Bardlerx Strictly average movie

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Konterr Brilliant and touching

utgard14 An inventor is killed and a boring investigation ensues. A B murder mystery starring Bela Lugosi with wooden performances from most of the cast, save for two cringeworthy turns from Hattie McDaniel and Allen Jung as stereotypical servants. It moves along at a snail's pace and struggles to maintain even a little suspense. The biggest selling point of this today is not Bela; he's very subdued in this and therefore not that interesting. The main reason to see this is for the fascinating historical elements. We get to see some early television technology and get an idea of how people viewed the concept of television back then. It's fun to watch a group of stuffy old people in tuxedos and gowns sitting around in stiff Victorian chairs to see a demonstration of this newfangled invention called television. Worth a look for Lugosi completists or anyone interested in television history.

JohnHowardReid The meticulously incompetent director: CLIFFORD SANFORTH. Muddled, impossible-to-follow screenplay: Joseph O'Donnell. Based on hare-brained ideas by Clarence Hennecke and Carl Coolidge. Photographed on a dishcloth by James S. Brown and Arthur Reed. Amazingly non-edited by Leslie F. Wilder (hardly a single shot matches).SYNOPSIS: Well, let's see now. Bela Lugosi evidently plays some sort of corporate spy who is willing to sell television secrets to a rival firm. Unbeknownst to us, he has a twin brother. This creates no end of confusion, both for the characters on the screen and the hapless audience. Although there is a hint that Bela might have a twin brother early on in the action, the movie is so scrappily edited that few viewers will take much notice of what seems an irrelevant close-up of a newspaper headline.COMMENT: Last night, on an excellent Grapevine DVD,I saw a really dreadful film called "Murder By Television". It was so badly directed and ineptly put together, I actually found it quite entertaining. But few other people would share my enjoyment. Most people would say, "Why are we watching this terrible film? It's absolutely the most incomprehensible, time-wasting movie I've ever seen. Everything about it is bad. There's not one single redeeming feature in the whole production. Even the photography rates as incredibly awful. The movie looks like it was photographed on a dirty dishcloth instead of a roll of film. And Bela Lugosi is so unattractively lit, he looks positively senile!" But of course to me, the atrocious photography, the hammy acting, the impossibly muddled plot with its ridiculous dialogue, and the downright incompetent direction, rate as an almost endless source of constant amusement. I always wondered what would happen if a director decided to use constant close-ups of the backs of people's heads instead of shots of their faces. Now I know. Yes, a fascinating exercise in creative misjudgments on a grand scale.

tthin4854me I bought a DVD with this film on it a few days ago for a dollar.I am watching it as I am typing this.It is a fairly good film.I had no idea television was kind of well known when this film was made.When I looked at the cover I was under the impression that this film was made during Lugosi's years with Ed Wood,I was surprised to find out that it was made in 1935.To me those years were the best time of his life and career, but I now know that he did get stuck playing some pretty crummy roles in films that were somewhat below his gifts and talents.The acting in this film is a bit stiff and the dialog is corny.But it is an enjoyable film for a "B" film.

Leslie Howard Adams Which is what comedian Joey Bishop was quoted as saying when informed that Bela Lugosi had died. And Bishop didn't even know Ed Wood was working on Lugosi's comeback film, and Bela was already dead. He also probably didn't even know of Ed Wood.Lugosi also returns from the dead in "Murder By Television." It seems that Professor James Houghland (Charles Hill Mailes), after years of research, has perfected revolutionary improvements in television, but he refuses all offers from companies that want to buy his inventions, and several unscrupulous promoters plan to get them by other means.On the night of the first public demonstration of his inventions, several well-known television experts, excluding David Susskind, are at Houghland's home. The first broadcast is an unqualified success, or at least as much of a success as could be mustered up in a William M. Pizor production. As the second broadcast is about to begin, probably an old British movie featuring a man named Buffy who wants to play tennis, Houghland falls dead, and the police headed by Chief Nelson (Henry Mowbray) arrive, and no one is permitted to leave the house, which is an order not needed as this is a one-set movie and all the actors are on a day-player contract.Several of the guests are suspected: Arthur Perry (Bela Lugosi), Hougland's assistant, because he was out of the room when the lights were turned on after the murder; Donald Jordan (Charles K. French), because he tried to bribe Perry to steal the secret; Richard Grayson (George Meeker), an ambitious, young television engineer, because he had promised to secure the secret for his company, and Dr. Henry Scofield (Huntly Gordon), because he refuses to explain a mysterious telephone call that he made shorty before the murder. Or, since Logosi, French, Gordon and Meeker are all present, the usual list of suspects. But they don't have to be rounded up in this film.Investigation discloses that Houghland's plans have been stolen along with the revolutionary tube that held the secret of the invention. Houghland's Chinese servant/butler Ah Ling (Allen Jung, who was unforgettable as "Big Stoop" in "Terry and the Pirates) accuses Perry of the tube theft. Perry disappears. Perry is found dead, stabbed through the heart by Ah Ling's wooden stake...uh...wooden knife.But, as Joey Bishop said, don't worry he'll be back.