House of Mystery

An obnoxious archaeologist insults the locals in Asia and has to flee, but not before grabbing a hoard of Asian treasures as he scurries back to the U.S. His investors back home want part of the fortune that he brings back with him. So he invites them all to his two-story mansion, but informs them that an Asian "curse" befalls those in possession of the fortune. His proposition is that the investors stay in his house for awhile and see for themselves what happens.

It's a silly story concept. But it does offer a neat little puzzle for whodunit fans to solve. The plot involves a séance, some incense, and tom-tom drums. There are multiple plot holes, at least one of which is revealed by means of dialogue. The solution to the puzzle includes a psychological concept called "conditioned response". But the application of it to this story is not very credible.

Characters are poorly developed, which is not surprising, given the short runtime. There are eight or so suspects, none very interesting, apart from a grouchy old woman lording over her henpecked husband. The insurance salesman is a bit annoying. The cops are rather nondescript and bumbling. I could have wished for a Charlie Chan.

In the version I watched, sound quality was not very good, and neither was the B&W cinematography. The visuals tended to be unnecessarily dark and somewhat blurry, probably a result of inferior technology in the 1930s. Casting is okay. But acting is exaggerated, also likely resulting from an era just emerging from silent films.

Aside from poor visuals and sound, which we might expect for that era, the main problem is a not very credible story premise, compounded by poor characterization. Even so, the film might still appeal to viewers who like animated puzzles, which is what a whodunit film really is.

The theme is nice and supernatural, nearly but it's a murder mystery. I didn't expect there to be comedy too. I found the film in the first half hour interesting but the second was silly. The policemen were comics and it became too over the top daft. I like old films but this one was just not my kind of thing. The ending felt rushed and I wanted to see a bit more to round it off.

House of Mystery (1934)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

An adventurer kills a sacred monkey and soon a curse is put on him. He returns to America and his share holders want their money but before he returns it they must stay a week in his mansion where all sorts of strange things are going on. This is yet another "old dark house" film with another mystery and another deadly gorilla. As I've said countless times before, I'm really not sure why everyone of these films had to have a gorilla in it but I guess people in the 30s were terrified of them. The cast of characters are pretty varied and fun including a nerdy professor and his pushy wife. There's some light comedy thrown in that works as well but the film mainly tries to work its mystery and it does so to a nice effect. I think the screenplay is rather good and I enjoyed how they added in the curse of the monkey. The gorilla outfit doesn't look too bad but then again I might be saying this because I've seen some really bad ones out there. Clay Clement does a very good job in the lead and the supporting cast is fine.

The movie begins in Asia (India) in 1913, where the main character (a Mr. Prendergast) kills a monkey, & then moves ahead to 1932-33 in the US, where the Curse of Kahli follows him. This is a solid old dark house kind of movie that has comic elements & a seance. It's a treat for fans of the Hopalong Cassidy B western series to see a 47 year young beardless George Hayes in a small role. There are lots of murders, several surprises, & the mandatory man in the gorilla suit. Chanda (played by Laya Joy, AKA Joyzelle Joyner), after an early stint in the movie as an exotic dancer (she's does a good job at that) walks around the rest of the movie zombie-like, almost speechless. Fans of the old dark house genre will certainly enjoy this one.

House of Mystery is ok as a 1934 mystery movie with a respectful dose of comedy thrown in. I was hoping for something a little scarier but that never came about. As a mystery, I thought it was below average but the strange and often comedic characters did keep things interesting. The movie doesn't drag or bog down, but that may be in large part to the fact that the film is only 62 minutes long. It never really met my expectations but had enough going for it that it managed to keep my interest. My impression of this movie is that it was just an ok movie, nothing special, but certainly not bad. If you see it, I think you might get some enjoyment out of it, but if you don't see it, you're really not missing too much. A respectable but forgettable 30s mystery movie.