London Blackout Murders

For a noir fan, "London Blackout Murders" from 1943 sounds exciting. It isn't.

A young woman (Mary McLeod) is bombed out of her house and moved into a place that apparently has an unsavory reputation. The man downstairs, Oliver Madison (Leslie Matthews) is helpful, but when news of the London Blackout Murders, which seem to take place in bomb shelters hits, Mary believes he may be the blackout murderer. The murders were committed with a hypodermic, and Mary saw that he had one.

A Scotland Yard Inspector (Lloyd Corrigan) believes Madison might be guilty too and uncovers a secret he's keeping. However, if he is indeed killing these people, why?

This film is not much on action, tension, or suspense. What it does have is that foggy British atmosphere and certainly puts forth the idea that London during WW II was a scary place. Not very impressive.

This is a little B movie directed by George Sherman and written by Curt Siodmack. The story of murders during the London Blitz is original, but the script is too much talky with no real action. I prefer Sherman as a western director with Hell bent for leather, Dawn at Soccorro, or Sam Bass and Calimity Jane.

Mary McLeod moves to London to work in a war plant. She takes up residence in a flat over a closed tobacconist. John Abbott welcomes her, puts a shilling in the meter for her ht water and invites her and her boyfriend to a dinner of pre-war tinned sardines. Of course, she suspects him of being the Blackout Murderer, who's been killing random strangers during air raids. So does Scotland Yard inspector Lloyd Corrigan. Dogwalker Anita Sharp-Bolster doesn't know anything about murders. She wants him arrested for leaving the dogs she parks in his shop while she's out getting drunk.

Working from a script by Curt Siodmak, director George Sherman offers a bizarre tale of morality far afield from normal practices, and the claim that when the law is helpless to act, then individuals must do so. I can't tell if the story was this abrupt when it was offered to the produces, or it got trimmed too far by editor Charles Craft, who figured it would never be more than the third film on a triple bill. In any case, it's disturbing.