Charlie Chan Carries On

I love IMDb--perhaps that is why I have written so many reviews. However, it annoys the heck out of me when I am searching on films and find reviews and lots and lots of scores for films that have disappeared over the years and cannot possibly have been seen. Unless you are about 100 years-old and have PERFECT recall, you have no business scoring this film as it does not exist--the film having been destroyed in a fire in 1931. So stop scoring films that don't exist--it screws it up for people who really want to find out about a film--not see the votes of some cult-like followers of a particular series. The same is true of the Marx Brothers first film--a short that Grouch described as a terrible film. Yet, despite not having been seen since the 1920s, it has tons of scores on IMDb! Do yourself a favor. Get the Charlie Chan box set and see "Eran Trece"--this is the Spanish language version the studio made at the same time they were making "Charlie Chan Carries On"--a common practice during the early days of sound films. Studios like Fox and MGM often made multiple versions of films for international release and sometimes even used the original stars--having them deliver their lines phonetically. Interesting.

No, I did not watch the English-language version and acknowledge all the previous reviewers comments. I found the Spanish language version on YouTube where it is titled Charlie Chan Carries On. No dubbed, but totally different actors speaking Spanish. They did use one shot (surfing in Hawaii) I think was in the opening of The Black Camel and a photo of the Chan clan that I am sure I saw in a later film. So, having said all that, is it worth watching. Yes. Not a great movie and I acknowledge all of the foibles mentioned by other reviewers. But if you've watched all the other Chan movies, you will want to watch this as well. The plot is somewhat different and the ending is not the typical "Charlie Chan" ending where the detective reveals only what he knows and the audience does not. The ending is satisfactory in that there was a very plausible motive, and the killer had both the means and opportunity. In fact, we are told the killer's name earlier on along with the likely motive. But the killer is using a different name and everyone who knows what the killer looks like is ..... well, you'll just have to watch it to find out. Don't take it too seriously and you will likely spend an enjoyable hour and some minutes watching how Charlie Chan carries on.

(Spanish version) This movie is so badly directed and acted to be embarrassing to all associated with or viewing this movie. It is a complex plot with continuity problems and intentional miscues.

There is some almost extreme overacting, overreacting to situations. I have seen other early movies where the acting was extreme. At least the male actors were not wearing lipstick and eye makeup as with many movies of this era.

In one scene in the telegraph office, a man shoots from between a window and a door through the window. We see only the arm extending from the shooter which places him between the door and window. He shots then "disappears" without going past the door and would have to had duck-walked or crawled under the window. Someone is out the door looking in about 3 seconds. He sees nobody. That's almost impossible. Poor staging! Unbelievable action!! It is watchable but almost laughable without intending to be funny. And so many unresolved red herrings! I would write a synopsis but this is the most confusing story I have seen in a long time. Many plot threads opened and left open for a long time or forever.

I am hoping for a good group-in-a-room ending with lots of explanation to make sense of this mess.

The group scene happened and the villain was caught but, by the end, you won't care much who it was...

Although I accept the fact that this film is indeed lost, I've never seen it in my life, BUT, to contradict the reviewer above who says it was destroyed in a 1931 fire, at some point in the past ten years (cant remember exactly) I saw on internet a copy of this film was being shown at one of UCLA's theater programs. If that's true, there's at least one copy in someone's private collection, out there somewhere. Never give up hope! re: the Spanish version of Dracula Universal 1931 was considered lost for decades until someone found a print copy in a Havana Cuba Warehouse early 1990s, it's now restored and widely available! Keep hoping and keep searching: You'd be surprised where these "losties" turn up!

The only version of "Charlie Chan Carries On" I've found is one on Youtube which stars Manuel Arbó and is called Eran Trece. It is labeled on Youtube as starring Warner Oland, but Mr. Oland is not in this version.