The Criminal Within

I almost gave up on this no-budget whodunit in the first 10 minutes. It was dull, flat, blandly staged and indifferently acted. Then Iris Adrian breezed into the room as a flirtatious gold digger who might as well have been wearing a neon sign saying "trouble."

Adrian's scenes were genuinely engaging, and if she'd had more screen time that alone could have made this movie worth watching. But she doesn't have that many scenes, and the dull script and convoluted, shapeless mystery had nothing else to recommend it.

By the way - this movie has two titles "Murder at Glen Athol" and "The Criminal Within" and neither makes much sense. No one ever talks about glen Athol and the criminal within doesn't make any sense in the context of the movie - they were clearly just trying to come up with a title that would intrigue people.

Anyway, in spite of Adrian's performance I can't recommend this movie.

A famous detective gets invited to a swanky party at an elegant mansion, but finds himself searching for a killer after a murder occurs at the mansion.

A few people are murdered, starting with gaily amoral Muriel Randall (Iris Adrian), who has divorced one elderly husband (he becomes corpse number two), driven a younger second husband to insanity (he ends up with Rigor Mortis, too) and advancing vampishly on his younger brother - apart from her flings, she is using her inside-knowledge of a gangland rub-out to extort booze and cash from local racketeer Gus Colleti (Noel Madison).

When Muriel turns up stabbed in bed, it's no wonder that everyone is suspect - and Bill is especially keen on proving that the pretty Jane Maxwell (Irene Ware), first wife of the second husband, didn't do it. Cause he fancies her ...

Murder at Glen Athol is a wellcrafted mystery with interesting suspects and a clever detective who is well played by John Miljan- his sidekick isn't too annoying as he provides some humour. This mystery can be taxing in a sense you have to pay close attention in terms of suspects or you get lost (I found myself rewinding a few times). However, it's an engaging film with good acting, breezy energy and a good finale that had my brain doing somersaults to keep up with the hero's explanation of who was the murderer, and his stiff "chicken" was the trigger.

"Murder at Glen Athol" is a B-movie with a limited budget and mostly no-name stars. John Miljan stars in the film and he has a face you might recognize--he played bad guys in quite a few Bs. He was a pretty good actor and his lovely voice sounded a lot like a combination of Otto Kruger's and Charles Butterworth's--but he never became a big star. Instead, he found steady work in lower-budget films. Here in this film, however, it's one of those times where he actually got to play the hero--and he did a nice job of it.

Miljan plays a famous detective who is on vacation. And, like most famous factional detectives (such as Charlie Chan and Jessica Fletcher), a vacation means someone will get murdered and this cop will get called in to help the locals solve the crime. This is just one of those screen clichés you'll just need to accept without questioning.

So why did I like it enough to give it a 7 (which is a very high score for a B)? Well, the acting and production values were surprisingly good, the murder mystery and how Miljan's character dealt with the murders was unique and I liked the sidekick--who, though a bit dumb, wasn't THAT dumb and often was quite handy--something that you couldn't say about most detective sidekicks (such as Birmingham Brown or Dr. Watson). All in all, an enjoyable film that managed to be a bit better than you'd expect. And, considering you can download it free from the link on IMDb, that's plenty of reason to see it.

The title is a misleading in that the location is never mentioned.

That said this is the story of a great detective on vacation and attempting to write his memoirs. His sidekick has alerted the neighbors that he is in neighborhood and so they show up to see the great detective in person. In short order he finds himself invited to a party where the dynamics of the people there make the dysfunctional families on soaps seem normal. That night after the party is over two shots are heard in the night, and three people are found dead...

This is a good little thriller that should have been longer than the 67 minutes it runs. Too much time is spent in the beginning being funny, although you do get to know and like the two detectives better then if you were just dropped into the middle of things. And the end is rushed just a tad.

The cast of characters is very interesting if a bit over loaded with names and faces, its too many in too short a time. The mystery is interesting simply because even if you get part of it you won't get it all.

This is the sort of movie thats hard to write about in that its neither fish nor fowl. Certainly its a murder mystery but there is so much else going on in it, comedy, soap opera, romance crime drama that its hard to know whats what and which is which. As I said its too short for its 67 minutes.

This is part of a series of films called The Crime Club, which were nominally based on a best selling mystery novel series and which, as a film series, bounced between two or three studios. My understanding is that this was a good series of films that never varied in quality, either good or bad, other than being very watchable. From this entry its certainly a series I would try to pick up if I could.

If you like good little thrillers, especially ones that try, but not always succeed at being more than run of the mill, then search this out. And even if you don't search it out, but run across it by all means do watch it since you will enjoy it.

Reuben Marshall plays a detective on vacation in a ritzy suburb writing about his exploits when invited to a party where death visits a couple of the guests. Marshall, his Irish sidekick in tow, discovers who the culprit is in this very interesting little mystery dealing with an above-average mystery plot. The story has several red herrings laced into it and is compelling for its age and era. The acting is nothing spectacular, but everyone concerned does a workmanlike job. There is also a generous dose of humour within the mystery. Some of the characterizations are very one-dimensional, yet, as a whole, the picture is generally well-crafted. I think it is odd that the film does not have a little more noteriety as it is a much better film than many mysteries of the same period.