person being “driven” to crime has been fodder for many a movie over the years but with Paramount’s Murders in the Zoo not only do we get one of the earliest examples but one of the most powerful and horrifying. Filmed during the pre-code era, director A. Edward Sutherland was able to take the premise of a husband’s mad jealousy to the extreme with a movie featuring a collection of rather gruesome and shocking deaths, and sure, what appears in this film may seem tame when compared to the “torture porn” of some modern horror films but somehow these have a more visceral feel to them that all the gore in the world can’t match. The key player in this film is big-game hunter and wealthy zoologist Eric Gorman (Lionel Atwill), a man who considers any threat to his marriage as a justification to murder, and the movie gets off to a great start with him sewing the lips shut of colleague Bob Taylor (Edward Pawley) and leaving him to be eaten by tigers, and the reason for this, the man attempted to kiss Gorman’s wife Evelyn (Kathleen Burke), which I considered to be an overly harsh response.

What’s wrong with the classic pistols at dawn?

The movie opens while Gorman and his wife are on safari in Indo-China, picking up animals for a zoo back in the States, but after the murder of the amorous Mister Taylor and a quick transatlantic boat ride, and it’s where we learn that Evelyn has another suitor in the wings in the form of Roger Hewitt (John Lodge), are story resumes its horrifying journey at the Municipal Zoo, an establishment that is currently suffering financial troubles that curator Professor G.A. Evans (Harry Beresford) hopes can be solved by the hiring of Peter Yates (Charles Ruggles) as their new press agent. Unfortunately, Yates is not only a bumbling drunkard who is terrified of practically all of the zoo’s inhabitants, but when two people at the zoo end up dead the wrong kind of publicity makes headlines. Needless to say, the deaths are not accidental but the work of Eric Gorman, knocking off one potential rival with a faked snake attack and then another murder to cover that one up, which leads to the zoo’s laboratory doctor, Jack Woodford (Randolph Scott), to discover the culprit and not only save the day but the zoo as well.

 

“I will now confront the killer alone because I’m an idiot.”

Stray Observations:

• Gorman returns from Indo-China with at least one lion visible among his catch, but lions have never been indigenous to Southeastern Asia. Did he hunt in one of their zoos over there?
• The killer snake is described as a “green mamba” but those snakes are only found in Africa so I’m starting to get a feeling that this script wasn’t vetted by an actual zoologist. In fact, the snake in this film is not a green mamba but a 25-foot-long python.
• If you’re in a movie and Lionel Atwill promises you “I really unusual evening” book a flight out of the country as soon as possible.
• Seeing Randolph Scott out of his typical cowboy garb and in a white lab coat makes this a fun look at his early career.
• If you discover your husband is a murderer, and have even found the murder weapon, go to the police and not the zoo, because if you end up being fed to the alligators then it’s kind of on you.

 

Maybe an open bridge over an alligator pit was a bad idea.

Lionel Atwill’s performance as the sadistic Eric Gorman is simply amazing, with his performance bringing a magnetic and sinister presence to the character, portraying him with a perfect balance of charm and madness. Atwill’s ability to convey Gorman’s cold and calculating nature while still maintaining an air of sophistication is truly remarkable but we shouldn’t overlook Charles Ruggles for his bumbling press agent, whose role in this outing injects moments of humour into the otherwise intense storyline, then again, I enjoy Ruggles in pretty much all his appearances in films over the years. Furthermore, Murders in the Zoo showcases impressive production values for its time. The set design, particularly Gorman’s mansion and the zoo itself, is richly detailed and adds to the film’s overall sense of opulence and decadence.

 

Decadence, thy name is Lionel Atwill.

One of the film’s standout features is the creative use of animals as instruments of horror as Murders in the Zoo presents some truly unnerving scenes, highlighting the power and danger inherent in the animal kingdom, from poisonous snakes to man-eating crocodiles, the film exploits the primal fears associated with nature’s predators, evoking a sense of unease and primal terror. While the film’s plot is intriguing and suspenseful, and even horrifying at times as the deaths in this film are particularly gruesome, does occasionally succumb to predictable storytelling tropes and contrived character decisions. However, these minor flaws are outweighed by the film’s overall effectiveness in delivering suspense and terror.

 

The zoo should have posted a “Beware of Irony” sign.

