अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA woman of twenty-one opens her grandfather's will left to her thirteen years earlier, per his instructions. Murder soon follows.A woman of twenty-one opens her grandfather's will left to her thirteen years earlier, per his instructions. Murder soon follows.A woman of twenty-one opens her grandfather's will left to her thirteen years earlier, per his instructions. Murder soon follows.
Johnny Duncan
- Harold Morgan
- (as John Duncan)
John Dawson
- Tom Jackson
- (as Jon Dawson)
Robert J. Anderson
- Harold as a Child
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Shirley Jean Anderson
- Marie as a Child
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Mike Donovan
- Mike - Police Desk Sergeant
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Lester Dorr
- Carter
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Dick Gordon
- Uncle John
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Herbert Heyes
- Dr. Sherwood - Plastic Surgeon
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Donald Kerr
- Photographer
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
A young girl arrives at her ancestral home and is promptly murdered-- -or is she? Twelve years earlier the murdered woman, as a little girl, had attended a birthday party for her dying grandfather. Thirteen partygoers were invited but only twelve attended. The thirteenth guest was death.
Now, in the present, the original twelve guests are members of the family fighting over the will and someone wants the money badly enough to kill for it. Detective Dick Purcell is called in to solve the crime, aided by comic sidekicks and the usual inept policemen who only seem to inhabit "B" mysteries. Directed by William "One Shot" Beaudine, this 60 minute quickie is a darn good version of the Armitage Trail mystery and manages to be a little better that its 1932 predecessor-----though for some reason the 1943 film is much more difficult to see.
Now, in the present, the original twelve guests are members of the family fighting over the will and someone wants the money badly enough to kill for it. Detective Dick Purcell is called in to solve the crime, aided by comic sidekicks and the usual inept policemen who only seem to inhabit "B" mysteries. Directed by William "One Shot" Beaudine, this 60 minute quickie is a darn good version of the Armitage Trail mystery and manages to be a little better that its 1932 predecessor-----though for some reason the 1943 film is much more difficult to see.
Mystery of the 13th Guest, The (1943)
** 1/2 (out of 4)
Decent "B" movie about a family getting together for the eldest to announce that his will won't be read for another thirteen years after his granddaughter turns twenty-one. Thirteen years later the guests at that party start turning up dead so it's up to a private detective (Dick Purcell) and a Police Lt. (Tim Ryan) to figure out who's doing the killings. If you're looking for high art then you're not going to find it here but if you're looking for an hour to kill with some light entertainment then you might find this Monogram quickie entertaining. Old 'One Shot' Beaudine certainly doesn't do anything overly special with this murder-mystery but he at least keeps the pace up so that the brief 60-minutes go by quickly and without too much dead space. The screenplay itself certainly doesn't try to do anything ground breaking but it keeps the characters interesting and the murderer under wraps until the very end, which is pretty much all you can ask for out of a film like this. Purcell does a pretty good job with his role and makes the fast-talking wise guy fun to watch. His back-and-forth banter with Ryan is pretty entertaining and Helen Parrish makes for a good female lead. Frank Faylen plays the dimwitted cop and gets a few laughs. The rest of the cast are serviceable and give pretty much what you'd expect out of them. The mystery itself is a pretty good one as I found the murder weapon (an electrical wire attached to a phone) to be quite fun and all the horror trappings like the mysterious hidden doors and traps to help keep things moving. No one is ever going to mistake this film for a classic but if you're a fan of the genre then you'll know that there's much worse out there.
