Homicide for Three

"Homicide for Three" is a brainless mystery B-movie. It tries to be funny (but it isn't) and it tries to be an engaging mystery (but it isn't). It just comes off as an incredibly forced low-budget film--one which never once seems plausible or interesting. And, even if the acting was better (and occasionally it's pretty bad), the writing is so poor that the actors haven't got a chance.

The film begins with a very frisky young married couple searching all over town for a hotel room--but with no success. So far, this looks like the makings of a sexy comedy....but no such luck. A bit later, when they are trying to get a room, a woman overhears them and offers them her room. From here on, it's a lot like "Date Night" when a murder occurs and they pair are possibly implicated. Through it all they have a 'detective' who helps them...and pretty much everyone but them knows what will happen next.

The bottom line is that the film is stale, silly and full of BAZILLIONS of plot holes. Why didn't they go to the police? Why would two idiots think they could investigate a murder ring?! Huh?!?! Dumb....very dumb. And, during the film my daughter kept begging me to turn it off. I wish I'd listened to her.

Naval Lieutenant Warren Douglas and bride Audrey Long are about to begin a delayed honeymoon -- he was shipped off the day they were married -- if they can find a hotel room. Fortunately, Stephanie Bachelor, about to elope, gives them her suite. All their hopes are delayed when Miss Long's look-alike cousin is murdered, followed soon by their next lead, Tala Birrell.

It's a potentially funny comedy-mystery from a novel by Hugh Wheeler and Richard Webb, except that Douglas has the comedy timing of a grouchy and not particularly bright block of wood. Miss Long is bright, beautiful, and interesting, and does her best, and there's drunken Lloyd Corrigan, dependably amusing as always. However, the fact that it turns out there's a renowned criminologist on the case who has figured out exactly who the murderers are and who they will kill, who never bothers to mention it to the police ultimately strains the serious side of the story past belief. So it doesn't work on either level.

It's too bad. Miss Long's career never got past the B movies, but she managed a happy ending of her own, marrying Leslie Charteris and staying married until his death. She lived to be 92 and pass on in 2014.

George Blair and Philip Ford were for Republic Pictures real, authentic chain directors, they never, never rose as RG Springsteen, Harry Keller, Thomas Carr, Joseph Kane or George Sherman, who also began at the studio with B westerns and thrillers, not over one hour length, and rapidly obtained bigger budgets, mostly in other studios, because unlike Ford and Blair, they were a bit ambitious, at least more than those two. So, to watch ths tepid, lame junk, you have to be a die hard boiled Republic Pictures B movies digger. A mystery thriller which offers absolutely nothing more than you usually deal with. Forget it.

Sprightly Republic programmer. The two leads (Douglas & Long) play engaging newly-weds as they try to solve a complex murder mystery swirling around them. There's quite a bit of innuendo as they try to get a few minutes alone before the navy man has to report back for duty. But roses, a bird, and a couple of murders keep interrupting their time. Long is particularly lively and engaging without going over the top. Fortunately, neither walks through his or her role, always a risk for a low-budget production. It's also a colorful supporting cast, especially rotund Dick Elliott as a stubborn drunk. I could have used more action, but happily director Blair keeps things moving. The mystery itself is not very involving despite the many teasers, so it's really up to the players to carry the load, which they do. All in all, it's a diverting and, at times, charming little farcical mystery.

Homicide for Three (1948)

There is a seeming waste of talent here in a Republic (small studio) B-movie that isn't quite dramatic or funny enough to take off. So it sinks under the weight of its frivolous plot, which I think it more or less intended to do. What I mean is, it was a lighthearted movie that would have played with a heavier A-movie feature. By itself it's not enough.

But it's worth noticing the very real, honest presence of the main actress, a lively and natural Audrey Long (seen in "Born to Kill" in a similar but secondary role). You can almost watch the movie just for her ease and "American" cheerfulness. Her counterpart is stiff by comparison, and the supporting cast gets worse from there (including a supposed detective that is so wooden he's concrete, though he has a passing resemblance to Lon Chaney Jr.). There are attempts to spice it up, even including some perplexing overview shots of a circus (they couldn't afford to really set up a circus for a shoot).

Mostly we have a series of rooms of various kinds and some lightly entertaining twists as two hapless lovers get dragged further and further into a plot with some absurd coincidences. All in fun, but try "Born to Kill" first, or Long's other known film, "Desperate," both great 1947 noirs.