L'ora che uccide

"Charlie Chan's Secret" (1936) is unique. Its predecessor is "Charlie Chan in Shanghai" (1935)---which featured Keye Luke in his usual role as Number One Son. All the remaining Warner Oland films in the series up to his final entry, "Charlie Chan at Monte Carlo" (1938), also had Keye Luke in the cast. However, "Charlie Chan's Secret", as others have pointed out, does not have Keye Luke on board. Rather, his "place" was taken (sort of) by the comic British actor, Herbert Mundin. Why did Keye Luke not appear in this film? Everyone seems to have missed him.

In the new DVD of "Charlie Chan's Secret", the extended commentary on the film fails to explain the cause of Keye Luke's absence-----only the fact that he does not show up in the film.

Is it possible that Keye Luke's void could be due to the fact that he was loaned by Twentieth Century Fox to M-G-M Studio around the same time to appear in the small but pivotal supporting role as Paul Muni's son in the classic Pearl Buck epic "The Good Earth" (1937)? Such loan out arrangements were not uncommon between studios in this period.

In any event, "Charlie Chan's Secret" survives his absence very nicely and emerges as a solid entry in the series with its own particular charm and entertainment value. But it does illustrate how the chemistry between Warner Oland and Keye Luke was very special and without doubt one of the greatest strengths of the "Charlie Chan" films.

More serious Chan story has the detective going it alone as he tries to solve the mystery of a missing heir. The mystery becomes a question of murder in short order and the detective tries to find the killer before he is the next victim.

Atypical Chan is undeservedly forgotten, even by me. I remember the film not because of what it is, a cracking good mystery, rather because of what its not, a film with little humor and no of his kids to help him. Its a wonderful change of pace that marked a break from the formula that would dominate most of the films in the series. The film also has one of the best mysteries, as in the plot of what is really going on, in the entire 40 plus film series.. Closer in a way to the darkness of some of the later films, this is one of the Chans thats really is perfect for a dark and rainy night. Recommended

A murder is revealed at a seance. All in attendance had motive and opportunity. There are a lots of nice tricks employed at the seance that Charlie has to figure out. Even after a plethora of red herrings, it still could be anyone when all are assembled in a typical ending in which Charlie pulls a surprise to reveal the criminal. There is no #1 or #2 son here, and Herbert Mundin, as the butler, who stands in for #1 and #2 to provide the laughs, is really annoyingly silly, more in the mode of Mantan Moreland in the later bad Chan films only minus the racism. However, he gives the crusty matriarch of the family a chance to deliver some rib-tickling lines at his expense. Listen for them. Oland is the best of the Chans and performs the role with dignity and some humor. You get the feeling that, although he isn't a Chinese actor, he respects the character. No "Confucius Say" here. I enjoy watching this film now and again and think anyone into old-style mysteries will too.

Warner Oland in classic mystery set in old house with secret passages. Lots of clues and comic relief done extremely well by Herbert Mundin as butler Baxter. Story has sufficient twists and turns to keep interest and keep ending unpredictable. Chan brings multitude of suspects together in room at end: `Motive for recent murders like tangle of many strings, ends of which held by persons in this room.' Like in most Chan films, the missing clue that cinches the case is not revealed until the guilty party is in custody. Good lighting makes the séance scenes even spookier.' Recommended.

I've worked my way recently through about 10 of the films in the Chan series and this is one of the most compelling I've seen yet -- largely due to the good chemistry between Warner Oland and Henrietta Crosman, who is one of the more memorable of the leading ladies in the series. True, the Chan family is missing -- except when viewed briefly in a photograph at the film's very end -- and the San Francisco location isn't very convincing; it is hard to place the "ancient" house where much of the action takes place in a city where most everything was burnt to the ground in 1906. Nevertheless many of the typically alluring elements of the Chan films are present in full force -- society ladies in long dresses, a shady pair of mediums, séances that come to a screaming end, pitch black scenes in secret rooms, and odd applications of 1930s technology. Jonathan Hale is a welcome presence and the comic relief supplied by Herbert Mundin as the butler stops short of being annoying, which is more than one can say for some of the later entries in the series. All in all quite satisfying.