While the film is undeniably entertaining, it is worth noting that some of the themes and depictions may feel dated by today’s standards such as its treatment of women in particular, which may be considered problematic, with female characters often portrayed as nothing more than damsels in distress and adding very little to the narrative. Also, the film’s big finale featuring big cats fighting each other would certainly not pass the mandate of “No Animals Were Harmed in the Making of this Film,” but it is important to view the film within the context of the time it was made and appreciate it as a product of the early 1930sm, an era that wasn’t necessarily kind to women or animals in more than one fashion or another.

Terrible Trivia: At the film’s climax, during a big cat free-for-all, a lion broke the back of a puma and later the poor suffering animal had to be put down.

In conclusion, Murders in the Zoo remains a notable entry in the early horror-thriller genre, offering a gripping and atmospheric tale that explores the darkest corners of human nature. Lionel Atwill’s chilling performance, combined with the film’s use of animal symbolism and A. Edward Sutherland’s excellent direction, make it a must-watch for fans of classic suspense cinema. Just be prepared to experience a dark journey into the human psyche as you delve into the shadows of the zoo.

Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) – Review

When thinking about a horror movie centring around murders committed by a disfigured mad sculptor the 1953 Vincent Price classic House of Wax would be the first thing to come to mind, I certainly hope no one immediately thinks of the 2005 version starring Paris Hilton, but Price wasn’t the first mad sculptor to stalk the streets looking for models for his macabre display, that honour goes to Lionel Atwill in Michael Curtiz’s Mystery of the Wax Museum.

Set in the dark and eerie world of a turn of the century wax museum, the film follows the twisted tale of Ivan Igor (Lionel Atwill), a master sculptor and owner of a financially failing wax museum in London England, despite his wax sculptures of Joan of Arc and Marie Antoinette receiving great praise from a local art critic. Unfortunately, before he gets an ounce of good press his beloved wax figures are destroyed in a fire deliberately set by his business partner (Edwin Maxwell), who was hoping to recoup some of his investment via the insurance money. The film then fast forwards twelve years and a trip across the Atlantic where we find a now wheelchair-bound, and hiding his burned features under a wax mask, Ivan has reopened a new and improved wax museum in New York City, but with a nefarious band of assistants his wax figures are manufactured from corpses of people he has murdered and then encased in wax.

 

“It was this or live beneath the Paris Opera House."

The "mystery" of Mystery of the Wax Museum deals with the uncovering of these diabolical acts of murderous art by intrepid reporter Florence Dempsey (Glenda Farrell) who is trying to prove playboy George Winton (Gavin Gordon) didn’t murder his ex-girlfriend Joan Gale (Monica Bannister) – her corpse stolen and now standing in for Joan of Arc – and Florence also spends much of her time being repeatedly fired by her exasperated editor (Frank McHugh) as each lead sends her on one wacky misadventure after another. Basically, this is a horror version of Ben Hecht’s play The Front Page only instead of simply freeing a wrongfully convicted man from the gallows, our heroine must uncover the truth behind these ghastly murders and the mystery of a deformed serial killer, hopefully in time to save her roommate Charlotte Duncan (Fay Wray) who has caught Ivan’s eye as to be a perfect replacement for his lost Marie Antoinette.

 

“How do you feel about burning hot wax?”

Stray Observations:

• The movie opens with an art critic visiting the wax museum, but then rushing off to join an Egyptian expedition, and one can only hope it’s to uncover the mummy of Imhotep.
• The morgue set was recycled from the laboratory set in the 1932 classic Doctor X which was directed by Michael Curtiz and also starred Lionel Atwill and Fay Wray.
• Glenda Farrell is billed below Fay Wray despite the fact that she's the heroine and Fay Wray doesn't appear until about the 31-minute mark of this 77-minute movie.
• Glenda Farrell would go on to play another hard-boiled reporter in the Torchy Blane mysteries which ran from 1937 to 1939 and were inspirational in the creation of Lois Lane.
• Many of the wax statues are played by real people so even a casual viewer will most likely spot one of them taking a breath, twitching, flinching, or blinking at several points throughout the movie.
• Fay Wray smashes the wax mask that conceals Lionel Atwill’s burned visage but this makes little to no sense as a hard mask would not have worked at all as a disguise.

 

He should have gone with the traditional Phantom of the Opera mask.

One of the most notable aspects of Mystery of the Wax Museum is the superb art direction by Anton Grot whose beautiful set designs have a German expressionist flair that perfectly captures the era while also creating a sense of otherworldly apprehension. The filmmakers were able to create a genuinely haunting and atmospheric environment, with dimly lit corridors, shadows dancing across walls and a sense of foreboding lurking in every frame. The attention to detail in the wax figures themselves is remarkable, showcasing the skill and craftsmanship of all involved. The performances in Mystery of the Wax Museum are all commendable, with Lionel Atwill delivering a compelling portrayal of the tortured artist seeking revenge while Glenda Farrell brings a refreshing bit of energy to the film as the relentless reporter and her chemistry with Frank McHugh's character adds a touch of humour amidst the tension.

