Bride of Frankenstein - 1935

Our experiment with the Universal Monsters continues with Bride of Frankenstein. Last we saw, the monster was torched in the mill.

We begin the film at the site of the fire. The overly confident burgomaster declares the scene to be safe and disperses the crowd. It turns out that was a bad idea, since there's a flooded basement under the mill, and the monster is hanging out down there. He kills the parents of the girl from the original film and then heads off.

While he's out learning English with a religious, musical hermit, another doctor is doing his best to recreate Frankenstein's experiment. So far, the doctor has had success on a "smaller" scale. He's made tiny people. Why? I really don't know. Frankenstein is fine somehow after taking that header off the top of the mill, and the new doctor is not above using blackmail to make Frankenstein help him create life.

This movie was bad. I hated it for a number of reasons. There were so many unanswered questions that bother me. On the plus side, I enjoyed Karloff's performance. Again, I'm on the side of the monster, and he gets the short end of the stick again. Also, we were robbed of the bride. By that I mean they spent all that time hyping her up, and we saw her for like three minutes. And Frankenstein was a whiny man. Am I supposed to root for him? Nope. And again, the monster dies.

I'm going to add some of my questions under the poster. There was so much weird stuff, and I would like these more if the monster would get some justice.

How did Dr. Frankenstein live after falling off the top of the mill?

Why did Dr. Pretorius make a bunch of small people? And how did he grow them? He mentioned seeds, but then the movie just moved on. I didn't!

What was the purpose of the small people? And why did he make so many? He made an archbishop, but there's no flock for him. And why make a dancer and put her in a jar?

Why didn't they address the fact that the murders around the village were actually Dr. Pretorius and not the monster?

Why does the bride move her head like a bird?

Is there a reason they couldn't give these two some time to "get to know each other"?

Why do they keep killing the monster?! He's the best part! 

*I had a lot more questions, but these were the ones that irritated me the most.

Lawrence of Arabia - 1962

I've had this one sitting on the shelf for quite a while. It's not that I haven't been wanting to see it, but the 3 hour and 42 minute runtime is a bit intimidating. A few years ago, I tried to read Pillars of Wisdom, Lawrence's book, but I was reading it at a time when it wasn't keeping my interest. Maybe I'll try again in the future.

This is a well-known epic. Lawrence was a British officer who brought Arab tribes together to fight the Turks during WWI. Lawrence becomes one of them but not deep down. He has an ego the size of the trains he's derailing, and he's got the courage to back it up.

I was a bit bored at the beginning. After Lawrence made it to the tribe, it became more enjoyable. The landscapes were beautiful and forbidding. A lot of camels and horses were used during the film, and I didn't see much that made me cringe for their safety.

The characters certainly had time to develop, and they did. I saw there was some controversy on the portrayal of Lawrence's character. As I said, I haven't read the book, so I can't weigh in on the matter, and I'm keeping my mind open. The other characters were likeable, and when I saw some of them die, I was upset. I didn't cry or anything, but there was enough of a connection to care.

I liked this movie, but it doesn't climb to my favorite of all time. I see why it's popular. It's a grand spectacle, the music is amazing, and the acting was good. I would definitely put it on again and feel it deserves a Good Movie! review.

The Black Cat - 1934

For movie night, we have a new theme: the Universal Monster series. Some of the movies don't have a typical monster, but we'll see what happens. Also, we're not watching a few of the ones listed. Abbott and Costello irritate me, so we aren't watching those. I'd be rooting for the monster to kill them, and I doubt that happens...

This movie is "suggested by the immortal Edgar Allan Poe classic." It has two icons of this genre, Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. For the purpose of this review, I'm going to call them Boris and Bela. They had complex names in the film, and I wasn't paying much attention to whatever their names were.

Bela has been in prison for 15 years. Now that he's out, he's tracked down Boris to the place where the betrayal that resulted in his imprisonment happened. The man responsible, Boris, has built a strange house on the site. Unfortunately, a young couple is also on the trip due to a car accident. Side note: I'm a bit bummed no one decided to go back and retrieve the bus driver. Poor man.

Anyway, Bela is looking for his wife and daughter. Boris has a weird collection of women hanging in his dungeon (by their hair?) and one of them is the wife. Boris has married the daughter, but he's hiding her from the rest of the house and especially Bela.

The movie was maddening. Everyone in it was terrible. The best character was Peter. He was one half of the young couple and the best part. He only had the one moment when he was overpowered by the minion, but I'm going to attribute that to recovering from being knocked out. He even escaped from the circle room by himself.

