User reviews

If you can't recognise who that is chuckling at the start and later on you shouldn't be watching this film in the first place, since you've probably also never seen any of the screen versions of Edgar Wallace's 'The Ringer' (such as 'The Gaunt Stranger', which opened just a few months later).

Although billed sixth, Alistair Sim has a showy part impersonating a clergyman; and its ironic to see a relatively young Bernard Lee spending most of the film pretending to be sozzled, since by the time he'd become well-known as 'M' in the James Bond films he was required to pretend that he wasn't. (Ditto Wilfrid Lawson, who even then visibly has to make an effort simply to walk in a straight line.)

The ending is an absolute riot!!

This is what I expect is a typical Edgar Wallace plot with its old house (former Abbey) replete with secret passageways, a hooded stranger and things that go bump in the night. Three crooks steal a fortune in gold coins; one of the thieves named O'Shea rats on the other two – "Soapy" Marx played by Sim and Joe Connor (Henry Oscar). Marx and Connor are sent to prison for ten years and vow to get even with O'Shea. It is now ten years later and the scene shifts to a former Abbey turned into a boardinghouse by its owner, Colonel Redmayne (Arthur Wontner). The thing is Redmayne keeps turning away potential boarders. So there are only three – a ditsy Mrs. Elvery who claims to be "psychic" and her unattractive daughter and a Mr. Goodman. Unexpectedly, Redmayne's daughter returns home after a long absence. The movie is slow slogging for the next several minutes as the "psychic" prattles on about noises and seeing a hooded creature (also seen by the daughter). Then murders start happening…. As annoying as Mrs. Elvery is, she does have a couple of good lines. At one point she tells the Detective that she will find out the truth even if it's the death of her. She pauses and then says something like "Oh, I wish I hadn't said that." The real kudos in this movie go to Sim with his daffy cleric routine and Lee with his comic drunk routine. Both actors were a delight to watch and they made the movie one to watch again.

Three men steal £300,000 in gold by staging a robbery. Two of them are caught and sentenced to 10 years each in prison while the criminal mastermind escapes with the fortune. Upon their release both men seek their share. From the pen of Edgar Wallace this is a crime thriller/drama but with added horror elements, the latter being what attracted me to watching it. Much of the film takes place at creaky Monk's Hall Priory. There is a monks tomb in the grounds, at night organ music can be heard and a ghostly, hooded figure seen. Insanity also plays a part. It is rather delightfully acted and fans of 1930's movies won't be disappointed. Through in some humour, a decent final reveal and a dash of romance and you get a fairly enjoyable 70 minutes.

It is the wit and self-mockery of this splendid little minor comedy-thriller that lifts it out of the pack of 30s quota quickies. A very standard Edgar Wallace plot, with a mysterious hidden mastermind, a ghostly monk, a damsel in distress and a houseful of assorted weirdies is turned into a beautifully characterised and choreographed ballet of murder with a nick o' time climax. Another comment complains about the clichés - of course it is clichéd, but that is the point, it is playing with them.

What brings this to life are the splendid performances. Linden Travers as the spooked girl, John Turnbull as ever the solid copper, Arthur Wontner as the tortured father (or 'deddeh', as his daughter calls him), and Iris Hoey as the psychic lady of a 'certain age' are all on good form. Richard 'Stinker' Murdoch in his second proper film catches the eye and steals all his scenes despite only being there to serve a running gag; it is obvious he will become a star. Wilfred Lawson (top-billed and shortly to achieve immortality as Mr Doolittle in Leslie Howard's Pygmalion) serves up several slices of lovely ripe ham.

But the stars of the show are obvious. A brilliant comedy drunk act by Bernard Lee gives a hint of his range, which may not be obvious to those familiar only with his work in the Bond films. But Alistair Sim takes over every film in which he features, and this is no exception. As the master of disguise Soapy Marks, he manages to play the gamut from the driven revenge maniac to the the fluffy comedy vicar. He could make you laugh out loud at the beginning of a scene, and send a shiver up your spine at the end of it.

People who complain about the predictability of this film miss the quality. Just as with a sonnet you can expect a number of lines and syllables, and some occasional tweaking of the language to fit, so you can expect style and structure fitting a well rehearsed pattern. You have the gothic mansion, a former monastery, with secret doors and passages, an organ playing in the night (no one operating the bellows) and a detached but eerie chapel. The place is a guest house/ private house with a staff including Irene Handel as kitchen maid, Kathleen Harrison as the house maid playing the sorts of parts they played for decades. There is a lost £300,000 in stolen gold, two gaolbirds who, after ten years, waaant to recover it, and get the organiser of the gang who betrayed them. Star turns are Alistair Sim as a crook disguised as a dotty vicar, and James Bond's 'M' as a serial drunk. A number of murders and the melodramatic denouement complete the early 20th century stage play, transferred to film. The style of acting reminds us that several of the performers were already on stage when Victoria died, and the elocution and style were necessary to project across large audiences before sound films came along. The formula for a stage play is all there, including the expected 'crisis'. Worth a watch.

