SpecialsTarget
Disturbing yet enthralling
Sarita Rafferty
There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.
Delight
Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.
Hitchcoc
Too much idiocy. Too much bad acting. This is kind of propaganda that would have benefited the wrong side. They talk about Neville Chamberlan on his way to try to negotiate for the good of the French people. We all know how that turned out. Usually there is some charm in these things. Not so here. There are contrived forces battling one another, trying to get significant people out of France. That loudmouthed French policeman is insufferable. There is also a lot of confusion as to what the whole goal was and why one person was a bad guy and the next was a good guy. I have to admit to almost dozing off. One reason is an almost total lack of comic relief.
bkoganbing
One of the few Charlie Chan movies that does not have one of his eager beaver sons trying oh so earnestly to help, Charlie Chan In The City Of Darkness refers to the fact that the well known city of lights is actually in darkness due to blackout regulations. During the course of the film, a breach in those regulations actually saves Sidney Toler's life.Harold Huber takes the place of the sons here and provides us some comic relief. Huber who normally played oily villainous types must have welcomed a change in casting. Toler is in Paris ironically celebrating a reunion of intelligence service officers from the last World War as a new one beckons. The film, released in 1939 after war had been officially declared was set in that period in 1938 when the United Kingdom and France went to the brink before capitulating to the Nazis at Munich.During the first of a Parisian blackout the French prefect of police in Paris is up to his ears in work and just can't get to the murder of Douglass Dumbrille in a timely fashion. This provides his loyal secretary who wants to make his bones as a detective an opportunity. Good thing Huber had Sidney Toler around to show him the ropes.Dumbrille was one of those international men of mystery and intrigue and being that has a host of enemies who would like to do him in. There's a nice array of suspects including a couple of sneak thieves played comically by Louis Mercier and George Davis who might look good for it as well. In fact with regularity Huber keeps declaring he's solved the case only to have Toler give him another Confucian aphorism about staying cool.During the course of the film an international smuggling and spy ring is broken up. As for the murderer, a rather different fate awaits him than that of the normal course of perpetrators that Charlie Chan usually brings in.Toler and Huber keep this film entertaining at all time, a good entry among the Charlie Chan features.
xnet95
This is without a doubt the worst Charlie Chan movie I have ever seen. Harold Huber as Inspector Spivak was horribly annoying. He had about ten times the amount of lines that Sydney Toler had, which is why I say this is barely a Chan film. It's bad enough the producers felt that this film needed comic relief, but to have that comic relief be so dominant is a travesty. Aside from Huber's grating performance, the rest of the movie kind of plods along, filling time until Huber comes back to dominate. YUCK! It was nice to see that the review from Variety (Nov. 22, 1939) didn't like this movie. The following is a quote from that review: "Direction is inadequate, further hampered by poor story material. Attempts to provide Huber with comedy as a jittery police novice are ineffectual. The audience is never presented with sufficient interest in the murder or culprit, and the mystery just unwinds without much attention." The fact that so many people on IMDb gave this a 9 or a 10 rating sickens me. Watching this movie was a complete disappointment.
MartinHafer
By his fourth film in the series, Sidney Toler had settled into the Charlie Chan role quite nicely. In many ways, this is a fascinating film to watch because of its historical value--as it talks about the events leading up to WWII as well as the assumption that the Munich Agreement would avert war. As a history teacher, this is great stuff--a real insight into Europe on the eve of war.However, despite the interesting backdrop of Paris as it prepares for war, the film ultimately is destroyed by one man--Harold Huber. This was Huber's third Chan film--having played a French inspector in Monte Carlo as well as a New York inspector. The problem in this film wasn't his accent (here and in the previous film, Huber was fine with his fake French accent), but how incredibly obnoxious and stupid his character was. This film did not feature a Chan child but most of the blundering was done by Huber. This might have worked had they not made Huber five times stupider than any of the Chan children. Plus, Huber came on so strong and was so dominant in the film that you really wanted him to die, as he completely over-shadowed Toler. Because of this, this might just be the worst Chan film that Fox Studios made. Watchable but annoying.
