The Catman of Paris

"The Catman of Paris" might as well have been called "The Copycat-Man of Paris", because what we have here is a cheap and inconspicuous - but not uninteresting - attempt to imitate the style and success of RKO's genius 1942 classic "Cat People" and its equally genius 1944 sequel "Curse of the Cat People". Those titles happen to be two of my all-time favorite movies, so I - for one - certainly don't mind watching another umpteenth rip-offs.

The film is more than decent, with a plot revolving around a distinguished but controversial young author who just returned to Paris after a long period in a tropical part of the world and finds several difficulties on his path. He loves a different woman than the one he's engaged to, the French government accuses him to exposing secret information via his "fictional" novel, and during his nightly walks around Paris he suffers from blackouts while people are getting ripped to pieces. Might it be that Charles Regnier returned home with a curse and turns into a lethal feline creature at night?

What I love about these ancient black and white movies is that they are short and don't waste any time! "The Catman of Paris" has a running time of barely 65 minutes, but it nevertheless features a talkative plot and a handful of exciting and action-packed moments. The highlights a feisty bar fight sequence and a wild horse carriage chase, which both could have come straight out of a western movie. The denouement isn't too complex to figure out early on already, and the cat-creature transformation sequence is rather weak, but those defaults don't bother me too much in a low-key 40s B-movie. The male cast is unremarkable, but "The Catman of Paris" does feature two strong female characters, with the protagonist's new love-interest Lenore Aubert and particularly his wicked fiance Adele Mara.

This is a middling to fair movie, gamely cashing in on the popular 1940s passion for Wolfman and Cat People creature films. Lame, but it limped along anyway.

Spine-chilling horror and suspense it has little of, but be fair! When you stack this film up against other non-Val Lewton movies or non-Brit films, (think DEAD OF NIGHT) it's okay for what it attempts. The director was probably a studio hack given the task of making something cheap using standing sets and on-hand costumes to fill the double bill and not run much more than an hour, thus clearing the seats for the A picture.

Workmanlike is he best that can be said about it. A good monster, wasted.

Anticipation ran high for me in the pre-home taping/DVD days when indie TV stations surrounding the SF Bay put this in their late-night viewing logs in the papers. My appetite for it was whetted by a photo spread in Monster World or maybe FAmous Monsters, showing Bob Wilke down in a makeup chair with a week's whiskers, getting on the fingernails and greasepaint and hair and full catty dentures. He looked great as the monster. His eyes were always cat-like and a bright shiny green anyway. Recall him as the first mate to Captain Nemo (James Mason) in 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA?

Robert J. Wilke made his career primarily playing villains in Westerns and was always a solid on screen presence. More of the Catman and less palaver was called for. It would be a better film, but I liked it for what little it achieved in moments of unease and threatening shadows.

And whomever id the makeup was an ace at greasepaint and direct work, without much in the way of prosthesis.

DB Jones, Mountain View, CA

In late 19th Century a writer returns to Paris to learn that his acclaimed novel may be censored by the government since it seems to contain proceeds from a secret trial. At this time someone connected with that trial is killed by what seems to be a catman. The writer, who has memory lapses, is suspected, especially when his fiancée is also a victim, but his mentor and the daughter of his publisher with whom he is falling in love strive to protect him.

Although not a classic like Cat People, it is of the 1940's genre of horror films involving supernatural transformations, films that aspired to be atmospheric and subtle, avoiding the use of already worn-out clichés of the '30's horror films and generally not employing established horror-picture stars. Catman was slickly produced (for a B-minus film), but being done by Republic Studios it not surprisingly featured many elements of Western films (can-can girls, a saloon brawl, a carriage chase). --- The cast is excellent. It's a treat to see suave Austrian Carl Esmond in a leading role, while Slovenian actress Lenore Aubert, in perhaps her most engaging role, is well showcased here. Also, Adele Mara is a knockout, and always reliable Douglas Dumbrille is particularly good.

It is, of course, a minor film and will not please those, easily bored, who prefer their horror blood drenched with a thrill a second, or those who prefer only vintage films with major stars. But it a somewhat novel twist on the classic horror film and this reviewer has enjoyably viewed it several times.

Are mysterious killings in Paris of 1896 the work of man or monster?

The best thing I can say about this film is that it has an awesomely choreographed fight in a restaurant, with plenty of flips and tables breaking. The waiter getting knocked over with a full tray (even though there are no customers, so who is the food for?).

Hard to say if this is a horror film. Netflix seems to think so, and I guess the idea of a half-man, half-cat killing people is sort of horror. But it is really pretty tame. We could say it is an early serial killer film with a population getting terrorized, but whether or not it is horror is just a tough call.

This warrants a second viewing.

There is a scene in this film when "Marie" (Leonor Aubert) is in a coach, terrified, with the protagonist in this Jekyllian style thriller. She is shouting, pleading, imploring with this person - who transmorphs into a deadly cat - for him not to kill her. When she calls out for him to "say something to me" the entire cinema - maybe 50 people, all simultaneously called out "miaow". It was really an achievement of coordination and comedy timing that far surpassed anything creative being seen on the screen as this rather dreary murder mystery rubbed along. Carl Esmond is "Regnier", a successful novelist who discovers that his book is going to be censored. When the archivist carrying papers to the censor is found dead - mauled - he is suspected and off we trot on the most benign of mysteries that lacks just about everything - except, perhaps, an alluring eeriness of late 19th century Paris. The writing, directing and acting are wholly adequate, but the thing lacks any sense of menace or thrill - and at times it is little better than a darkly lit romance with a well telegraphed twist.