Lo strangolatore folle

Some people have asked why Boris Karloff never played a serious version of "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" . Well, here it is, even though it is in the form of some "Dr. Tennant / Hyde-like strangler" duality. Once again, Boris Karloff plays the "monster" and like Mr. Hyde in the previous films, he plays a man who degenerates to a rampaging animal which lives to kill. Also like Mr. Hyde, the transformations to the lower form seem to be based on some sort of sexual repression that bursts out in the form of savage attacks on women. In addition, like the "beast" in the "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" films, whether one is watching Fredric March, Spencer Tracy, or John Barrymore, the transformation from man to the lower animal state gets uglier with each change. Another thing, the graveyard scenes in the movie are really creepy - kind of a throwback to films such as "Frankenstein", "Bride of Frankenstein", "Return of the Vampire", and "The Body Snatcher". Even though the plot has some strange twists, this is one of the best post-Universal thrillers starring Boris Karloff - one of the last in which he plays both the monster ("Mr. Hyde") and the mad doctor (Tennant). (Karloff did the same thing in "Frankenstein 1970" in which he played both creator and created.) Great hair-raiser.

Watch it in the dark.

Dan Basinger

Having been - as was the case with THE TIN DRUM (1979) - the one to 'announce' several years ago the re-release on DVD of 4 Richard/Alex Gordon productions through Criterion on another online Forum (after writing to Image Entertainment to see if their bare-bones OOP editions were going to be re-issued), this set has been a long time coming indeed! As some of you may know, I'd never watched this one prior to purchasing the expensive "Monsters And Madmen" set - or, for that matter, its follow-up CORRIDORS OF BLOOD (1958); however, I knew enough of their reputation as two of Boris Karloff's best latter-day films to make me spring for them regardless.

To be honest, as I lay watching THE HAUNTED STRANGLER, I was somewhat let down by it and my heart actually sank when, in the Audio Commentary, both Richard Gordon and Tom Weaver opine that they prefer this one over CORRIDORS OF BLOOD! Still, going through the film twice in a matter of hours can sometimes work wonders: at first glance, it's a handsome-looking yet rather lurid film - reveling in the permissiveness of the time to include as many (often gratuitous) instances of sleaze and sadism as it possibly could; in that respect, it's similar to THE FLESH AND THE FIENDS (1959) - incidentally, another well-regarded title I had long wanted to watch and been underwhelmed by on a preliminary viewing.

The film actually precedes Hammer's DR. JEKYLL AND SISTER HYDE (1971) in that it mingles the Stevenson perennial with the equally popular exploits of Jack The Ripper; to these it attaches a thriller angle by having Karloff act as a detective investigating an old series of murders, ostensibly to prove a miscarriage of justice, but whose repercussions are far worse - to say nothing of closer to home - than he could have imagined (itself an oft-used device as in, say, THE BIG CLOCK [1947])! While I knew of the twist from reading about the film beforehand (and which is actually revealed fairly early in the game), I feel that it doesn't quite work here because, for one thing, the star was simply too old for the role (though I'll readily admit that he entered with glee into its quite physical attributes, even coming up with the economical make-up design himself!) but also because the character's mental condition and its effect on his backstory is conveniently kept under wraps until the revelation (when it should, at least, bother him equally as much as wanting to prove the innocence of an anonymous and legally convicted serial-killer). Incidentally, though strangulation is involved in the crimes, the film's title is somewhat misleading because it's the scalpel which sets the 'monster' off and, for this reason, the U.S. moniker is rather more accurate!

Anyway, one of the film's major assets is surely Lionel Banes' black-and-white cinematography; the second half of the narrative, then, creates reasonable suspense and excitement with the scenes involving the rampaging 'monster' and his ultimate identity crisis. In the end, I wouldn't really classify THE HAUNTED STRANGLER as one of the star's very best vehicles - but it's undoubtedly among the more satisfying from his later work that I've watched (along with THE RAVEN [1963] and TARGETS [1968]).

