AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

csteidler Midway through this Chesterfield mystery, I found myself wondering: Is this plot awfully complex, or just awfully muddled? A suicide that is a murder; a stolen letter; an old photo in an album; odd family relations and relationships….Various characters guard strange secrets of the past and present. But I'm still not sure how much sense it makes.Three male leads are at the center of the story. Charles Starrett is of course the rather upright and dashing young student whose roommate is bumped off in the film's opening moments. Starrett immediately calls for assistance from his criminologist father, played by Robert Warwick in the best Holmesian style. It seems like a promising setup—a father-son team parsing clues, nabbing bad guys. But, for me at least, Starrett's character came across as overly deferential and Warwick's as annoyingly smug. Third-billed is the great Edward Van Sloan as a professor (naturally) interested in the parties involved; his character is darkly appealing but, alas, not on screen often enough.Overall, it's not a bad film, exactly, but I just couldn't feel it gain any momentum. The comic relief supplied by the moronic sheriff and his deputy is rather lame, and the rest of the cast seem to take things altogether too seriously. And there's one large red herring that would have added intrigue had it been a "real" clue....Anyway, early practice, I guess, for director Charles Lamont, who would go on to bigger and better and less serious things.

kidboots An excellent cast and a very intriguing finish lift this film out of the usual poverty row sludge. It was a Chesterfield production but was filmed at Universal studio so it had a more polished look. Edward Van Sloan's imposing presence was put to good use in many a programmer mystery. While often a kindly doctor (or professor) he also popped up as a surprise villain in quite a few who done its.Student Ken Harris (Charles Starrett) gets a call from his father (Robert Warwick) to meet up with him in a nearby town. Ken is at a Victory party for Cornwall College Football team. Jean (Marion Shilling) wants to go with him but her chaperone, Miss Lottie Case (Helen Jerome Eddy) declines the invitation, as does Jean's brother, Byron. On the trip back his father voices his disapproval of his friendship with Byron. The next morning Ken awakens to find Byron has committed suicide - or so everyone thinks. Ken's father is an amateur criminologist and quickly discounts that theory. The doctor's examination finds that he was dead before the rope went around his neck. Jean is then questioned about her movements that night - she says she went to bed early but Ken's dad saw her at his hotel about 2 am. Sam, another boy, knows who visited Byron's room that night but before he can talk to Ken he, too, is murdered. Byron's murder was committed for money - he was due to come into a large inheritance on his birthday which is today!!! A third boy is then killed, John Mesereux, who bore an uncanny resemblance to Byron (they are both played by the same actor - James Bush). The script, was quite complex and the ending was a surprise. Ken's father found the solution had to do with a family scandal that only Byron's mother (Doris Lloyd) knew about. John was Byron's half brother, who the mother placed with a French family, hoping to put the shame behind her.Charles Starrett had a mammoth career - as a cowboy!! At the start he was often in society dramas but in 1936 he signed with Columbia and found everlasting fame as the Durango Kid. Marion Shilling was a lovely actress who started out in an early musical ("Lord Byron of Broadway" (1930)) but by the time she made "A Shot in the Dark" she was well entrenched in westerns. Eddie Tamblyn, who was the father of Russ Tamblyn, played one of the college boys.Recommended.

robert-temple-1 This is an entertaining murder mystery of the mid-1930s made on a budget so small it would fit in a child's pocket. The lack of production values and largely unknown cast do not however detract from the appeal of this unpretentious offering, for those who like creaky old mystery films and enjoy seeing the manners and mores of a bygone era. The only performance which really stands out is by Robert Warwick, who was a cut above the rest and does superbly well, old trooper and charmer that he was. The plot outline given for this film at the moment is entirely wrong, is obviously that of another film, and should be replaced, as this film is not about people in a room being murdered. It is set on a university campus, though no classrooms come into it, and it is all about someone inheriting when he turns 21 and whether he hangs himself or not. Some novel twists are introduced, an unusual murder weapon appears, and there are some far-fetched solutions. But it is all good fun for those who are not fussy. in other words, people who just like a good mystery film and do not demand modern stars, big budgets, car chases, and exploding buildings.

dbborroughs While at a party at his college campus Ken Harris gets a call from his dad saying that he's nearby and would like to see him. Ken goes that night to pick up his dad and bring him back to stay in his dorm room. Ken sends his dad up to the room while he parks the car. When Ken arrives at his room he finds that the door is locked and neither his dad nor his roommate will answer the knocks. Ken then crashes for the night in a downstairs friends room. In the morning Ken is awoken by a banging outside. It seems that Ken's roommate has committed suicide by hanging himself out the window. It quickly transpires that what appeared to be suicide was in fact murder and the murderer is still on the prowl.This is a solid little mystery that unfolds in such away as to keep you glued to the screen wondering whats going to happen next. The investigation, nominally headed by Ken's dad moves along at a good clip and in a logical progression with events, including more murders, coming out of what is revealed in the story. Each clue leads to something else which leads to something else. This is one of the few times that you can feel the source novel actually working well with in the frame work of a 60 minute movie, and where the compression of the story doesn't lead to a moment or two where something seems to come completely out of left field. The film is also unique in that contrary to most mysteries of the period (or mysteries period) the local cops are not buffoons. While they admit that murder is beyond them (the deputy says about all they're used to is speeders) they do make a go of investigating the crime and acquit themselves nicely.As good as the film is its not perfect. The pacing is a tad slow since the film is has a great deal of talk (though this is not a bad thing). There is one moment where the scenes seem to have been placed out of order with Ken's dad talking about working with the police and in the next scene has a conversation with the police about working with them. The film's main sin is that while we get all of the required information there are times where characters and situations get the short shrift. There are times when I felt we could have known a character more or that perhaps they could have added a scene that lead to something (the discovery of the murder weapon for example). Still this is a great little flick. Worth a bag of popcorn and some soda on the couch with some friends.(Possibly as part of Murder on Campus which has some of the same cast and also set on a college campus)