User reviews

Some genuinely inspired bad acting doesn't prevent 1936's "The Dark House" from showering a few sparks of real originality. Two elderly brothers and their niece reside in a mansion. They're fearful something bad will happen and they're right. Two murders take place, neither appearing to have occurred as first thought.

This is a good house murder mystery. Elsa (the very beautiful and former Miss United States, Irene Ware) is falling in love with a detective, Jim Landis (Ray Walker). Elsa regularly meets Jim at retired detective Paul Bernard's house (he's played by Burton Churchill). Elsa's putative guardians, her uncles, don't like this developing match one bit. Of course their time together is as chaste as many moviegoers (and the moralistic censor-type folks) demanded.

One death having led to another, the two sleuths wisely combine forces to find the killer and figure out why the murders occurred in the first place. The plot is a bit tricky. Adding to the mystery is the possible role of Elsa's aunt, Mrs. Tallman. Here is a real treat-she's Hedda Hopper, once dubbed the "Queen of the Quickies," a woman who made a number of forgettable features before discovering that the printed word was mightier than fleeting celluloid images. For decades she and Louella Parsons battled for scoops as Hollywood's prime, incendiary gossip columnists.

Walker is the really weak actor here. He performs with a deadening numbness that made me wish he was the killer who would be executed on-screen. But his interaction with the retired senior cop is both interesting and dramatically effective.

Charles Lamont, born in Russia, was a veteran director who turned out many "B" flicks and some better comedies during a very long career (he did a number of the Abbott and Costello and Ma and Pa Kettle flicks). He's famously forgotten today for such films as the deservedly rarely viewed "I Was a Shoplifter" that brought young Tony Curtis to the screen. In "The Dark Hour" he crafted an interesting murder mystery. If you can get it as I did for $4.99 on DVD (thanks again, Alpha Video) it's worth your time just to see Hedda Hopper disporting herself as a grand dame but maybe I'm just dating myself.

6/10

A quick run-through of most of the plot suggests that this whodunit film might be an Agatha Christie creation, as complicated as the story is. There are five to seven suspects, depending on whom you count. And the murder occurs in the library of a large house. But though the underlying premise is okay, "The Dark Hour" is no Agatha Christie creation. Two brothers live together along with their various servants. A couple of other suspects live close by, together with a retired detective. A building fire figures prominently in the plot.

It took two viewings to make sense out of the story. In the end it does all come together, though there is some conveniently coincidental timing in certain plot points. The main reason to watch the film is the ending. My guess as to the identity of the murderer was dead wrong. So the ending was a pleasant surprise, and I was able to go back and see the subtle clues that I missed. Near the end a major twist further adds to the film's enjoyment. Spine-tingling suspense erupts near the climax as an unknown person shines a flashlight into a darkened bedroom, and then fires a shot.

Almost all the scenes take place on indoor sets, implying that this was a low-budget film. Production design is minimal. I'm constantly amazed at how old houses back in those days were built with such high ceilings, making rooms look cavernous. B&W lighting has a slight noir effect. The camera is largely static. Very little music occurs during the film, but I like the score during the opening credits. Sound tends to be scratchy and overall sound quality is poor, which makes dialogue hard to understand in a few spots. Acting is acceptable, my favorite performance being the actor who plays blustery Mr. Bernard.

It's not the best whodunit out there by any means. The script could have been improved to enhance clarity. And production values are weak. Still, it's not a bad movie. The final twenty minutes or so are quite good, and render "The Dark Hour" worth at least a one-time viewing.

This mystery film is unusual is that there are two quite different (old & retired vs. young & active on the police force) detectives on the case, & they are both competent & work well together. Usually, Hollywood would be expected to have at least one of them take the comic element, but here they are both serious & both effective! Aside from trying to guess "who done it?," the viewer also finds him/herself wondering which of the two detectives will solve the case first, & this aspect adds to the excitement. There are plenty of suspects here, & the film moves along briskly. Berton Churchill is especially good as the older detective, & reminds me of a smaller version of the great Sydney Greenstreet. I rate this 8/10.

Chesterfield does it again--a tidy whodunit that, surprisingly, holds up pretty well despite its age. The race between the two detectives is quite droll and interesting; it shows, once again, that the fundamental lesson of integration between the old and the new still applies--regardless of decade and/or century. Of course, as the film was lensed nearly 70 years ago, some of the technical aspects of the plot do not age well. And, unless I missed something, I would have preferred a little more detail into the motive for the crime. Despite these minor quibbles, it was a relatively enjoyable 71 minutes, especially when Hedda Hopper was chewing up the scenery.l

The plot has two reclusive old men keeping a watchful eye on their affairs they barely allow their niece to go out and visit a retired detective living next door. The woman is also visiting an active police detective and friend to the retired detective. When one of the uncles is murdered the young detective and retired detective join forces to solve the crime.

The suspect pool is too shallow to sustain this films 70 minutes and I would love to think that you can cut 20 minutes out of this and get a decent thriller, but I don't think its possible since this movie goes round and round dropping just enough clues and clever dialog in the interest of solving the crime that you really can't cut much. It would be a better movie if it simply got on with it instead of stopping for long scenes of discussion that seem more designed to fill out the running time rather than economically tell the story. Frankly I found myself hitting the fast forward in order to just have the movie move at a reasonable speed, which is a shame since this film is filled with tons of pithy dialog between all of the characters that I never heard.

Recommended for those with patience.

(Still any movie where the butler named Foot and played by great character actor EE Clive can't be all bad)

Henry Carson is found dead slumped over his desk in the library. Because of the slightness of the wound and the lack of bleeding there is a mystery about the way he has been murdered. Henry had been a curmudgeon and it's only his brother Charles who shows any real signs of grief over his death. And he seems to be concerned that he may be next to die in such a way.