The DVD supplements are very adequate: the Audio Commentary featuring genre authority Tom Weaver and the film's producer Richard Gordon (with interjections from his late brother/partner Alex) is especially interesting - apart from the privilege of having Weaver and the two Gordons name their 3 favorite Karloff pictures, amongst many other things I learned that Boris once almost worked with Edward D. Wood Jr. (and Bela Lugosi and Lon Chaney Jr. to boot) on the project which eventually became BRIDE OF THE MONSTER (1955)!

... or did he? Ever? In 19th century England Edward Styles, a one-armed man, is being hung, for the murder of several women, with a large crowd watching. Who thinks watching an execution is entertainment anyways? But I digress. Styles is professing that he is innocent up to his death. He is buried in a lonely prison yard grave.

Fast forward twenty years and novelist James Rankin (Boris Karloff) is revisiting the Styles case to prove that if he had an attorney provided he would have likely been acquitted. He is trying to get this policy - the crown paying for an attorney for indigent defendants - to become law in England and use the Styles case as an example. After some digging - and some of that literally - he determines that the case against Styles was not only weak, but that the evidence points to a doctor who did the autopsy on Styles, was at his burial, and was the doctor present when the strangler killed all of his victims. He tries to find this man but his trail goes cold.

As for the rest of it, it has such a unique premise that I will say no more. Karloff is the best thing about this film, and the rest of the actors just seem like props around which he performs. It has great atmosphere, and I can really only say one bad thing about it. That one bad thing is that the scene at the bawdy music hall where The Strangler killed one of his victims is long and tedious. There actually is an entire musical singing number by one of the actresses and it just bored me. It would have been better if Karloff had just asked his questions, and maybe given you a feel for the place, and then have the movie just leave that place never to return.

Set in Victorian times, Boris Karloff plays a determined writer who becomes obsessed with a twenty-year-old case surrounding "The Haymarket Strangler" and intends to prove that the young man who was hanged for the murders two decades earlier was in fact innocent. All evidence seems to point to a certain Dr. Tenant who used a surgeon's knife to not only choke the life out of his victims, but to slash their flesh as well. But the details of Tenant's life and whereabouts since the crimes remains a mystery, one which Karloff comes to learn hits closer to home for him than he suspected.

It's amazing to realize that Boris Karloff was nearly 70 when he appeared in this film as it is impressive to see him perform so vigorously in a very physically demanding role. He is required to undergo very strenuous activity as he contorts his body and facial features to simulate a Jekyll/Hyde madman on the loose -- upper teeth gnawing spasmodically at his lower lip, one eye half-closed, a twisted arm wielding a scalpel. At more refined times, Karloff is very dedicated in his role as the well-meaning but disoriented author on a road to madness.

There is no question that there are some powerful moments in this feature, and it is highly required viewing for any fan of Karloff. Unfortunately, the film bears a weight of becoming tedious on occasion, so first-time viewers would want to make allowances for this in between the thrills. **1/2 out of ****

"The Haunted Strangler" is an unusual beast for a horror movie. It makes the surprising decision to feature no surprise. There is never any question of who the killer is because the movie tells you early on. It doesn't even end with a twist.

There are examples of this being done well with horror movies and thrillers, usually when the aim is to disturb, rather than scare the audience. Consider films like "American Psycho", where you already know the guy on screen is a killer. The suspense comes from wondering who they'll off next. "The Haunted Strangler" doesn't seem to be trying for that, though. The main feeling it evinces is sadness, I guess, at the tormented killer, when really you should just be scared of him. He's hideous and fearsome, but not interesting enough for the movie to show its hand so soon.

The plot concerns an infamous killer called the Haymarket Strangler who is hanged in Victorian London. Twenty years later, Boris Karloff plays an ageing writer and social reformer who is determined to prove that the man executed for the Haymarket crimes was innocent. Karloff unravels the mystery of the case and the killings begin again.

Who could the killer be?

If you think I'm hedging perilously close to a spoiler with this review, the people who made the movie would have disagreed. The revelation of who the killer is could have been used to great shock and suspense, but instead, it's thrown away carelessly early on. With it, sadly, goes all trace of suspense.