His wife was one of those fainting, screaming women that annoy the crud out of me. Also, she 100% could have saved someone near the end but waited until he'd already been shot to clarify the victim had been trying to help. Boris's character was icky and evil. Bela was borderline. I feel like he could do some helpful things, and I'm not sure why he was hinging letting the couple go on a chess game.

Overall, I had a good time with this one. I know Bela had a phobia of cats, but I'm not sure why he had no issues stabbing one cat but not shooting another one. The way he reacted seemed a bit over-the-top, but I got some good laughs. There were some "eww" moments for sure, so the horror existed, too. It's not gory horror, and I had more laughs than uncomfortable moments. Pretty sure I'm not supposed to be laughing, but if I'm having a good time, what else is there to say? Good Movie!

Autumn Leaves - 1956

This was a random one that popped up on my feed, and I was interested in the synopsis.

A lonely woman meets a man and takes things way too fast. She tries to break it off because she's too old for him, and it feels like he just needs her because he's lonely, but after a month they find each other and get married. At the wedding in Mexico, she notices his birth place doesn't match up with what he told her before. Another lie is caught later, and she's wondering what she's gotten herself into.

I was intrigued by this movie. At first, I thought it was going to be one of those movies where everything would have been fine if people would use their brains and get to know someone before starting a serious relationship. But it's not that simple. Burt has issues that run deep, and he needs help. There is a serious stigma to mental health at this time, and the methods used can be extremely questionable.

Overall, I really liked this movie because of the different spin on the whole "I got married too fast" trope. I appreciated how she had choices to make, but they weren't black and white. Crawford had her usual "horror" face for a lot of it, but the story itself made up for that. Good Movie!

They Were Expendable - 1945

This is one of those famous WWII movies I've been meaning to watch for quite a while and just haven't. It stars John Wayne, and I was shocked to see he wasn't listed first! The main actor was Robert Montgomery.

PT Boats were somewhat new and needed to prove themselves. At first, when the United States joined the war, the boats were used more for taking messages back and forth. The movie focuses on these boats and their role in the war up to the surrender of Bataan - around April 1942. There's a romance subplot in there, but it's not that important.

Okay, so the movie itself was pretty decent. The romance was stupid and didn't need to be in there. There isn't a resolution to it, and it didn't add anything particularly important to the story. Also, the end was...weird. The two main leads are stuffed into an airplane and sent back to the States to make the PT boats a more vital part of the war effort. I believe this was due to the book being written in 1942, when the war was still in full swing. The movie came out in December 1945, so I was a bit confused why it was quoting MacArthur saying they'd be back when the war was over by that time. Again, I believe that's related to the release of the book.

I'm going to remain neutral about this one. The strange ending and useless romance brought it down a bit, but I liked the attention to detail with the PT boats. Robert Montgomery had actually commanded a PT boat and took over directing for a time when John Ford broke his leg during production. Montgomery ended up doing more acting and eventually transitioned from being an actor to directing his own films. That's pretty cool! Overall, I'm just staying on the fence. I want to like it, but there was just some weirdly placed comedic moments and the other things I mentioned that keep it from being a good movie.

The Kennel Murder Case - 1933

I saw William Powell was in this, so I put it on. I liked watching him in The Thin Man, so I was curious to see what would happen in this mystery.

After a dog show, Philo is ready to leave on vacation when he hears a man has committed suicide. Not believing that to be true, Philo leaves the ship and enters into the investigation. Both the sergeant and the district attorney are okay with him and work with him. In the meantime, they find another body, which complicates matters.

I recognized Philo from the book The Benson Murder Case by S. S. Van Dine. I wasn't a fan of his character in that, but Powell was fairly amiable as Philo Vance. He teased the sergeant once in a while, but it wasn't to the extreme that Philo abused people in the book. 

This movie was pretty good. The poor little dog that was a victim was NOT shown, so I was semi-okay with it. The story was good, and the characters were interesting. I pretty much had it figured out, but then I didn't see him for a while, so I forgot about my suspect. Everything turned out nicely, and I had a good time. It was good enough to give me second thoughts about my feelings of the book, and I might give the author another chance to see if Philo is still a super jerk. Good Movie! 

The Green Cockatoo - 1937

I found another hour-ish mystery to watch. Nothing known about it ahead of time. I noticed it is also known as Four Dark Hours and Race Gang. The Green Cockatoo is probably the best title in my opinion.

Innocent Eileen has come to London fresh from the country. She gets off the train and is immediately approached by a man who offers to help her find a place to stay. When they get to the hotel, he collapses, and she stands over him with a knife in her hand.

