The Murders in the Rue Morgue

When the basic story of a film is good, you naturally want to like it. But, sometimes, about half of the way through, you realize that it hasn't lived up to expectations. Edgar Allan Poe wrote a fantastic tale, no doubts there. But this film is sadly misguided.

Several factors contribute to this. First, David Epstein's screenplay effectively rips all the subtlety out of the source material. Second, director Jeannot Szwarc makes absolutely no attempt to film this in a way that takes advantage of its low budget and venue. Finally, the casting is utterly random. Accents and nationalities are thrown together with total abandon.

In spite of all that, some the cast members manage to put in good performances. George C. Scott (as Auguste Dupin) is really excellent, with great command of his dialogue. Naturally, he is miscast, but acts as if he is in a far better film. A very young Val Kilmer (as Phillipe) is good, but has almost nothing to work with. He too, is miscast, though the main reason I originally watched this. Ian McShane is certainly entertaining, but his character has no subtlety.

After the acting, there's little to say. The only quality the film has left it owes to its source material. This might have been acceptable for an original script, but as a badly adapted story, it is simply disappointing.

The editing seems haphazard at points, either that important scenes were removed, or never filmed. Dupin's realization of the culprit is never explained, nor the contents of his newspaper ad, or any of his deductive process for that matter. Phillipe's process of discovering Adolphe's unfaithfulness is also never explained.

Finally, the intelligence of the script dips considerably by the final scenes. I won't elaborate, but they have all the brains of a 1950s horror B movie. Really weak.

RATING: 6.2 out of 10

This modest but solid mid-80s TV thriller/horror is the third film version based on Edgar Allan Poe's short story with the same bone-chilling title, but they are all very different. The oldest one, released in 1932, is a delightful contemporary Mad-Scientist movie starring Bela Lugosi. The 1971 version, featuring names like Jason Robards and Herbert Lom, is also typical for its period of release, as it's a slasher set in a flamboyant Grand-Guignol theater. This version, starring the legendary George C. Scott and upcoming young talent Val Kilmer, is perhaps the least spectacular one of the bunch, but it is the adaptation that remains the most faithful to Poe's tale.

Poe's fictional character August Dupin, elegantly depicted by Scott, was actually the first super-intelligent detective. If, during "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", the character of Dupin reminds you of immortal sleuths like Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot, do realize they were invented by their respective authors much later. At the beginning of the story, Dupin is embittered because he got forced to retire by the obnoxious Prefect of Police. Even a visit from his acolyte Philippe or the engagement of his beautiful daughter Claire can't cheer him up. When the whole of Paris is struck by fear and panic due to the indescribably gruesome murders of two women inside their house, Dupin finally considers focusing on something else than his chess board. Claire's fiancé is the police's only suspect, but Dupin quickly deducts the truth behind the murders is far more unusual.

If you read Poe's tale or seen the previous versions, the climax of "The Murders in the Rue Morgue" doesn't come as a surprise, of course, but the film nevertheless remains compelling thanks to the performances and the marvelous decors & scenery. Jeannot Szwarc, a more than competent genre director (and, moreover, French) clearly wanted the recreation of Paris at the turn of the century to be very detailed and accurate. Unfortunately, the pivotal murders occur off-screen. Probably because it's a TV-film production and/or because they are described in Poe's wicked imagination as ultimately savage. Poor us, horror fanatics, we don't get to see anything. Not even any short clips of the ripped apart corpses upon their discovery.

A detective (George C. Scott) comes out of retirement to help his daughter's fiancé (Neil Dickson) prove that he did not commit a series of murders.

I really enjoyed this film, and was surprised to see it was the only attempt to adapt the Poe tale since the 1930s (the one in the 1970s hardly counts as being remotely close to the source material). While I think some liberties were taken (my memory of the story is not perfect), it follows the general feel and does its best to keep the mystery going as long as it can.

And, indeed, that is what I enjoyed most about the film -- the mystery! How did the killer get in and out of the house? What was the motive? Why did he not want the gold coins? Even though I already knew the story, they successfully brought me along for the ride.

This is one of the classics truly brought to life. Edgar Allen Poe was one of my favorite authors and he was a true magician with the English language. This is a beautiful TV film that really did justice to one of his greatest works thanks to one of our finest American actors. George C. Scott was one of those rare breed of actors who could do everything and anything and did it!He was that good at what he did. He made any film that he was in excellent. He gave a masterful performance as the great detective Dupin in this film and Rebecca De Morney gave him excellent support as his daughter. This film really brought Paris to life and is beautiful to look at. There was an older version of this film starring Bela Lugosi that really took liberties with Poe's story and made it into a cheap horror film, they didn't do it here and that is what makes it worth watching. This was an early example of "psychological profiling" Dupin tried to match any individual into his profile of the murder and had to come up with the fact that it wasn't a human at all. It is far-fetched! but Scott makes it worth your while. Everything about this film from the musical score to the smallest supporting performances is A plus.

Considering the fine start in this film, the movie overall was a huge disappointment. Part of that great beginning was the cinematography, a real eye-grabber particularly in the first 5-10 minutes.

The story begins to drag after awhile and it wasn't worthwhile sticking with it all the way - even though I did - because the ending is very unsatisfying.

I didn't recognize Rebecca deMornay, she looked so young. Val Kilmer, too, must have been at the beginning of his career. Being a TV movie, the language was pretty tame, which was nice, but the story just didn't deliver. It's not something I would give a second look.