Ghosts on the Loose

The main problem with "Ghosts on the Loose" is that it's outdated. Today's audience doesn't know the norms of 1943 society so we can't fully appreciate when the East Side Kids break these rules with their comical lines and antics. The characters use a lot of slang and terms that are over 60 years old. We can't get the full impact of these lines. Things really weren't the same back then. We can still get quite a bit of humor out of this movie but unless we were alive during that time, I don't think we can possibly catch everything. I still found this to be an entertaining movie and still funny. What I liked the most was seeing this film in a historical perspective. I'd like to get a few "East Side Kids" films under my belt and see the comedy of the 40s. It's always interesting to see anything with Bela Lugosi in it and he does have a staring role in this. I was also pleasantly surprised to see that this is one of Ava Gardner's early movies. As entertainment I would have to say that "Ghosts on the Loose" is an OK movie. It lost a lot of its appeal over the years but is still good for a few laughs. As an historical piece of cinematic history, it's priceless.

This was another East Side Kids movie that was pretty funny from beginning to end, largely due to the antics of Leo Gorcey and Huntz Hall as well as Ernie "Sunshine Sammy" Morrison. This was Bela Lugosi's second appearance (after Spooks Run Wild) in a film with this gang though he rarely has any scenes with any of them. This was also one of Ava Gardner's early roles in the movies and she's not in it much, either. As the title implies, this takes place in a supposed haunted house with strange things happening. So on that note, I recommend Ghosts on the Loose. P.S. It's amusing that New Orleans native Morrison says "Who Dat!" at one point since that's now the rallying cry for that Crescent City's NFL football team, the Saints. Also loved it when Glimpy asks "Who?" before Muggs says, "Who is on first."

Slapstick meets Bela Lugosi in this all-but-forgotten 1943 comedy. Just think about that statement... Comedy, Bela Lugosi. And that right there is why I allowed myself to splurge 2 bucks for a used VHS copy, because the very concept made me crack a smile.

But although Lugosi's performance can't be argued with, the plot underpinning his role certainly doesn't help to elevate this film to award-winning, or even memorable, status. There isn't any "bad" acting from anyone on the cast. It would be more accurate to say that each part was played with about as much talent and gusto as it required. While Lugosi can just walk on screen and be effective by looking like himself, the other parts are a little trickier. There is a doofus, a few cronies, a guy getting married, or a very flat Ava Gardner, so take your pick. There isn't much depth behind those parts that a halfhack drama student couldn't pull off with a hangover, so they are adequately acted.

But all criticisms of writing and the very nature of crackerjack comedy aside, the whole thing was pretty good. There are plenty of gags and stupid lines to keep anyone with at least half a heart interested. Paintings with moving eyes, secret passages, etc. The gags get old from the start but some of the lines just snap off like popcorn and I appreciate that type of writing. It's an older, fast-talking style that Hollywood tends to ignore nowadays, if people are even writing like that any longer, but I doubt it; there's too much interest in color film, sex and violence to make dialogue important.

This film has no blood, no senseless violence, no gratuitous sex, and no crass language. Don't get me wrong, there is an upside (heh). So I'm not going to pretend that I'm too cool to say this wasn't any good, because it's funny, simple, and downright ridiculous. All I mean to say is that when those factors are combined in a script today, they doubtlessly create a tasteless, fluffy PG sleeper not worth the price of the ticket. This movie is different, however, just don't expect a cinematic masterpiece. Expect it to be what the title suggests, a simple and stupid comedy starring Bela Lugosi as a secret Nazi, and you've got to love that.

I have some bias with regards to this classic slapstick comedy because I watched it several times at a young age, but I must admit it's still VERY funny in what is at least 15 years later. Sure, the characters and acting are all extremely dated, but that's the beauty of it! The Bowery Boy gang's line of films can be compared to the comedic stylings of the Thee Stooges and other similar old Hollywood comedies. I found myself grinning through much of the duration of this film. It's good, fun comedy. The kind of humor that you can really enjoy at any age. If you go into this film (and all the others like it) without cynicism, then you'll undoubtedly enjoy it.

The Director, William Beaudine, also known as, "One-Take Beaudine, believed in filming one take of one scene. Get it right the first time. Bela Lugosi, as a gag, said a bad four-letter word in the first take of one specific scene. Bela Lugosi standing still as a portrait, while sneeezing expelled the expletive. Director William Beaudine kept the take in the film. This may be the first time a very bad expletive word had ever been heard and used in a film, with the exception of Gone With The Wind (1939), in which Clark Gable said in his memorable last line, used the word "damn", Bela Lugosi used the word "shit" uncalled for and not in the script. Ghosts On The Loose was released in 1943.