Der Würger

Dr. Orloff has been endowing funds to the Dearborn Institute for the Blind, but is using the institute as a home for his sinister activities. Orloff has been ordering the murders of a series of men who have named Orloff as their insurance beneficiary, as collateral for a monetary loan. Scotland Yard Inspector Holt, also teaming up with Lt. O'Reilly (from Chicago) and Diana Stuart, daughter of the latest murder victim, try to uncover the connection of Orloff, the Dearborn Institute, and the murdered men. I enjoyed this movie more than I expected I would. Lugosi gives a very good performance, and the movie has a good aura of mystery about it which only enhance the audience's attention, despite the film's modest small budget. Rating, 7.

This is one of Lugosi's top movies. It's right up there with Dracula, White Zombie, Son of Frankenstein, and the Raven. Lugosi plays a dual role as a lecherous insurance salesman and kindly Dr Dearborn, a kindly blind teacher. Lugosi is at his sinister best as he knocks off people for their insurance money using the blind to do his bidding.

In one truly evil sequence, Lugosi makes one of the blind men deaf when he discovers that he had tried to warn someone about Lugosi. I won't spoil the ending. Not to be missed for Lugosifiles.

In my opinion, outside of "Dracula" and "White Zombie," this is Lugosi at his best. Dr. Orloff (Lugosi) is a philanthropist who donates his medical expertise to a work-house for blind men. On the side he runs an insurance scam by loaning money to desperate individuals and holds their life insurance policy as collateral, then he has them killed so he can collect on the policies. But that's just the plot. There is so much more happening.

Lugosi is brilliant as the cold-hearted Dr. Orloff as he plays cat and mouse with the police and the daughter of one of his victims. He is able to move effortlessly from kind hearted doctor to calculating and greed driven murderer. The plot moves forward at a brisk pace with little down time and the build up to the climax was unexpected and absolutely chilling. Lugosi truly made me believe he was evil in this film and I quickly was involved with the plot. The supporting cast did exactly as they should; got out of the way and let Lugosi run with the film. See it. Buy it. Watch it.

Instead of repeating all the details others have, I'll just say the film really gave me the creeps the first time I saw it. Sometimes when you see an old movie like this from the 20s or 30s, it's tempting to think nothing in it can shock you, because movies are not as "sophisticated" as the things you see today. I saw it on television many years back, way before home video, and was delighted to find it in a grocery store's previously viewed tape bin. It hasn't lost any of it's punch. To see how cruelly Lugosi dealt with his very helpless victims chilled me to the bone. The Uday of his time. It has a Hitchcock-type of human horror that is more effective than any rubber suited monster. Not too badly paced, and is still one I get out when in the mood for something dark.

Bela Lugosi made a lot of schlocky films during his career. While DARK EYES OF London is definitely a low budget film, thanks to decent writing and a very creepy style it manages to entertain even after almost 70 years.

Bela plays a totally amoral criminal who runs an insurance company. He insures people and makes himself the beneficiary after making these people loans. But instead of waiting to collect the money, he drowns them and throws their body in the Thames. While an interesting scheme, he oddly does it repeatedly--naturally arousing the suspicions of the police.

In addition to being an insurance man, Lugosi also is a benefactor to a home for indigent blind men. However, this act of kindness is a front, as this home is where Bela commits his murders with the help of a truly horrifying looking blind assistant. Near the very end, you actually get to see him kill one of his innocent victims and toss him in the river in a very graphic way--hence deservedly earning its special horror rating in the UK.

The film earns some points for an unusual plot and its graphic scenes--it really is a pretty scary film for 1940. However, there are a few lulls, some overacting by the idiot playing the cop from Chicago and the irrationality of Lugosi committing so many murders yet hoping to get away with it when he's the only rational suspect. By the way, speaking of the Chicago cop, do all Brits see us Americans as THAT brash and annoying?! I sure hope not! You also wonder why they even bothered including this character, as he was rather distracting and unnecessary.