Murder in Harlem

A mostly black cast, and made by an early black author, writer, director, producer. With frequent use of typed cards to move the story both forward and backward. Writer student henry glory falls for a girl while selling his book door to door. Later, when a dead body is found, the coppers are brought in to solve the mystery. And the girl's brother, a watchman, has been accused of the murder. Stars clarence brooks, andrew bishop, alec lovejoy. Written and directed by the team of micheaux and williams. Based on micheaux's own book, this describes an actual murder from 1913. Some really interesting information in the imdb trivia section. Gotta give this one high marks for script and production. Micheaux knew some of the acting wasn't top notch, and the picture quality is pretty bad, but we're lucky to have this around at all, for such an oldie film by a black writer director producer. Hopefully it can get a restoration, even if just for historical value. He was the first black producer of sound films, acc to several sources. Currently showing on roku streaming channel. Hopefully there is a better copy out there somewhere for a future restoration! For more information on micheaux, check out his entry in wikipedia dot org, or watch "oscar micheaux: the superhero of black filmmaking". Interesting guy! He really accomplished a lot, in spite of the conditions at the time.

Just watched this Oscar Micheaux-directed movie on YouTube. Based on the Mary Phagan murder case of which a Leo Frank was the accused one, a black night watchman sees a dead white woman on his rounds, and first tries to call his boss. Somehow the police find out and this particular watchman gets arrested even though he says he didn't do it. I'll stop there and just say the story goes back to before the beginning quite a few times which may get you confused as the narrative goes on if you're not paying enough attention. Some of the performances seem stiff but Alec Lovejoy, playing Lem Hawkins, seems somewhat of a comic relief when he does some of his kowtowing to his white boss or does a good acting turn expressing concern about what his possible fate might be if he doesn't follow orders. There's also some good musical numbers whenever there's a restaurant scene. The print I saw on YouTube skipped some frames but for the most part, I understood what was going on. In summary, Murder in Harlem was an okay murder mystery drama.

It's film noir from an early African American movie producer. It's set in 1932 and 1935 in Harlem, New York. It tells the story of the murder of a white woman initially blamed on an African American watchman at the factory.

In 1935 Arthur Vance (Lorenzo McClane) was one of two African American watchmen at a chemical company in Harlem. The company's director, Anthony Brisbane (Andrew S. Bishop), asks him to come to the office briefly in the afternoon but then sends him home and tells him to return at 6:00 pm. Later on his shift, Vance discovers the body of a young white woman. The police and several notes at the scene point the finger at him.

The film then flashes back to 1932, where we meet African American Henry Glory (Clarence Brooks) selling a novel he authored door-to-door. Misunderstanding the directions of a buyer who recommends a potential purchaser across the street, Henry arrives at a different door and meets and is attracted to Claudia Vance (Dorothy Van Engle), a good-looking young woman who also buys a book. Unfortunately, next door to Claudia's apartment is a place run by the Catbird (Bee Freeman), a shady operation. On a later visit, Henry is robbed and thinks Claudia has set him up.

Back in 1935, we learn that Claudia is Arthur Vance's brother. Henry Glory is now an attorney, and Claudia asks him to represent Arthur. Together, they try to solve the mystery. We meet the other watchman, Lem (Alec Lovejoy), the white woman who was murdered, and her volatile boyfriend.

"Murder in Harlem" is valuable from a history-of-film perspective. The acting is clunky, and the surviving film has a few gaps that make some scenes choppy. But the movie includes some awesome African American music of the era. Oscar Micheaux is the earliest essential African American movie producer, beginning in the silent film era.

Murder in Harlem (1934)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

A black watchman is doing his rounds when he stumbles across the body of a white woman. He calls the police but he's eventually arrested for the crime. Soon a lawyer is on his case trying to find out who was really behind the crime.

MURDER IN HARLEM is a fairly entertaining race film from director Oscar Micheaux who was of course the leading black director during this period. A lot of times the race films from this era didn't feature any white people but that's not the case here as the director was allowed a pretty good cast as well as an interesting story to work with.

Obviously, the director was still hampered with a very low-budget that didn't allow much technical advantages. The cinematography is the biggest issue here and especially during a few scenes where the camera zooms towards the actors, cuts off the top of their heads and then has to re-arrange the shot. Of course, normally you'd be asking for a second take but that wasn't possible when you're working with this type of budget.

