MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Hitchcoc In watching the entire Charlie Chan canon, there is one consistent issue. That is the trust that Charlie puts in his own son. There are at least five goof ups due to him; not to mention his constantly tampering with evidence and shooting off his mouth. I realize that these are part of the comic relief, but sometimes they cross over into potential danger for other people. Putting that little complaint aside, this was quite an entertaining offering. It involves sabotage once again. There is a test plane at the center of it and concern that someone may try to put a wrench in the works. The use of poison gas is front and center and the identity of a man known for his terrorism. We have the repeated business of a person in authority wanting the spotlight, but Chan is ultimately in control. I like this one.

blanche-2 Charlie Chan (Sidney Toler) is full of clever sayings in Murder in New York, from 1940. Also starring is Sen Yung as Jimmy Chan. They make a delightful team. Jimmy shows up unexpectedly while Charlie is in New York to attend a conference. He and a friend of his want to attend the World's Fair.It's not long before both Chans are on a case, when a friend of Charlie's, a detective, is murdered. Soon they're in the midst of the investigation of a sabotage ring, people being killed by poison gas pellets, an airplane crash, and plenty of suspects. The police ask Charlie to stick around and help. I don't think he gets to his conference, and Jimmy doesn't see the World's Fair, at least not yet.Donald McBride, Ricardo Cortez, Kane Richmond, Robert Lowery, Marjorie Weaver, and Joan Valerie are all featured.It's a fair mystery, enlivened by Charlie's witty dialogue. Frankly, any one of these films that has something to do with the war basically have similar plots: sabotage, missing formulas, spies, that type of thing.Sidney Toler is in good form. I have to say I prefer Warner Oland, who seemed to exhibit more energy and was more upbeat. Toler's humor comes from his sardonic line delivery and good chemistry with the actors. Both brought something special to the role.Whether the story is bad, good, confusing, whatever, with stereotypes abounding, somehow these films are always enjoyable.

MartinHafer This film is about a deadly poison that is contained in small glass globes that is used to kill. This is apparently done to hide an espionage ring intent on stealing plans for a new American bomber. Now much of this plot was repeated in other Chan films, THE JADE MASK and THE DOCKS OF NEW ORLEANS. Additionally, it was first used in MR. WONG, DETECTIVE--all had the exploding glass globes--a plot element that obviously has been overused. It was interesting in MURDER OVER NEW YORK, but by these later films it was rather passé.Fortunately, the rest of the film was fresh and the plot worked out very well--with a nifty conclusion where, of course, the culprit reveals himself. However, no plane could fly the way this one did--especially in 1940. Such extreme dives and rapid ascents were pretty silly out of this already obsolete plane.By the way, in a small role as a porter you'll see Frank Coghlan Jr.--the same actor who played Billy Batson in the CAPTAIN MARVEL serial. According to IMDb, Mr. Coughlan is 93 years old and retired from the film industry.

bensonmum2 On his way to a police convention in New York, Charlie Chan runs into an old friend from Scotland Yard, Hugh Drake. Drake, now employed by military intelligence, is hot on the heels of a saboteur named Paul Narvo. Drake asks Chan to pay him a visit while he's in New York to talk over his case. Chan makes the visit only to find that his colleague has been murdered.If you look through my reviews, it should become apparent that I'm a fan of Charlie Chan. That's why it pains me to admit that I don't really care for Murder Over New York as much as most other fans seem to. Part of the problem is the whole WWII spy angle. I've never much cared for this type of plot when watching a Chan film. I should also point out that I have the same problem with the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films that deal with WWII espionage. I'd much rather see my favorite film detectives solving murders than chasing spies.Beyond my issues with the plot, I've always had a real problem the solution to the case. There is no way that the audience could hope to play along with Chan and come up with a solution. The movie cheats far too much. There is information known only to Chan that comes up after the killer is identified. All I ask is that movies of this type play fair.From my rating, it's probably obvious that even with the problems I have with the film, I still enjoy it. I mean it's still Charlie Chan after all. Sidney Toler is as enjoyable as ever. Victor Sen Yung is as good, if not better (meaning less annoying), than in some of the previous installments. The rest of the cast is more than serviceable with a fun cameo from Shemp Howard. Like all the other Chan films, this one looks much better than it should. The cinematography is solid. Finally, considering all the problems I pointed out that I have with Murder Over New York, it's a bit odd that I've probably seen it more than any other Charlie Chan film. That's got to count for something.