 

“I’m a kick-ass reporter and way ahead of my time.”

Then there is Fay Wray, who later gained fame in the 1933 monster classic King Kong, portraying a woman who has the misfortune to look like Ivan’s Marie Antoinette and becomes entangled in the mystery surrounding the wax museum, and while she doesn’t have Bruce Cabot to run to her rescue she at least has Glenda Farrell’s intrepid reporter for a roommate. Another of the film's strengths lies in its ability to blend elements of horror, mystery, comedy and suspense as Curtiz is able to keep viewers on the edge of their seats with a genuine sense of unease and tension, with the occasional break for a laugh. Balancing this blend of humour and horror is required when dealing with the concept of replacing wax figures with real corpses creates which in itself makes for a macabre and unsettling atmosphere, heightening the horror elements and establishing the film as a standout in the genre. Lucky for us, we have Glenda Farrell to keep our spirits up.

 

“Come for the art, stay for the murders.”

If you are a fan of the 1953 Vincent Price movie, or just a fan of classic horror movies in general, then Mystery of the Wax Museum is a must-see as it showcases the talents of director Michael Curtiz as well as the unforgettable performances of Lionel Atwill, Glenda Farrell, and Fay Wray. With its intriguing storyline, chilling visuals, and unique colour cinematography by Ray Rennahan, this has become a significant entry in the genre and its enduring legacy makes it an enjoyable piece of cinematic history.

Doctor X (1932) – Review

Paramount Pictures didn’t have much box office success with their adaptation of The Island of Doctor Moreau, Island of Lost Souls, but that very same year director Michael Curtiz delivered another “mad doctor” entry, one that not only proved quite successful it also introduced actor Lionel Atwill to the general public, playing the titular Doctor X and starting his long career of playing doctors mad or otherwise.

This horrific mystery centres around a serial murderer that the press had dubbed the “Moon Killer” as he only strikes during the full moon, worse is the fact that each body has been cannibalized after the murder, and we're talking decades before Hannibal Lecter would make the scene. On the trail of the killer is reporter Lee Taylor (Lee Tracy) who hopes to get a scoop and secure his job at the Daily World, but this job becomes more complicated when the police bring in renowned Doctor Xavier (Lionel Atwill) to examine the latest victim of this gruesome murderer and Xavier is no fan of newspaper publicity. Unfortunately for the good doctor, the police aren’t just interested in his skills as a coroner but more to the fact that all of the murders have occurred near his Academy of Surgical Research, then add to the fact that the type of scalpel used by the killer is only to be found at his facility, the suspicion falls heavily one of the academics working for under him.

 

“Clearly, someone was just out for a late-night bite.”

Or suspect list consists of Dr. Haines (John Wray), Dr. Duke (Harry Beresford) and Rowitz (Arthur Edmund Carewe), and while there is a fourth doctor working for Xavier he is the one-armed Wells (Preston Foster) and doesn’t seem a likely candidate as the killer, one who first strangles his victims before getting down to cannibalism. The police want a full investigation but Dr. Xavier, desperate to keep his business out of the newspapers, begs them to let him find the killer in his own way via some rather outlandish pseudoscience bullshit. For some reason, the police agree to give him 48 hours to figure out on his own which of his people is a murderous madman, but will that be enough time and will the killer strike again?

 

My guess is that the body count will rise.

The plot of Doctor X is fairly absurd and the scientific mumbo-jumbo Doctor Xavier spouts is about as realistic as anything you’d find in a Commando Cody adventure serial. The fact that Michael Curtiz employed the great Lionel Atwill to produce reams of this techno-babble nonsense shows what an astute director he was, because Atwill is fantastic at delivering such pieces of exposition as “Now, it is my theory, that one of us in the past, through dire necessity, was driven to cannibalism. The memory of that act was hammered like a nail into the mind of that man. Shrewd and brilliant, he could conceal his madness from the human eye, even from himself... but he can't conceal it from the eyes of the radio sensitivity.” This is a machine that will, apparently, be able to deduce which one of them is the killer.  If only Scotland Yard had such a device.

 

This movie is just chock full of mad science.