She was tasked with handing over a message to the man's brother, but when she makes it to The Green Cockatoo, she can't find the man. The police are hot on her heels, though, and she unknowingly chooses Jim's room to hide in. She doesn't make the connection since he's Jim and the brother called him Connor.

The murderers are still after Jim, and they go on the run together. Eventually, the police catch up with Jim and let him know his brother is dead. He hears who the suspect is, but he doesn't believe it could be Eileen until he gets to the murderer's place and finds her there. Will he believe her?

I know they tried to explain why she didn't tell the entire story, but it bothered me a bit. I'm also curious why she didn't recognize any of the men. She saw Terrell twice, so I don't see any excuse there. Maybe I could give her a break for the thugs, but she should've recognized the main man. He walked right by her after the attack at the abandoned building, AND she saw him at the train station.

Anyway, if I brush that aside, I did enjoy my hour with the story. It was written by Graham Greene, whose name I recognized from Went the Day Well. I'm still on the lookout for the book associated with that one, but it appears this was a straight screenplay written by Greene. I really liked John Mills (Jim Connor) as an actor in this one, and I'm sure I've seen him in something else. I may do more searching on him. He seems like an interesting person. Oh! And I need to correct his name. SIR John Mills - he was granted knighthood! Good Movie!

Murder at Glen Athol - 1936

This is another one of those quick mysteries that is a little over an hour. I knew nothing about it when I put it on. It appears to be listed on IMDB as The Criminal Within and shows Murder at Glen Athol as the original title.

A well-known detective is on vacation writing his autobiography when he gets invited next door to a party. At the party, he meets a beautiful woman. Later that night, he gets involved in a strange double murder.

The threads that end up coming together in this one are far apart. For a time, Jane appears to be involved, and the detective has to doubt what he feels for the woman. Then, he overlooks a major clue that sets the two murders apart. He has a sidekick, but this man doesn't get near as annoying as the policemen in the previous movie.

I actually liked this one. I wasn't sure that I would, but I'm left with some interesting questions. They have nothing to do with the movie itself. Apparently, the book is based on a 1935 novel by Norman Lippincott, but I can't really find anything about him. This is the only title I see under his name, and that makes me sad. The detective in the film was writing down his adventures, and I could see a whole series based on him and his skills. I may try to do a bit more digging, but this particular movie is getting a Good Movie! review!

The Mystery of the 13th Guest - 1943

I saw this in the "Leaving Soon!" category on Tubi and decided to give it a watch. It was barely over an hour, and I was ready for a quick mystery.

A young woman comes back to her grandfather's home 13 years after his death to open his will. The rest of the family has had to wait all that time, and they weren't known for liking the old man. While in the house, something happens, and the young woman is found propped up dead in a chair. She's in the same place as 13 years ago.

Later, another murder happens. The lawyer was sitting next to the young woman, so when he's propped up in the chair next to hers, there's little doubt the whole family is threatened.

Okay, so I'm really interested in the novel this was taken from. Armitage Trail (or Maurice Coons) is famous for writing Scarface. This book was written in 1929, and I can't help wondering if the story made more sense in the book. The movie became confusing, and I had questions that went unanswered.

I didn't enjoy the weird romance shoved into the movie. It was unnecessary. Also, I was on board with the bumbling policeman, Speed, at first. But then, they went over the top to make sure I knew the cops were idiots. It was a bit much after a while. I recognized Dick Purcell's name, and he looked familiar. I discovered he was muffin-top Captain America! I'm glad he was in something I enjoyed.

The main thing this movie did was make me interested in the book it's based on. I'd like to track down a copy and see if it makes more sense than the movie. Is more time given to the motive for the murder? I'm so curious! I wouldn't say this was enjoyable, but it raised a curiosity in me.

Witness to Murder - 1954

Another one I'd seen before but didn't get reviewed.

Cheryl looks out her window and witnesses a murder. She calls the cops, but the murderer is clever and charms the police into believing he's done nothing wrong. Obviously, Cheryl had a dream. After that, the man enacts a calculated plan to make Cheryl look insane. And Cheryl doesn't help. Screaming "I'm not insane!" doesn't help. At all.

Once he has everyone convinced she's a nut, he feels confident confessing to her. Then he puts the thought in her mind that no one will believe her, and she should end it. That sets up his end game where he'll kill her and be free. During all this, Cheryl has made a friend on the force, Larry, and he's been trying to believe her. It's just a matter of whether he can get the evidence he needs before the man murders Cheryl.