** 1/2 (out of 4)
Decent "B" movie about a family getting together for the eldest to announce that his will won't be read for another thirteen years after his granddaughter turns twenty-one. Thirteen years later the guests at that party start turning up dead so it's up to a private detective (Dick Purcell) and a Police Lt. (Tim Ryan) to figure out who's doing the killings. If you're looking for high art then you're not going to find it here but if you're looking for an hour to kill with some light entertainment then you might find this Monogram quickie entertaining. Old 'One Shot' Beaudine certainly doesn't do anything overly special with this murder-mystery but he at least keeps the pace up so that the brief 60-minutes go by quickly and without too much dead space. The screenplay itself certainly doesn't try to do anything ground breaking but it keeps the characters interesting and the murderer under wraps until the very end, which is pretty much all you can ask for out of a film like this. Purcell does a pretty good job with his role and makes the fast-talking wise guy fun to watch. His back-and-forth banter with Ryan is pretty entertaining and Helen Parrish makes for a good female lead. Frank Faylen plays the dimwitted cop and gets a few laughs. The rest of the cast are serviceable and give pretty much what you'd expect out of them. The mystery itself is a pretty good one as I found the murder weapon (an electrical wire attached to a phone) to be quite fun and all the horror trappings like the mysterious hidden doors and traps to help keep things moving. No one is ever going to mistake this film for a classic but if you're a fan of the genre then you'll know that there's much worse out there.
The Morgan house at has been locked up for thirteen years, ever since the death of the family patriarch (played in flashback by Lloyd Ingraham). There was, of course, the usual rigmarole of mutually antagonistic heirs, a shady lawyer, and a will calculated to make things as difficult as possible for everybody. The dying Morgan had summoned Barksdale the lawyer and all ten of the heirs out to the house to discuss his impending death and its aftermath. Morgan's will was sealed, its contents secret even from Barksdale, and it was to remain so until the youngest of his grandchildren- eight-year-old Marie (played as an adult by Helen Parrish)- turned 21. When Marie turns 21 yesterday, she lets herself into her grandfather's house, she finds it exactly as it was thirteen years ago, except with a telephone installed, which doesn't make a lot of sense in a house where nobody lives. A shot rings out, and Marie rushes to the mysterious telephone to call the police. No sooner has she lifted the handset to her ear, though, than she goes into convulsions and sinks slowly to the floor, apparently dead. Soon more dead bodies follow...
Decent enough mystery with a idea typical of the era, some fine creepy house atmosphere and shadows and a creepy looking killer donned with mask a la michael Myers, however it doesn't really lifts itself above ordinary. Still it's watchable and there's some good humorous dialogue.
Decent enough mystery with a idea typical of the era, some fine creepy house atmosphere and shadows and a creepy looking killer donned with mask a la michael Myers, however it doesn't really lifts itself above ordinary. Still it's watchable and there's some good humorous dialogue.
Perhaps I am not as well-versed in movie history as others are. I don't know what a Monogram film is.
I like mysteries and it was recommended in Netflix. I was surprised to see it only lasted an hour. Of course, well before the hour was up I was grateful for that fact.
This is not a good movie. It's akin to a bad short story; you just have to finish even though you know it's not going to get any better.
The grandfather dies and the folks who were at dinner 13 years before begin dying off. Who is responsible? We eventually find out, but there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why that person is responsible.
The dialogue is insipid. The acting is not good. The lighting doesn't seem too good either. There's the hard-edge detective and the campy one-liners. It just didn't work.
Spare yourself; there are better movies out there. There's nothing about this that I find worth sitting through.
I like mysteries and it was recommended in Netflix. I was surprised to see it only lasted an hour. Of course, well before the hour was up I was grateful for that fact.
This is not a good movie. It's akin to a bad short story; you just have to finish even though you know it's not going to get any better.
The grandfather dies and the folks who were at dinner 13 years before begin dying off. Who is responsible? We eventually find out, but there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why that person is responsible.
The dialogue is insipid. The acting is not good. The lighting doesn't seem too good either. There's the hard-edge detective and the campy one-liners. It just didn't work.
Spare yourself; there are better movies out there. There's nothing about this that I find worth sitting through.
Mystery of the 13th Guest (1943)
I have to admit, I started this with too high expectations--it had great mood, great B-movie sets, and a plot that sounded great in an Agatha Christie way. But then the corny style of acting kicked in--it's a kind of pre-TV flippant entertainment, purposely aiming for a slight, silly humor at the expense of real drama. Too bad.
