Bluebeard

When not playing featured roles in classics like 'The Grapes of Wrath' John Carradine made a good living in stuff right at the bottom of the heap. These were the films in which he actually enjoyed top billing, so not surprisingly it was one of them that gave him his personal favourite of his roles; seldom off the screen and at his most dashing.

Garrulous but stylish, director Edgar G. Ulmer again makes bricks without straw; it's one drawback being Leo Erdody's unrelenting score, although it's fun to hear him constantly plunder Mussorgsky.

This telling of French serial killer Bluebeard (why was he called Bluebeard?) is notable for two reasons - one is John Carradine's haunting yet believable portrayal of a madman's psyche, and the other is for Edgar G. Ulmer's ability to create mood and even grandeur on a tiny budget. While Carradine's acting skills have never been in question, his over-the-top scene stealing in many small roles would make one approach him with caution in a leading role. However, Carradine manages to restrain himself enough to never grow old or cumbersome in the role, while simultaneously delivering his lines memorably - leading to the excellent final crescendo. The plot never tires, the direction is masterful, the ensemble acting (especially the devious art dealer Lamarte) far better than expected, and the final feeling one of satisfaction. While all of this is unadulterated praise, the movie does appear a tad bit stagey (via budgetary concerns) at times, and also moves slowly at certain points. Despite this, Bluebeard is not merely an excellent time-waster, but a movie worthy of any viewer going out, renting, and popping in.

I saw this on a cheap DVD copy, and the film may have lost a bit in translation, but time has not been kind to the soundtrack, the dialogue muffled, and the background music overbearing. Even so, this is clearly a very uneven production saved mainly by the two leads and the high notes of artistry within an overall muddy piece.

Carradine is fantastic. This is a great role for him, displaying diverse talents. He is unfortunately not directed with any subtlety, and it is clear that he is the villain from the beginning, so this becomes more a story of "will the villain be redeemed by love?" That makes this film more interesting than a standard thriller.

Jean Parker is really luminous and lovely, and is the only young female in the cast that captures the feeling of the time period. The actress playing her sister is arch and tart enough to be playing a film noir gun moll, and the other young actresses are just horrible, and horribly directed, and completely out of place in a period film... they must all have come from the local bar.

The movie has elements that make it interesting and artistic, the focus on painting style, the accomplished and beautiful puppet show. It becomes fairly clear that this movie should have been called The Puppetmaster... that kind of "just missed the mark" moment mars many elements of this film. It starts with the title BLUEBEARD, which is bandied about, but never followed up on, and continues. THE PUPPETMASTER would have been a great premise and title for this film that could have unified it.

Others have mentioned this being a poverty row film, and that does endear it to me... but being from 1944, this is not that early a film, and it is simply a grade B shocker - a precursor to Vincent Price's wonderful performances in many B thriller shockers. If this was an attempt to make a period film in film noir style, it was a mismarriage.

Still, I give it a 4 - slightly below average, because in the overview of film history, we have much higher budget films that are infinitely worse on all levels. A similar, earlier film, but much better on all levels, is John Barrymore's SVENGALI. If you liked this, you will LOVE that.

Over the years, there have been several notable versions dealing with the story of BLUEBEARD. The most critically acclaimed is Chaplin's MONSIEUR VERDOUX (1947). The most critically reviled is Richard Burton's BLUEBEARD from 1972. In 1960 George Sanders starred in BLUEBEARD'S 10 HONEYMOONS which is an effective, though hard to find, little B movie.

PRC was known as the bottom rung of the "Poverty Row" ladder. Between 1939 and 1947 they cranked out an astonishing 179 films (that's 22 movies a year) which were shot in less than a week on a budget of less than $100K. Considering that, the look of their movies was very good but after numerous 16mm copies were used on TV, the visual and sonic quality sharply declined.

Carradine (who was 38 at the time) gives his finest PRC performance as puppeteer Gaston Morell. He's low key and uses his baritone voice to great effect although that's obviously not him singing. For those who don't know, the opera is Gounod's FAUST. Director Edgar G. Ulmer loved classical music and worked it into his movies whenever he could. The other major theme comes from Mussorgsky's PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION.

In 19th century Paris, strangled woman are found floating in the Seine. The police have no clue. Could it be the kindly puppeteer who gives performances in the park? BLUEBEARD is not a horror film nor a mystery but rather a portrait of a tortured but compulsive killer whom we know will get caught in the end. It's the look of the film and Carradine's performance rather than the story that matters.... For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.

This is a decent little film but more importantly it's a chance for the star (John Carradine) to show he COULD be a leading man and not just a cheesy supporting actor. In fact, I was THRILLED to see this film because only a couple weeks ago, I saw Carradine's worst film (BILLY THE KID VERSUS Dracula). This film helped to wash away the foul stench of failure from my mind--at least temporarily.

The film is, not surprisingly, a low-budget movie. Carradine played in many of these type of films but this one is different because it is actually well written, acted and engaging. And while it is NOT going to change your life by watching it, it does deliver excellent B-movie thrills.