Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

SincereFinest disgusting, overrated, pointless

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Michael_Elliott Mad Ghoul, The (1943)** 1/2 (out of 4) Decent Universal chiller has a doctor (George Zucco) experimenting with a Mayan gas that can bring life to the dead. He uses the gas on his partner (David Bruce) turning him into a zombie-like creature but one who still has feelings for his girlfriend (Evelyn Ankers). It also turns out that the gas eventually wears off so the doctor is constantly in search of fresh hearts to keep his zombie/assistant going. THE MAD GHOUL will never be confused with the Universal classics but at the same time it's actually on the mark with many of the studios outings from this period. I think the biggest problem with the film is its actual screenplay because once "The End" comes up you'll realize that not too much happened throughout the 65-minutes. Many elements are borrowed from 1935's THE RAVEN including the relationship between the doctor and his assistant. As in the Karloff-Lugosi picture, the relationship here as the doctor being the evil one and the film tries to get us to have sympathy for the monster who is actually the innocent victim. One really shouldn't come into this thing expecting any sort of logical story because once you really look at the material you'll probably have quite a few unanswered questions including how the zombie, who isn't suppose to remember anything, still manages to be a brilliant surgeon in his dead state. I'd also question how on Earth the doctor was able to discover this mysterious gas but that's another issue. What makes the film worth viewing are the performers as they all fit their roles nicely and add to the entertainment level. Ankers wasn't the greatest actress in the world but there's no doubt she was the Queen of this period of Universal films. Whenever she appears you can't help but have a smile on your face and in the films she's not in you often find yourself wondering why the studio didn't put her in the part. Bruce is pretty good as he manages to make you believe he is this smart character and he also handles the part of the monster and makes us feel for him. Zucco could play this type of role in his sleep so he delivers the goods as usual. Robert Armstrong appears briefly as a newspaper man trying to solve the case. He gives a good performance but I think the film could have done just fine without his comedy bit. Jack Pierce's make-up effects are rather cheap but effective. I liked the white face make-up and the skeleton like look that he gave the actor.

MARIO GAUCI One of the lesser Universal horrors is a still enjoyable if decidedly silly outing. The former is due largely to the typical low-budget atmosphere (from intermittent graveyard raids, for plot purposes, down to the recycled music cues), George Zucco's equally reliable presence as the obligatory mad scientist (with this in mind, the title – actually referring to the 'human monster' of the piece – has always struck me as kind of desperate) and, to a lesser extent, Robert Armstrong ditto as the fast-talking but ill-fated reporter who cracks the case. The 'monster' (afflicted by sudden 'attacks' which transform him, in a matter of seconds, into a scruffy and wizened zombie) is a student in love with a renowned singer (resident Universal scream queen Evelyn Ankers), predictably also desired by the elderly Professor - deluding himself, a' la the Bela Lugosi of THE RAVEN (1935), that she corresponds this affection - but who has herself fallen for the accompanying pianist (the just-as-ubiquitous Turhan Bey) of her concert tour. Obsessed with the Ancient Egyptian ritual of death-in-life (improbably involving a release of poison gas followed by an impromptu heart transplant!), Zucco first experiments with a monkey but soon turns his attentions to a human specimen…for which his naive assistant (a surgical genius no less) fits the bill perfectly (however, no attempt is made to explain how he manages to operate repeatedly on himself – since, naturally, it transpires the effect of the revivification is only temporary – without being fully conscious of the fact!). As I said, this is standard low-grade fare – not quite as good as even the minor classics among Universal's second outburst within the genre, though certainly nowhere near as bad as the worst of the lot - THE CAT CREEPS, SHE-WOLF OF London and THE SPIDER WOMAN STRIKES BACK (all 1946).

gftbiloxi Lovely concert singer Isabel Lewis (Evelyn Ankers) is engaged to marry medical student Ted Allison (David Bruce.) When she unexpectedly falls in love with her pianist Eric Iverson (a very suave Turhan Bey), she turns to Ted's laboratory boss Dr. Morris (George Zucco.) But it happens that Dr. Morris is in love with Isabel himself, and he decides to get rid of his assistant by subjecting him to ancient Mayan gas! Unfortunately for Ted, this gas is of a particularly nasty sort: it transforms him into a zombie-like creature. Under the control of Dr. Morris, Ted then participates in gathering the human hearts he must have for injections that allow him to return, temporarily, to normal.The idea for this story seems to arise from a number of sources, most particularly the silent classic THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI, the various versions of DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE, and THE RETURN OF DR. X--the latter a particularly peculiar B-flick featuring an unexpected Humphrey Bogart as a lab-created vampire of sorts. It other hands, the concept might have worked quite well, but although the cast is accomplished and the production values are generally quite good, the make-up effects are hardly up to the Universal standard, the pace is slow, and the script is quite dire.The film makes no effort to create any sort of "transformation" when actor David Bruce goes from golly-gee lab assistant to shambling zombie; it is a straight cut-away, cut-back-to shot, and the latter finds him in uninspired make-up and with very untidy hair. Director James P. Hogan maintains a pace every bit as leaden-footed as the zombie, and as for the script... well, it is probably this sort of script that Evelyn Ankers, the studio's "Scream Queen" of the 1940s, had in mind when she walked away from Universal a year later. Given the talents of the cast and the overall look of the film, which (make-up effects aside) is handsomely mounted, I find it difficult to give this film less than three stars. All the same, I greatly doubt that THE MAD GHOUL will have any appeal for those outside the circle die-hard Universal horror fans.GFT, Amazon Reviewer

BaronBl00d Of all the Universal stars and stock character actors, the one that seems to get lost in the shuffle the most is George Zucco. It is a shame as I can never say I saw him give a bad performance despite the lack of depth in the cinematic vehicle he was appearing in. Zucco is the star of Mad Ghoul and does a wonderful job playing a man obsessed with a pretty singer played by Evelyn Ankers. Zucco works with the fiancee of Ankers, both scientists working on what keeps life after death..in a zombie form at least. Ankers, however, is not quite sure she loves David Bruce still, and is having a relationship with the pianist touring with her, Turhan Bey, who has little to do in his role. Zucco somehow induces Bruce to become a zombie/ghoul at times...thus telling his pretty fiancee things that cool down the relationship so old George can have a crack at her..or so he thinks she might be so inclined toward him(not knowing about Bey of course). The Mad Ghoul is a wonderful film because it has some great scenes and dialogue for George Zucco. Zucco shines as a sinister man with a battle between moral conscience losing to his base desires. The rest of the cast is good(look for Robert Armstrong of King Kong fame), the scenes and graveyard sets in particular are very appropriate. Don't forget the Mad Ghoul when catching up with your list of Universal horror films. It is worth seeing if for no other reason than seeing Zucco in one of his finest performances.