LouHomey From my favorite movies..

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

MartinHafer "The Canary Murder Case" is a problematic film to watch. Apparently after it was made, the studio decided to re-shoot a few scenes and dub others in order to make this silent film a talking picture. This happened quite a lot in the late 1920s. But what made it tougher is that the temperamental Louise Brooks refused to return to re-shoot or re-dub so the studio had to make due with another lady's voice and re-shooting a few awkward scenes (such as having Ned Sparks' character talking to a screen and pretending she was behind it). Well, their gamble worked and the movie was a big success. When seen today, however, it's obvious that the film has issues! Now I am NOT saying it's a bad film but, like "Saratoga" (where the leading lady died in the middle of filming and they awkwardly had her stand-in do the missing scenes...with her back to the camera!), the ruse clearly shows.The 'Canary' in the title of this film is a nickname given to a horrible chorus girl, Margaret O'Dell (Brooks). She uses her sexual wiles to blackmail men..LOTS of men. The first 20 minutes of the film is used to establish MANY times MANY different potential murderers and SOMEONE croaked the 'lady'...but who?! Philo Vance (William Powell) and a dopey detective (Eugene Palette) investigate.When you watch this film, you need to cut it some slack. Films from 1929 simply aren't as polished as films made just a year or two later. The incidental music we take for granted is missing--which is normal for 1929 but not 1931 or later. It makes for a strangely quiet film. Also, unlike the bazillions of detective films of the 1930s and 40s, this one is remarkably talky and relies a lot on the detective's intuition instead of concrete facts. Not a great mystery movie by the standards of later films but watchable nevertheless.By the way, if you DO watch this film (and it's currently posted on YouTube), look at one of the potential murderers--he looks JUST LIKE LENIN!!! It wasn't--I checked.

drednm A famous "transition" film. One shot as a silent and partly re-shot for talkies. William Powell stars as Philo Vance. Jean Arthur plays a show girl. Louise Brooks is the "Canary." Of course this film is famous because Brooks refused to return from Europe to re-shoot scenes as a talkie. The studio then released news her voice would not record well. To get even more even they hired Margaret Livingston to dub Brooks' voice in a high nasal New York accent. Livingston also appears in a few long shots in a Louise Brooks hair cut.Slow but OK murder mystery. Brooks disappears after about 15 minutes; Arthur has no real part. That leaves us with James Hall as the dupe, Eugene Palette the dumb sergeant, Charles Lane the father, Oscar Smith the desk attendant, etc. Lots of talk.Brooks is gorgeous and in the credits you note she gets downplayed from 2nd to 4th billing. Another Paramount jab. Brooks indeed had a fine voice even though I've only seen a couple of lousy westerns she made. She was a beauty and had a good voice. But she sure was difficult. And her "Lulu in Hollywood" memoir doesn't change my mind about her. By the way: I loved her in Beggars of Life as well as Pandora's Box and Diary of a Lost Girl.

Bucs1960 This film typifies the problems the studios were having adapting to sound in 1929. The characters talk and talk and talk and nothing much happens. Being a great Philo Vance fan, I had to purchase this film even though it is a pretty rough transfer to tape and is very stilted in style. The obvious post-dubbing of Louise Brooks' voice is comical since it comes out as a nasal Bronx accent. William Powell, just beginning to develop his persona as a sophisticate, really doesn't stand much of a chance here. However, for historical value, it is worth a try. It is the last film that Brooks made before she went to Germany and her greatest triumphs(Pandora's Box, Diary of a Lost Girl); thus the voice dubbing. The film started out as a silent and was converted to sound....by that time she was in Germany and refused to return to dub her own voice. If you are a Philo Vance buff and can't work your way through this film, see "The Kennel Murder Case" instead.

gerdav I have been a fan of S.S. Van Dine's "Philo Vance" novels since I was a kid. I have recently purchased the first editions of most of his catalogue. I have read about this movie for years, and being a HUGE admirer of Louise Brooks, I could not wait to see this film.Although I have always been fascinated by early sound films, this is one is a textbook case of the problems encountered by the studios at the time. It is slow beyond belief. It is more than obvious that Louise's speaking parts are dubbed. The editors chose long shots so it wasn't as noticeable----it didn't work! Powell's Philo Vance bears no resemblance to the colorful character in the novels. I give this film a "3" rating simply for Brooks' beauty.