I actually liked this one. Other than Cheryl acting hysterical, Larry and his sidekick were great characters. The convoluted plan the murderer went through to make her appear insane was interesting and different. It was nice to see George Sanders again. I've seen him in a few things now, and he's always a smooth character. I enjoyed watching this one, and I'll make sure to remember it in the future. Good Movie!

In a Lonely Place - 1950

It took me a while to figure out, but I have seen this one before. It's based on a novel by Dorothy Hughes.

Humphrey Bogart plays the lead in this tale of love, anger and murder. He's a screenwriter who brought home a woman who ended up being found dead. Suspicion falls on him, but he claims innocence and goes on his merry way. The woman across the street gives him an alibi and falls in love with him.

He has a dark side that comes out at unpredictable times. The way his agent describes it is "he's dynamite. He has to blow eventually." It's not right. This is the same agent who was seriously asking if Bogart actually committed the murder. So he feels he's capable of it.

In the meantime, Laurel is gets hints of who he is underneath. Little outbursts and controlling events give her doubts about what to do. She loves him, but she's afraid of him. And with good reason. At the end, when he shows his true self (I'm not sure why she hadn't seen enough sooner), she acts like it would've made a difference if he'd actually been guilty of murder. The man is dangerous, and Laurel was better off without him.

Anyway, the movie was okay, but I don't understand why people were putting up with his crap. His agent was this nice, little old man, and Bogart's character straight hits him in the face. I'm not a fan of Humphrey Bogart to begin with, so seeing him as a villain didn't bother me. The movie was okay but not really enjoyable.

The Hound of the Baskervilles - 1983

I've seen a few different versions of this story, but this was a new one for me. I thought I'd seen it before, so I put it on thinking I could watch a bit of it, and then not care about turning it off mid-way through and going to bed.

Hound of the Baskervilles is a Sherlock tale. The American heir of a creepy country estate is being threatened by the curse of his ancestors. A ghostly hound haunts the moors and causes death. 

Okay, so Ian Richardson was an okay Sherlock, but I have to object to the beginning of the movie. It starts out showing where the curse came from. A young woman flees from the lecherous attentions of the master of the house, and her horse flips into a bog. Then it proceeds to struggle for the next five minutes until finally sinking beneath the muck. And then they had to show the murdered dog. Not only that, they slowly zoomed in on it. Really!?

Also, Denholm Elliott is in this. He's been some good characters in some of my favorite films including Indiana Jones and A Room with a View.

This particular version wasn't my favorite, mostly because of the animals and the actor playing the current Sir Baskerville. I did enjoy Ian Richardson as Sherlock and the gypsy, but other than that, I didn't really enjoy this one.

Montana Sky - 2007

It was movie night, and it was Mom's turn to pick. I tracked this title down for her, and we settled in to watch it.

Ella's father is dead, and her two half sisters show up late to the burial. She can't wait to get rid of them, but the will stipulates they have to spend the next year together or forfeit their share of the ranch: approximately $8 million. That must all be land value, because they only had 3 farm hands and not much cattle.

Around the ranch, brutal slayings start with a cow, then a dog (ugh), and escalate to a man named Pickles. Along with this, a horse is made sick. One of the sister's ex-husbands is lurking around the ranch, stalking his wife. He'll be an issue, but I'm not sure what he does most of the time. They just show him occasionally peering at her through binoculars. He kidnaps her toward the end, but other than that, did he just watch her for months? I figured he'd be more threatening.

Also, the other two sisters have romance side quests. The one guy acted creepy most of the time, so I wasn't sure why I was supposed to root for him. Ella was like the physical embodiment of a hedgehog. She was prickly with everyone and irritating the whole time. I think the most decent couple was the L.A. woman who barely wore clothes (they made comments about that all the time) and the old-fashioned sheriff.

The twist at the end was weird and didn't make sense. I won't get into it, but the way crazy man was going about getting what he wanted wasn't going to work. Not sure what his plan was. And I wasn't on board with the mutilating the animals and showing it. Sure, it's not real, but they made a point of showing it. I'm the type that cares more about the animals than the people in movies, so that brought the movie down immediately. The relationships were weird as well. Ella shared a father with the sisters, but she also called the one guy her brother. Half-brother. So did they share a mother? They mentioned it more than once, so I'm not imagining it. For a while, I thought Adam and Lilly were brother and sister, which made their budding relationship cringy. But then, the father didn't have a son. It was just odd.

Anyway, the movie was just not for me. Sorry, Mom, this one was a downer, and I only really liked the sheriff. And the animals. But they murdered the dog. If you want me to like a movie, never murder the dog!