The one big advantage this film had over several of the early sound films from Micheaux is that the performances were very good. Dorothy Van Engle gets most of the praise for her performance as the girlfriend and rightfully so as she comes across quite strong and certainly helps carry the picture. Clarence Brooks, Andrew Bishop and Alec Lovejoy all add very good support.

MURDER IN HARLEM is a very good example of a race movie that could have been so much more had it had the budget and technical advantages of what was going on in Hollywood. As it stands, the film is certainly very much worth watching but one can only think of what it could have been.

"I'm all by myself, free, sugar-cured, and single." "Hot diggity dog, right down my alley."

Oscar Micheaux's take on a real-life murder case from 1913, in which Leo Frank, a factory manager in Georgia, was convicted of the murder of a recently laid-off machine operator, Mary Phagan, who was just 13 years old (and had been working since age 10). The case was notorious in its era, especially when a mob of some of Georgia's prominent citizens kidnapped Frank from prison and lynched him, outraged over his death sentence having been commuted. He was Jewish, you see, and antisemitic sentiment ran high. Adding to the ugly event, the murderers and those around them brazenly sold postcards and souvenirs from the lynching afterwards, which apparently sold like hotcakes. Woven into the case were a couple of African American men, Newt Lee (the night watchman who discovered the body), and Jim Conley (the janitor who was convicted of being an accomplice after the fact, but who many modern day historians believe may have committed the crime).

It's certainly a fascinating case on which to base a film, and Micheaux had done so previously in his lost silent version, The Gunsaulus Mystery (1921). As disentangling the conflicting accounts of what had happened from the principals was complicated in real-life, Micheaux shows us multiple versions of the events ala Kurosawa's Rashomon. While the recounting of the murder in flashback was tediously drawn out in places, overall the storytelling was reasonably good, and helped considerably by the acting and costuming were a step above some of Micheaux's lower-budget efforts in the sound era. The women in particular were strong, starting with the sister of the night watchman (Dorothy Van Engle), who showed great range in a role that was intelligent, empowered, and sweetly seductive. Also wonderful in smaller parts were the sassy prostitute who lived next door (Bee Freeman), the wise maid (unknown, argh), and the murder victim herself (sadly also unknown).

As with many of Micheaux's other efforts, there are breaks with little musical interludes to liven things up, something I love about his films. Here, look for the tap dancer whose shiny satin outfit is set off by the dark background at 46:14, and Eunice Wilson performing "Harlem Rhythm Dance" at 53:36.

One of the things the films captures is just how much danger black people faced at the hint of being involved in violence against whites. The night watchman (Lorenzo McClane) is immediately suspected and understands the grave potential consequences early on. Later, the janitor (Alec Lovejoy) is shown to be coerced into helping cover up the crime for the factory manager (Andrew S. Bishop). While his character snivels annoyingly and even does a little jig when tossed a quarter, we feel how powerless he is, and how Micheaux sympathized with him. As part of his extended flashback while on the witness stand, he's in his boss's office with him for literally 13 minutes, which was far too long, though I did smile when he broke the fourth wall to tell the viewer "That white man's got something up his sleeve." That also mirrored the night watchman breaking the fourth wall to stare at the viewer when he finds the body early on, conveying a knowing sense of dread over the trouble he could be in as a black man standing over a dead white woman.

The fictional framing device of the author turned detective (Clarence Brooks) and his encounter with night watchman's sister in the first half hour felt weirdly glued on to this story, and was probably unnecessary. More unfortunate was making Phagan older, and inventing a vindictive, jealous boyfriend, one who says "D*** b****, you" upon finding her, and then strangles her unconscious body. It was ludicrous and muddled the story, even if I liked the little Leopold and Loeb reference slipped in by the boy who initially informed the detective about him.

The biggest sin, however, was in making Leo Frank white instead of Jewish, and by making him ultimately not guilty of anything beyond covering up the crime, finding a way of leaving out the horrific real-life lynching. Just imagine if Micheaux had confronted the antisemitism as bravely as had confronted the racism against black people, and had told the story in a simpler way, true to the facts (and accepting his view that the night watchman and janitor were both innocent). This could have been a masterpiece. Maybe he had conflicted feelings about Frank's conviction, and that's why he invented the character of the boyfriend. Regardless, I think he missed the most compelling part of the story, the lynching, sacrificing it for lesser things.