TheSTORY-1.25

Right from the opening, the double-cross and the twists start to affect our criminal anti-heroes. After stealing a fortune in gold the architect of the whole plan sets up his gang of reprobates to take the fall, while he disappears with the ill-gotten gains. Two are imprisoned for ten years. As the world passes them by outside of their cells they can only dream of the gold and their revenge. The third gang-member makes a getaway but spends the rest of the time searching for the loot and the double-crosser.

This is the section where the film could have been made stronger. Had we seen a little of the search this would have anchored the story more firmly in the minds of the audience. However, we skip through the ten years and then straight into the thick of things. Unfortunately, this doesn't give us time to relate to the crooks, who I assume we are meant to be rooting for. But thanks to clever casting this is made nearly unnecessary. The thing I don't like though is the mastermind. When you see the reveal you'll probably think, how could he have pulled it off? and, why? The answers make little sense in context to the ending.

theDIRECTION

Richard Bird is a good director. There are some nice shots and scenes. Bird is of the "Frame Your Cast Perfectly" class. In practically every shot the actors and actresses working in the scene are perfectly centred. This works well in this style of film.

Having said that the lack of variety does hinder the film slightly. Some artistic shooting would have enhanced the viewing for the audience, as well as setting a moodier atmosphere, of which there's very little. This would have worked especially well in the climax had Bird used a few more shadows.

theTEMPO-1

Bird stays at the same pace as he does filming style. It's not a bad thing as this average speed works well with this style of filming - tell it as it's told. But, once again, variety would have helped to strengthen the story.

theACTING-0.75

This is where the clever casting works. Having superb actors such as Alastair Simm, Henry Oscar, and Bernard Lee raises the film. The shame is the rest of the cast aren't up to their calibre. The worst being the leading lady who is so wooden she chops down all the good work the others have done.

theGRATIFICATION

Though this a below-average thriller that is lacking in atmosphere and a well-structured story, I found myself enjoying the movie. This was down to the aforementioned actors and the climax. I won't watch this again, but I am glad I watched it.

If this is on the telly and you've got nothing else to watch, then you could do worse than give it a look-see. Especially if you're and Alastair Sim fan or like old black and white thrillers.

theSCORE-4.75

Check out my thriller list-come-chart, The Game Is Afoot, to see where this film ranks.

As to whom can roll their eyes most.This is a typical Edgar Eallace thriller with a rather predictable plot and climax.A good cast helps make this entertaining.

Criminals carry out a robbery of an armoured van but two of the gang are betrayed by the mastermind. On their release after ten years in prison they search for the man who betrayed them.

Based on a play by Edgar Wallace, and despite a reasonable cast, this film fails to meet expectations. Its sole redeeming feature is in the appearance of Alastair Sim but this falls well short of his later work.

This is the story of a spectacular gold coin robbery carried off by three men. Once its over, the mastermind, a man named O'Shea, turns his pals in and they go to prison vowing to get revenge when they get out. Ten years later they get out and go looking for O'Shea, and the gold, which has never turned up. At this point the film shifts gears to the happenings in and around an old monastery, now turned into a semi-boarding house. Strange people begin showing up, ghostly happenings begin occurring and finally people begin dying...

From the pen of Edgar Wallace comes a fantastical little murder mystery that's very witty and breezy and a great deal of fun. Certainly its better than the long series of German films from the 1960's that strung Wallace's books together to make a continuing series by never having the villain caught, who became a pseudo-Mabuse super villain.

While the mystery is good, the best part of this film is the acting. What a joy it is to see Bernard Lee, years before Bond, playing a lead. You really get the sense of what his range was. There's Arthur Wontner who several years earlier had played Sherlock Holmes. And of course Alastair Sim bringing a smile to your face as one of the crooks. There are others in the cast, all of which you've probably seen before but never knew their names, and who are equally good.

This is a movie to seek out on DVD, since its one that will certainly give you a good night's entertainment.

I'm spending a lot of time with 1930's mysteries. This one just isn't worth your time. It has some interesting plot features: the double-blind villain and a double-blind detective. But it has some tedious elements: the spooky mansion with secret doors, the hooded villain, carefully shrouded until the end, too much talk among and to "inspectors," and the not very funny comic relief in the biddy who thinks she knows all. And it spends an inordinate percentage of our patience on the setup and prior events.

You'll guess all the secrets as soon as they are posed.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

The Terror (1938)

** (out of 4)

Three thieves rob a shipment of gold and two of them are sent to prison for a decade. After the two are released they travel to a creepy old house to track down the man who turned them in and hope to find some of the treasure.

Edgar Wallace wrote the play that this here is based on. There are a couple interesting things in THE TERROR but sadly it's another British film that has way too much talk and boring talk at that. The main reason most people are going to want to watch this is because of the actors who appear here. You've got Bernard Lee from James Bond fame playing a drunk and Alastair Sim playing one of the convicts. Sherlock Holmes fans will also note Arthur Wontner in the cast.

The actual story is decent but there's no question that this "old dark house" movie just runs way too slow for its own good and even at just 70 minutes it feels rather long. It doesn't help that the majority of the dialogue is just downright boring and there's really no energy from the direction. The cast and genre might attract some to THE TERROR but there's certainly much better out there.