UnowPriceless
hyped garbage
Ceticultsot
Beautiful, moving film.
Janis
One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.
Fleur
Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.
dsayne
This review is short and so is this movie. SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! Here is my synopsis: "You're the Catman!" "No, I'm not." (Insert gratuitous cat scene here.) "You're the Catman!" "No! I'm not!" "Meow" "I'm the Catman!" "No, you're not." "Yes, I am!" "No, You're not!" "Meow!" "Let's have dinner." "He's the Catman! Get him!" (Insert gratuitous Roy Rogers fight scene here.) "I'm hiding the Catman in my bedroom." "I'm Catman." "Are you? Is he?" "He is not. Is he?" (Insert gratuitous Gene Autry chase scene here.) "I'm the Catman!" "Surely you're not! Maybe he is!" "Meow" "No! Getaway!" "He was the Catman!" "Was not." THE END. A REPUBLIC PICTURE.
MARIO GAUCI
Savage murders at turn-of-the-century Paris are attributed to a popular crime author who suffers from bouts of amnesia. Preposterous Poverty Row riff on both WEREWOLF OF London (1935) and CAT PEOPLE (1942), disguising its singular lack of purpose under indifferent period detail. Prolific director Selander is best-known for a spate of Western programmers and, if anything, this routine affair only serves to prove that his earlier atmospheric foray into the fantasy genre, THE VAMPIRE'S GHOST (1945), was a mere fluke; having said that, the film under review does feature a bar-room brawl (involving a young Anthony Caruso and John Dehner) and a carriage assault that seem to come straight out of a cowboy movie! The troubled hero (Carl Esmond) is a bore and no sparring partner for Inspector Gerald Mohr; the root of and the reason behind the transformations are far-fetched even for the genre…and you have not lived until you have seen ubiquitous comedy foil Douglass Dumbrille decked out in the hirsute titular 'costume'!
gavin6942
Are mysterious killings in Paris of 1896 the work of man or monster?The best thing I can say about this film is that it has an awesomely choreographed fight in a restaurant, with plenty of flips and tables breaking. The waiter getting knocked over with a full tray (even though there are no customers, so who is the food for?).Hard to say if this is a horror film. Netflix seems to think so, and I guess the idea of a half-man, half-cat killing people is sort of horror. But it is really pretty tame. We could say it is an early serial killer film with a population getting terrorized, but whether or not it is horror is just a tough call.This warrants a second viewing.
mord39
I came across a copy of this rarely-seen film and I can safely say it's better off never seen. Some films just are too damned dull and uneventful for their own good, and this is one of the best examples of an uninvolving movie where nothing occurs.If you have ever seen bores like DEVIL BAT'S DAUGHTER, SCARED TO DEATH, THE UNDYING MONSTER, or SHE-WOLF OF LONDON (all from the 1940s) you'll know what to expect...or should I say what NOT to expect? The only worthy mention is Lenore Aubert (from ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN) on hand as the leading lady.The monster isn't seen until the very end, and you'll have given up long before that anyway. At 60 minutes or so, this feels like 60 YEARS.
