Charlie Chan in Egypt

This has always been one of my favourite Warner Oland Chan's, made even more suitably murky and mysterious by the passage of time and the way it's been handled since it was made.

Charlie's in Egypt to track down the person responsible for leaking valuable ancient artifacts into European collections, finding murder as well. With some fantastic atmospheric sets as backdrop and a great cast he and the ever dependable Thomas Beck act as a team to get to the bottom of the mystery and nab the culprit. Every other post has highlighted the main problem with it: Stepin Fetchit. It's a shame they put him in but it's not a problem to me as I don't watch it for him shuffling and mumbling along but for the main story unfolding around the rest of the cast. His major scenes could easily be cut out or altered to save everyone's black and white blushes today - but where would you stop? Airbrush cigarettes, smoke and alcohol, cgi over carbon non-neutral cars or low efficiency lightbulbs, even change Oland to a white Swede and superimpose a black superhero in goodie Beck's place to engage a more proactive and socially inclusive demographic, erase mention of Egypt to try to disguise the colonial connotations etc? And of course if we went that far also add plenty of mindless graphic sex and violence because that's OK in todays crazy world; the Nazis would have simply burned all the prints of this and everything considered similar and revised the history books.

With all its faults I'm grateful for what we've got – some of the early Chan's are lost forever – at the very least for an insight into the human mental condition as it existed in Hollywood in 1935 but more for as it exists around the world today. If you really don't like it you could campaign for its destruction, but if you like watching pre WW2 b&w middle brow detective movies containing innumerable dead people like this like me watch it without angst as a good film.

Warner Oland does it again with a great performance as Chan. This one also has a great setting and creepy atmosphere. It is set at a newly excavated Egyptian tomb with all the trappings. There are some genuinely scary sequences creeping around the tomb at night. A young Rita Hayworth (billed as Rita Cansino) has a small part. The only drawback for me is the stereotyped portrayal by Stephin Fechit. He is hard to understand and very annoying at times. The performances by Mantan Moreland and Willie Best in the much later Monogram Chans serve the same niche as Fechit's "Snowshoes" character, but come off much better and are funny in the same way Lou Costello or Curly Howard are funny. But this does not harm the picture. Another one to see over and over again just for the atmosphere if nothing else.

Despite the ridiculous presence of Stepin Fetchit, who really contributes nothing but the most egregious of stereotyping, this is a pretty good mystery. Oh, he is quite successful at mumbling incomprehensibly and bringing a flashlight when one is needed. He lives in perpetual fear. Anyway, something is going on with Egyptian treasures that British imperialists are stealing from Egypt to take back to museums. During a discovery, an archaeologist drops dead. This leads to infighting among groups who obviously have made a major discovery and would like it for there own. Charlie Chan has come on the scene and has no idea at the outset that there is so much going on. There is a romantic angle with the young male lead getting in over his head. One interesting thing is the appearance of the beautiful young Rita Hayworth who does little more that look attractive. What is interesting to me is that there is a point where they start to blame Charlie for all the ills they are facing. He takes this in stride because, after all, he is a lesser being in the pecking order. The method of murder and the wrapping up of the case is quite satisfying.

"Waiting for tomorrow, waste of today!" and other Chan aphorisms account for just a small portion of the delightful entertainment afforded by this eleventh offering in the 47-picture series. But for one distressing lapse, it might even rank as the best. That lapse is Mr Stepin Fetchit, about whom the less said, the better. Fortunately, his role is small, although, alas, it's considerably larger than that enjoyed by the lovely Rita Hayworth who seems to have spent most of her Fox sojourn posing for charming stills. Her role in the actual movie is inconsequential although she does manage to exchange a few lines with Warner Oland. Otherwise, all she does is to hover in the background of a few scenes.

Oland, of course, is in top form, but so are the other players, and even more importantly the Robert Ellis-Helen Logan script comes across as a real winner. Although the identity of the killer will fail to stump many viewers, the puzzle is admirably contrived and the plot worked out with commendable pace, precision and power.

This is no "B" picture. The sets are stunning. Daniel Clark's noirishly atmospheric photography also deserves special mention and even the normally humdrum director, Louis King (brother of Henry King) has risen to the occasion.

Charlie Chan in Egypt isn't my favorite Charlie Chan. For some reason, I'm more used to Sidney Toler in the role, I love Mantan Moreland, and it's always fun when one of Charlie's sons is on the scene.

What this 1935 film does have is an interesting story, footage of Egypt, which even in black and white is pretty impressive, and an appearance by a heavier, brunette, pre-electrolysis Rita Hayworth (using her original name Rita Cansino here). Pat Paterson (Mrs. Charles Boyer) is the lead woman.

Chan is in Egypt on behalf of a French museum to investigate tomb treasures that were to go to the museum but instead are in other European museums. He meets Carol Arnold (Patterson) whose father, on the dig, hasn't been heard from in some time. There's a good reason for that. He's mummified in a sarcophagus that's supposed to hold an ancient priest.

Well, there's another murder and an attempted murder as Charlie attempts to figure out who killed Professor Arnold and why.

Warner Oland is fine as Charlie, though some other performances are a little over the top/melodramatic. Mainly, James Eagles, as Professor Arnold's physically challenged son, sticks out with an absolutely maniacal performance.

I won't bother to go into the controversial Stepin Fetchit's presence in this film. His life story is an interesting one, however, and worth a look. The character he developed, which made him a millionaire, is cringe-worthy by today's standards.

All in all, an okay film.