InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

mark.waltz It's pretty obvious from the beginning who the shadow is, and the only clues to the sinister crimes come from a series of poetry letters. The poor victim of the final walk to fate gets the opening, and as soon as you see his silhouette, it's obvious that the end might not be imminent, but certainly soon. A lack of opening credits deliberately adds to the intrigue, with Charles Coburn leading the investigation into unknown crimes involving a series of letters, while the innocent lass (ironically named Lucy) tells her pal, Lucille Ball, about the mysterious gentleman she's been seeing. Lucy soon disappears, leading Lucille to begin her own search. While this brilliant thriller is set in modern times, it could easily be set in the days of Sherlock Holmes, Jack the Ripper, and Queen Victoria. The fog is thick, the gaslights are barely lit, and the thick sound of cockney accents fill the air. When Coburn and Ball get together, the chemistry he shared with Jean Arthur is almost immediately forgotten. He's seemingly lecherous (with a cause) and she's no nonsense and filled with the cynical wisecrack of a showgirl who's obviously been around. In short, she's as far from McGillicuddy, Ricardo, Carmichael and Carter as she can get, basically a nicer version of her showgirl from "The Big Street".The colorful characters she meets along the way are brilliantly constructed, a character actor's dream. From Coburn to dashing George Sanders to urbane Sir Cedric Hardwicke to Boris Karloff, anything is possible in this shadowy night world where courageous Lucy proves herself to be any of these men's equals. Had she not gone onto TV comedy, she may have had a shot at real dramatic acting, directed here by none other than Douglas Sirk, a master of melodrama. Karloff (along with Anne Codee as his partner in lunacy) is hysterically funny, although certainly not sane. What makes this film so much fun is the combination of Gothic mystery, light farce, a bit of film noir and of course, Lucy, makes this a must. It features an outstanding technical look with an incredible set design, superb photography, a wonderful musical score and unsurpassed pacing. The film gets episodic as it moves along, with George Zucco and Alan Mowbray popping in for amusing bits. Coburn, totally adorable in every nuance of his performance, plays well opposite Lucy, and it's a shame that this was their only pairing. Once you begin this film, you'll be lured in as I was, and there is no return until it is all over.

tomsview This movie used to turn up a lot on Australian television during the 1960's, but now seems quite rare with the DVD fetching a high price if Amazon is any guide.It's a serial killer movie before the term was actually coined. The film is set in Hollywood London with plenty of fog, sumptuous interiors, loads of atmosphere and a terrific cast.Lucille Ball, a few years before "I love Lucy", plays Sandra Carpenter an American working as a taxi dancer. When a friend of hers becomes a victim of The Poet Killer, she is hired by Inspector Temple (Charles Coburn) of Scotland Yard as a temporary undercover policewoman to act as bait.Although the way the police put the clues together with early attempts at psychological profiling is interesting, credulity is stretched when Temple enlists Sandra after a few questions and asking her to lift her dress to check the shape of her legs – he also gives her a pistol. However Charles Couburn brings plenty of gravitas to his character, which makes up for the odd lapse in logic.The murder plot is woven around wanted ads in the paper and messages based on the poems of Baudelaire, "One of the most fantastic madmen who ever lived", according to Inspector Temple. Sandra also becomes involved with Robert Fleming (George Sanders) and his business partner Julian Wilde (Cedric Hardwick) who together run a string of popular nightclubs. Both men are drawn into the mystery, which keeps the whole plot pretty close to home.The film is full of red herrings including a bizarre sequence starring Boris Karloff.The reason why the film works so well is the brilliant mood that is established from the start, a clever script and the smooth direction by Douglas Sirk – the film has a light touch without losing suspense. Then there are the stars; a very pretty Lucille Ball exudes feistiness and confidence, while George Sanders delivers that unique quality of unflappable sophistication and superiority, and he plays a nicer guy here than his Addison Dewitt in "All About Eve" – he was a brilliant screen presence that was never replaced.Although a suspension of disbelief helps, this movie has something. I love the ending, but I wouldn't spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen it. It's one of those films I can always watch again.

bensonmum2 A homicidal maniac is loose in London, murdering young women he meets through newspaper personal ads. When Lucy Barnard goes missing, her friend Sandra Carpenter (Lucille Ball) agrees to help Scotland Yard catch a killer. Along the way, however, she falls in love with number one suspect Robert Fleming (George Sanders). Despite all the evidence to the contrary, he can't be the killer, can he?Despite all the flaws in Lured, it's just too much fun not to give it a positive rating. The cast is strong. I really enjoyed watching several of them play against character. Sanders usually played men in charge of their environment. It was interesting to watch him play a character who has lost control of his situation. Lucy is obviously best know for her work in comedy. While she a few funny moments in Lured, I was really impressed with her efforts in the more dramatic parts. George Zucco, an actor I know best playing Egyptian priests or mad scientists, gets a chance to do comedy. He's more than up to the task. Throw into the mix the talents of Boris Karloff, Charles Coburn, Sir Cedric Hardwicke, Alan Mowbray, and Alan Napier and you've got one impressive cast. Beyond the cast, other positives I found in Lured, include: fabulous costumes, nice cinematography, a witty script, and plenty of atmosphere. But as I said, Lured has it's share of flaws. Chief among them is that there's really not much of a mystery. I found it way too easy to spot the killer. And his motives are a bit muddled. If he did it because he loved Sandra, then why kill all the other women? If he did it because he loved Fleming (as some suspect), then why frame him? There's a lot of plot inconsistency. Finally, as much as I enjoyed watching Lucy and Karloff in their scenes together, it doesn't really fit with the rest of the movie. It almost felt like this part came from another film. These scenes really do nothing to advance the plot.Even with the multiple problems, like I said, Lured is a fun movie. A 6/10 from me.

Spikeopath Lured (AKA: Personal Column) is directed by Douglas Sirk and collectively written by Leo Rosten, Jacques Companéez, Simon Gantillon and Ernst Neubach. It stars Lucille Ball, George Sanders, Charles Coburn, Cedric Hardwicke, Joseph Calleia and Boris Karloff. Music is by Michel Michelet and cinematography by William H. Daniels.A serial killer in London is murdering young women whom he meets through the personal columns section of the newspaper. Taunting the police with cryptic poems, the killer is proving most illusive, so much so that when a friend of dancer Sandra Carpenter (Ball) disappears, the police enlist her to act as bait to lure the killer in.There's a lot to like about Lured, on proviso you have your expectation level correctly set as to what sort of film it is. It's a very uneven movie in tone, which when one sees that there were four writing contributors involved in bringing it to the screen, perhaps comes as no surprise. A remake of Robert Siodmak's 1939 film Pièges (set in Paris), it is never sure if it wants to be a comedy mystery or a dark brooding thriller. A shame because in spite of it being a set bound production, Sirk and Daniels create a sinister visual mood when the story lurks around the constructed London sets.The cast are ever watchable, though you can see Ball struggling to rein in her natural comedic bent during the more dramatic sequences, but she leads off from the front and looks positively lovely and radiant. Karloff fans get a fun extended cameo, with the great Uncle Boris playing up to a caricature of unstable characters he could do in his sleep, Sanders is suitably stand-offish, Coburn ebullient, while Hardwicke and Calleia add a touch of class to the support ranks.Michelet's musical score is in keeping with the mixed tonal flow of the picture, in fact sometimes sounding like it should be in a screwball movie from decades previously, but with competent professionalism coming elsewhere from Sirk, Daniels and the lead cast members, it's an enjoyable movie. Even if it's all a bit too jolly and nonchalant for its own good at times. 6.5/10