So I watched the rest with half an eye, which was enough. The plot is highly contrived and highly important--it's a whodunnit, for sure, with a series of growing clues and new characters. The detective is just too absurd to work--he doesn't even serve as a parody of the newly crystallizing Bogart kind of hardboiled detective. And there a too many scenes with a lot of people standing around a room (a living room or a detective's office), with not a lot of clear tension of development, just exaggerated chitchat.
So, why watch it at all? I'm not sure! But I did, from the side, and there are some great stereotypes (call them clichés) at work--dark shadows of men in fedoras, a haunted old house, a murder and the threat of more murder, even a terrific (haha) trap door. It verges on Three Stooges kind of humor now and then but lacks the true slapstick genius (at times) of those guys (who began in the 1930s and were really big by the 1943), but you can sense an echo of them (one of the detectives even makes little Curly and Moe noises). This version of the movies is actually a remake of a better if not brilliant 1932 film, starring a young Ginger Rogers (and available to see free and legal at this site: www.archive.org/details/The_Thirteenth_Guest).
If you are really feeling frivolous, this might be fun. But your are forewarned.
I have to admit, I started this with too high expectations--it had great mood, great B-movie sets, and a plot that sounded great in an Agatha Christie way. But then the corny style of acting kicked in--it's a kind of pre-TV flippant entertainment, purposely aiming for a slight, silly humor at the expense of real drama. Too bad.
So I watched the rest with half an eye, which was enough. The plot is highly contrived and highly important--it's a whodunnit, for sure, with a series of growing clues and new characters. The detective is just too absurd to work--he doesn't even serve as a parody of the newly crystallizing Bogart kind of hardboiled detective. And there a too many scenes with a lot of people standing around a room (a living room or a detective's office), with not a lot of clear tension of development, just exaggerated chitchat.
So, why watch it at all? I'm not sure! But I did, from the side, and there are some great stereotypes (call them clichés) at work--dark shadows of men in fedoras, a haunted old house, a murder and the threat of more murder, even a terrific (haha) trap door. It verges on Three Stooges kind of humor now and then but lacks the true slapstick genius (at times) of those guys (who began in the 1930s and were really big by the 1943), but you can sense an echo of them (one of the detectives even makes little Curly and Moe noises). This version of the movies is actually a remake of a better if not brilliant 1932 film, starring a young Ginger Rogers (and available to see free and legal at this site: www.archive.org/details/The_Thirteenth_Guest).
If you are really feeling frivolous, this might be fun. But your are forewarned.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThis film was first telecast in Cincinnati Friday 3 June 1949 on WKRC (Channel 11), in Los Angeles Sunday 26 June 1949 on KTLA (Channel 5), in New York City Tuesday 5 July 1949 on WCBS (Channel 2), in Chicago Sunday 10 July 1949 on WBKB (Channel 4), in Syracuse Wednesday 31 August 1949 on WHEN (Channel 8), and in San Francisco Sunday 6 August 1950 on KRON (Channel 4).
- गूफ़It's never said who raises young Marie. Surrounded by aunts, uncles, cousins, a grandfather, and the grandfather's lawyer, she and her brother are supposedly orphans, although this is never said. Why the grandfather favors his granddaughter over his grandson is also a mystery. In that he's soon to die, it's curious who becomes her guardian over the next 13 years (since it's a good guess her grandfather has been watching out for her and won't be around to protect her).
- भाव
Johnny Smith: Burke, you ought to have that mind of yours dry-cleaned.
Police Lt. Burke: And while I'm at it, I'll have your conscience pressed.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनAlternate titles include "Dangerous Men" and "The Last Racketeer."
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Movies at Midnight: The Mystery of the 13th Guest (1954)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Mystery of the 13th Guest?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें
टॉप गैप
By what name was The Mystery of the 13th Guest (1943) officially released in Canada in English?
जवाब