There are two investigators on the case. The old experienced hand who is actually retired and the young one who shows how green he is or at least that's how the elder one thinks of him. Both have an interest in the Carson household chiefly through their associations with Elsa who is heir and niece to the Carson brothers. Landis the younger investigator is engaged to her. The older investigator Bernard has also an interest in George Carson and his new butler Foot as he has been investigating them both for years.

I don't think I've ever been confronted by so many clues as I was in this whodunit. It was puzzling when trying to piece all of them together into one cohesive idea of how and why the murders were committed. The suspects include a chemist who is experimenting on poison gas and an intruder who turns out to have a pathetic tale to tell and just about everybody else in the story. There is an impression that some characters are covering up for other characters. And there is an air of a slightly unusual grayness to the humor and the ending is certainly unconventional.

A pair of detectives investigate the murder of a reclusive millionaire. A run-of-the-mill low-budget mystery in which people talk and talk and talk about all the things the camera can't afford to show us. There's no shortage of suspects, and a lot of convoluted theorising, which is about exciting as it sounds. Strangely, the way the final reel plays out suggests that both of the detectives are prepared to conceal the identify of who they mistakenly believe to be the killer for personal reasons. At least Irene Ware is easy on the eye...

This is a nice Who-Done-It of the time when movies did not rely on a bunch of background spooky music.

The movie is based on a novel by Sinclair Gluck; good luck finding the novel.

Some of the co-stars are Irene Ware, Hobart Bosworth, Hedda Hopper, and E. E. Clive.

A millionaire Henry Carson William V. Mong has been found dispatched with some mysterious clues. Detective Jim Landis (Ray Walker), who has this thing for Henry's daughter, is called in to investigate; he, in turn, requests the assistance of former investigator Paul Bernard (Berton Churchill.) Naturally, everyone on the estate and some mysterious peeping Tom is suspect.

Strikingly beautiful Irene Ware lives with her two wealthy, disagreeable uncles, who are inexplicably living in fear for their lives. She is befriended by a retired detective neighbor and romanced by an active detective. When one of the uncles is murdered the detectives join forces to solve the crime. Benton Churchill is the standout in the cast as the believably tough, smart, and experienced detective. A good cast executes a well-acted whodunit with lots of twists and turns. What is unique and quite entertaining is watching the interaction between the two detectives as they hypothesize various scenarios based on newly discovered facts. This also has an excellent ending. The movie I watched was on Prime and is a terrible copy. This is worth searching out and I feel would have gotten a better rating from me if I had seen a better copy of the movie.

If you enjoy old mystery movies and like your mystery with a little light humor, this film will please you. There are plenty of unusual characters and twists to the story that will keep you amused if not confused. The characters are well played and the story is quite intriguing. Unlike most of today's movies that rely on special effects, this film lets the story and characters set up the mood for the film, and by doing so sets up some unexpected situations such as two detectives trying to solve the mystery. One is an older fellow, the other younger. Instead of teaming together, they work independently for the most part and compare notes, each feeling the other out. There is the usual romantic interests as well, and all ingredients are made to blend pretty well. There is indeed a lot going on in this old film , as you will see.

The only big name i recognize in here is Hedda Hopper, who had started with bit parts in the silent films, become pretty well known years later, and then started her own "woman about town" gossip column, now playing herself in later films. (Gotta see he in "The Women" !) In "Dark Hour", two old timers are watching over their neice "Elsa", played by Irene Ware. ( Ware was apparently Miss United States 1926. ) Elsa will inherit EVERYTHING when the uncles go, so they are concerned that she might some bad decisions... and then... something TERRIBLE happens... and everyone tries to figure out who dunnit! Picture and sound quality are pretty turrible... but it's not so bad. Based on a novel by Sinclair Gluck.. couldn't find any info about him; this seems to be the only thing of his made into a film. Directed by Charles Lamont. He had been around in silents since the 1920s, writing and directing. Worked with some of the biggies in comedy and drama. Dark Hour is "okay"... it's just like every single "thin man", or any who-dunnit ever written. nothing in the middle really happens until the last five minutes when everything comes together. It's not so bad.

"But I didn't do it." "What! Then who the heck did?" The Dark Hour keeps viewers—and detectives—guessing until the final moment. A truly puzzling mystery combined with some juicy performances make this quite a nifty little hour of fun.

Berton Churchill as the retired detective—respectfully requested by his younger counterpart Ray Walker to assist on the case—is wonderfully nimble-minded and yet perhaps suspicious. Irene Ware is earnest and intelligent as the niece of rich old uncles in whose house the mystery develops—but she's obviously hiding something. Hedda Hopper bustles in occasionally with energy and smarts as an aunt who seems to know plenty but isn't saying just what.

Not a fancy movie, but one that's paced just about right: The action certainly moves along quickly, but care is taken to allow us time to notice which characters are thinking a bit more than they're saying. Irene Ware's character, for example, is given an extra moment of screen time here and there—just enough of an extra glance for us in the audience to see quite clearly that she's holding something back. Again, it's not fancy or subtle—but it does show that director Charles Lamont was paying attention.

The dialog is crisp enough; the actors move with energy. Hopper and Churchill, in particular, appear to enjoy themselves immensely in their roles.

My only complaint is that the sound is badly chopped up in the version I saw. Lines are dropped and cut into pieces (including in a couple of key moments!). I can only assume that the print from which this came had been shown about a hundred times and broken and been spliced in about that many places. Oh, well—I can live with that. Otherwise: a top-notch B mystery.