And how exactly does all of this “science” work? Simply put, the suspects are all hooked up to this elaborate piece of apparatus that will measure their reactions to certain stimuli, which consists of subjecting them to the light of a full moon and lifelike reproductions of the Moon Killer's pitiful victims. Then Xavier's creepy butler (George Rosener) and hysterical maid (Leila Bennett) would act out the latest murder, which to Xavier’s theory, would cause strong mental repressions and phobias hidden from the darkest corners of the subconscious mind, which would be brought to the surface and thus expose the guilty man. I’m guessing this device works something like a lie detector, we do see each suspect hooked up to an electrical system that records his heart rate, but the whole setup looks absolutely insane, and I love it.

 

I bet Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot would have loved this device.

What’s amazing is that the film doesn’t just rely on Xavier’s crazy madness detector for its mad science, nope, this film goes all in when it comes to mad science because we get the big reveal is that one-armed Wells had somehow invented something he calls "synthetic flesh" and has been creating artificial limbs and a horrific mask to aid him in carrying out his crimes, which was to collect living samples of human flesh for his experiments. That he achieved such knowledge by researching cannibals in Africa and “stealing the flesh” from them just adds more layers to this villain’s madness, to the point where it is so over-the-top crazy you almost have to respect him for it.

 

Even Doctor Jekyll would have called this a bit much.

Stray Observations:

• The villain of this film is referred to as the Moon Killer and is almost certainly a very thinly disguised reference to Albert Fish, aka the Moon Maniac, whose cannibalistic crime spree ranged from 1924-32 and was still ongoing at the time of this film's release.
• Dr. Wells is an expert on cannibalism and Dr. Haines and Dr. Rowitz were once shipwrecked with a third person who “vanished” and they were both suspected of cannibalism. Talk about on-the-nose suspects for a case revolving around a cannibalistic murderer.
• Doctor Xavier is able to commission figures of Moon Killer’s victims on a moment's notice, which is impressive unless he made them himself, Atwill later became quite adept with them in Mystery of the Wax Museum.
• A killer unable to control himself during a full moon would, of course, become a key ingredient of Universal’s The Wolf Man.
• The dark house overlooking the sea, a group of murder suspects, and a masked killer roaming through secret passageways all make this film a proto-Scooby-Doo mystery.

 

"You're gonna have yourself a Scooby Snack!"

One of the standout qualities of Doctor X is its visual style and atmospheric setting. The film presents a hauntingly beautiful depiction of a mysterious laboratory tucked away inside a looming mansion on a seaside cliff. The shadowy lighting and eerie set designs create a palpable sense of dread and suspense, perfectly capturing the tone of the narrative. The use of two-strip Technicolor in select scenes further enhances the film's otherworldly charm. And it should be noted that this film was produced in the pre-Code era of Hollywood and thus it contains adult themes throughout, such as those of murder, cannibalism, prostitution and rape, elements that would definitely not appear in later films of the genre.

 

“Fay, we’ve got to get busy before the Hays Code takes effect.”

The performances in Doctor X are all top-notch, particularly Lionel Atwill as the bombastic Doctor Xavier. Atwill brings a commanding presence to the character, conveying both brilliance and a hint of sinister motives. And while Lee Tracy's portrayal of the witty and determined reporter adds a dose of humour and energy to the film it probably would have worked better with someone like Bob Hope in the role, something akin to The Cat and the Canary. The film also supports a love interest, something genre films always have whether the plot needs them or not, and in this case, it comes in the form of Doctor Xavier’s daughter Joanne (Fay Wray), who inexplicably made the trip to this creepy mansion, and while no logical reason is given to her inclusion in the events it does allow her to fulfill the role of damsel in distress.

Note: A year after the release of this film Fay Wray will take on her most iconic role, that of Anne Darrow in the monster classic King Kong.

While Doctor X is often categorized as a horror film, it possesses a unique blend of genres that sets it apart from the typical horror fare of its time. It incorporates elements of mystery, science fiction, and even dark humour and it's this amalgamation of genres that keeps the audience engaged and invested in the unfolding story. Now,  Doctor X quite perfection as it does have one failing and that is in the mystery aspect itself, which has to with the reveal of the killer being as impossible as it is absurd - cue the silly science fiction of synthetic flesh - and the obviousness of his identity could have only been more obvious if the butler did it. But despite absurdness of the villain the film still manages to create a chilling atmosphere without relying on excessive gore or jump scares, instead, it focused on suspenseful storytelling and intriguing character dynamics. For fans of classic horror or those interested in the evolution of the genre, Doctor X is a must-watch.