Behind the Mask

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.

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.

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.

This is a nice, efficient mystery/thriller, enlivened by the presence of Boris Karloff and Edward van Sloane. Karloff is fine in this non-monster role, as a cocky, bowler wearing, cigar smoking crook. His presence (in retrospect) also provides a cachet of horror to the mix. This movie, after all, was shooting just as Frankenstein was released. The rest of the cast is very good and the direction is no-nonsense, straight ahead story telling (if a bit improbable). Things keep moving so quickly you don't really have time to question the plot's realism. But the real kick and revelation is Edward van Sloane in a dual/triple role -- in particular, his portrayal of Dr. Steiner, with his crackling electronic gear, his google-eye specs, his trilling foreign accent -- apparently having the time of his life as an sinister, conniving doctor masterminding a dope ring. His sadistic banter during the film's climax is convincing enough to rank with the best of Lionel Atwill's or Bela Lugosi's incarnations of mad doctors at the height of their madness.