Behind the Mask

I forgot the director John Francis Dillon, he is lost now in moviegoers memory I guess, and I think it is a shame after watching this movie. This is not astounding but very worth the watch, with a good story, solid, unusual for the period. Pre Code film, it is authorized to predict many more things than one decade later. Yes, this is definitely an interesting little film from the thirties, early thirties, where it remains many more movies to find out. I am still amazed by this topic. Boris Karloff also shines in this non horror feature, and his role is rather important in this crime topic. He steals the place to Jack Holt.

Were it not for the presence of Boris Karloff, here in a supporting role, we may not have such a high quality home video edition of this movie. Enjoyable as it is in many ways, BEHIND THE MASK is also a good example of how much difference a talented director can make. Compare the films of James Whale, for example, from the same period and see how much better several scenes here might have been. On the plus side, there is the cinematography of Ted Tetzlaff, creating moody scenes in heavy rain that grab a viewer's attention from the start. So the film looks mostly great, but in the acting department it's merely adequate. No one in the cast is terrible, and we do have Edward Van Sloane clearly enjoying himself as an evil scientist. But even Karloff is a slight disappointment. It's fun to see him in modern dress, playing a hired killer, but it's not one of his really notable appearances. Still, the plot is engaging and there is more action than one might expect from such a modest production.

What must have started life as a pretty ordinary crime picture is dressed up for the box office with some of the popular flourishes of the day such as electronic gadgets and a mysterious criminal mastermind.

Karloff gives excellent value as villain's chief henchman and thankfully gets plenty of screen time.

Although director and cast were all well experienced in pictures, the performances tend to be on the dull side, particularly Jack Holt in the lead. The pace of individual scenes is a little slow too, almost as if everyone concerned were making a conscious effort to hold back from the excesses of the silent days.

No classic, but you could do worse.

Ah, there's nothing like a good old-fashioned creepy & atmospheric horror tale from the early nineteen-thirties starring the almighty Boris Karloff! Be forewarned, however, that this "Behind the Mask" is not really a horror movie and that Karloff in fact only plays a supportive character – albeit quite a menacing one. Does that mean that the film isn't worth checking out? Nope, not at all, because "Behind the Mask" definitely does contain quite a few sinister twists and details in its overall very ambitious and compelling crime/mystery screenplay. A whole bunch of elite federal agents are trying to unravel a large-scaled drug smuggling network led by the nefarious Mr. X. Special agent Jack Hart takes the identity of small thug Quinn and goes undercover in a state prison where he meets Jim Henderson (Karloff); one of Mr. X's principal henchmen. The organization of Mr. X is most certainly evil, as the criminal mastermind also runs an unorthodox clinic where the patients are murdered and their coffins stuffed with narcotics. The script from the hand of Jo Swerling – also the writer of Hitchcock's "Lifeboat" – superficially seems extremely ambitious, but rather many elements are nevertheless tacky (like the forced love-story between the secret agent and one of the minions' daughter) and/or predictable (for example the identity of Mr. X is not really that secretive). Top-billed stars Boris Karloff and Jack Holt are decent enough, but the show is stolen by Edward Van Sloan in a fiendish double role, and by Bertha Mann! She depicts a creepy maid who's strategically put in the house of Dr. X's unreliable collaborators. She closely observes everyone in the house and reports to her employer via a radio installation in her room.

This film was made during the same period as "The Criminal Code" by the same studio. It also used some of the same sets and film footage. During this period,"Frankenstein" was released and Columbia decided to play up Karloff's name and the picture's horror aspects in the advertising. But technically, it is not a horror film. It is exploited as another horror picture, this doesn't horrify sufficiently to class with preceding baby-scarers. The scare stuff seems tossed in regardless of where it fits, but it gets results because KARLOFF's threatening pan makes him a natural for his part.