Der Würger von Paris

Rory Del Ruth directed this film supposedly based on the classic Edgar Allen Poe story 'Murders in the Rue Morgue' though showing only the slightest resemblance. A number of young women are brutally murdered and all evidence points to Professor Dupin (Steve Forrest). However, Dupin continues to protest his innocence but his attempts to prove it to exasperating Inspector Bonnard (Claude Daulphin) are ignored by the abhorrent police officer.

I found this movie to be quite entertaining. To begin with the story moves slowly and one has to question where this movie is going? However, the final twenty minutes or so are very tense leading up to an almost blistering and highly exciting finale. Steve Forrest is great as Dupin, the university professor apparently caught up in the middle of a very elaborate murder plan, and commands his role as if it were written for him. Unfortunately the rest of the cast did not seem to perform to the same standard in my opinion with the exception of Karl Malden in the role of Dr. Marais. Even though Malden certainly hammed it up a bit his performance was still of a high quality and during a particular scene gave one of the more fearsome horror performances I have been privileged enough to witness.

Phantom of the Rue Morgue's finest quality is in its thriller aspect. As all murders are off-screen and only the aftermaths are shown the film searches out for a different type of brutality and succeeds but unfortunately rather late on. During the first half of the film 'Phantom.' remains a pleasant crime thriller but suffers somewhat from slowness in places. All this changes when it becomes obvious to us all who the killer is and what their motive is for doing so. Upon acquiring this knowledge we are given an insight into one of the more disturbed killer minds in horror and also some marvellous final scenes.

Despite the occasional slowness and poor acting I still quite liked this film. Though I must admit I found the first half to be of only average quality and reasonably dull when the story eventually become more interesting 'Phantom of the Rue Morgue' managed to regain my attention. I can understand its low rating on IMDb but I don't think it's a true representation of this film. 'Phantom.' certainly has flaws but is worth watching if only for the blistering finale. My rating for 'Phantom of the Rue Morgue' - 6.75/10

If you've never seen this Parisian outing in 3-D, you must. It's been decades since the last time I enjoyed it at a temporary 3-D revival, but I remember the effects quite well. I won't discuss the story because too many commentators have already discussed how it is modified from Poe's original, but the script works. It is a horror movie, after all, which makes me think the writer who critiqued the "over the top" and "stilted" acting, doesn't realize that like fair rides we go to these movies to be thrilled and shudder. By current slasher film standards, this movie is very tame ... but it effectively depicts enough to give you nightmares, if you really think a bout what's going on. As mentioned, the 3-D effects are stunning. No, this movie is not as good per se as "House of Wax" but it is definitely worth a look. Why the devil doesn't Warner Brothers release both HoW and PotRM on DVD in 3-D using the shutter process utilized for the Imax releases?

Phantom of the Rue Morgue (1954)

*** (out of 4)

The police are baffled by some gruesome murders to local women and they think the case is solved when they arrest Paul Dupin (Steve Forrest). What Inspector Bonnard (Claude Dauphin) doesn't realize is that the real culprit is Dr. Marais (Karl Malden) who has trained an ape to do the killings for him. This remake of the 1932 Bela Lugosi film was Warner's follow-up to HOUSE OF WAX, their first 3-D and color horror film. Most reviews seem to be very mixed in regards to this movie and while it's not quite as good as that Vincent Price classic, I think there are enough effective moments to make it worth viewing. The one thing that really caught me off guard was how ugly and rather violent the movie was. I guess director Roy Del Ruth was wanting to go the extra mile by delivering some violent scenes and while we don't always see the violence the aftermath is on few view. There are several scenes of women badly beaten and bloody and an even more memorable scene has one wannabe hero getting thrown to his death in a violent fashion. Another memorable scene is when a model is being attacked by the killer and we see blood splash across the wall but then it's revealed to be something else. I thought the performances were also good, if nothing too special. Malden doesn't do his greatest work here but there's no question that it's fun to see someone like him in a horror movie like this. Forrest does a good job as the innocent suspect and Patricia Medina makes for a good female lead. We even get Anthony Caruso playing a creepy, one-eyed assistant. There are many flaws with this movie including the police who are downright annoying. Just watch how whenever someone is being attacked and they scream, whenever a police officer is around they simply walk to see what's going on. Had any of these guys actually ran to the scene then the murders would have been solved early on. The Technicolor is another major plus here as are the sets and costumes. PHANTOM OF THE RUE MORGUE certainly isn't a masterpiece but it's good entertainment to kill some time.

I recall watching this as a kid, though not the opinion I had made of it back then. With this in mind, I am baffled by its maligned reputation (the "Leonard Maltin Film Guide" gives it a measly **); mind you, I would not say that I prefer it to the classic 1932 Bela Lugosi version but it is more readily enjoyable (and faithful to its source). The film, in fact, is quite stylish in color – with special care given to the art direction – and a worthy follow-up to Warners' success of the previous year HOUSE OF WAX (1953); like that one, it was one of the numerous genre efforts from the early 1950s to be made in 3-D (though, typically, it was used gratuitously more often than judiciously). The cast is effective, too: Karl Malden adds an Actor's Method sensibility to the lead role of biologist/misogynist, Claude Dauphin is fine as the Police Inspector investigating the various gorilla slayings, Steve Forrest ideal as the handsome hero/accused and Anthony Caruso as Malden's loutish henchman/gorilla keeper. The murders are well-done, suggesting the animal's brutish strength without actually showing it – even the 3-D process comes in handy here as one of the victims throws something at the ape in defense and the latter responds by throwing a chair back at the girl!; there is, however, a goof in the scene depicting the killing of the circus performer (assisting her jealous husband in a knife-throwing act) as she is seen taking off the tell-tale bracelet but is then unaccountably back at her hand in a shot of the mangled (albeit conveniently covered) body! On a personal note, Malta's name comes up a number of times throughout the film: the Maltese cross on a sailor's (eventually revealed to be Caruso) scarf and his inopportune meeting in a dingy tavern with a drunken former 'colleague' (sealing his fate by unwisely disclosing his knowledge of the ape's existence). The latter stages, veering from the Poe tale, actually feel closest to Universal's earlier adaptation – as Malden cannot hold back his obsession with heroine Patricia Medina (engaged to his former student, and presently incarcerated, Forrest), an impulsive move which can only lead to the expected poetic justice of the climax in which the villain meets his own grisly come-uppance at the hands of the trained (read: abused) gorilla. By the way, having included a handful of films during this challenge in which this type of animal was featured as a menace (two more followed in quick succession), I came to realize just how many were made over the years. Finally, as I said in the beginning, this is pretty much underrated both as horror/monster movie and as adaptation of a highly-influential literary work.

Although not in the same league with Warner's HOUSE OF WAX, at least this version of the Edgar Allen Poe story has some interesting ingredients that make it passable entertainment. First and foremost, the always dependable KARL MALDEN as a sinister man terrifying Paris with his ape and a pleasant supporting cast that includes CLAUDE DAUPHIN, PATRICIA MEDINA and a very young and slim MERV GRIFFIN.

David Buttolph's music adds some flavor to the improbable Poe story and the sets and costumes provide additional quality. But the basic story is so silly that none of it seems quite credible. You just have to suspend your disbelief long enough to enjoy the tale, expanded a bit from Poe's original short story with only modest returns.

STEVE FORREST, as a man wrongly accused, gives the film's most earnest performance but it's KARL MALDEN and his ape companion that you're most likely to remember.

At any rate, a vast improvement over the stilted '32 version directed by Robert Florey with a very young Leon Ames as the romantic lead and Bela Lugosi providing the only thrills.