Main Cast: Karl Malden, Claude Dauphin, Patricia Medina, Steve Forrest, Allyn Ann McLerie
Release Year: 1954
Country: US
Run Time: 84 minutes
Plot
Warner Bros.' followup to its 3D hit House of Wax, Phantom of the Rue Morgue bears only the slightest resemblance to its alleged inspiration, the Edgar Allan Poe mystery yarn Murders in the Rue Morgue. Karl Malden delivers one of the hammiest performances on record as mad scientist Dr. Marais, who uses a trained gorilla to exact revenge on those who've wronged him. At the top of Marais' hit list are the many beautiful women who've spurned his advances, including such French pastries as Yvonne (Allyn McLerie), Arlette (Veola Vonn) and Camille (Dolores Dorn). Each of these unfortunate ladies have been given bracelets decorated with bells, designed to attract the homicidal ape's attention. Psychology professor Paul Dupin (Steve Forrest) conducts a private investigation of the killings, only to be arrested for the murders himself by the supremely confident (and rather dense) Inspector Bonnard (Claude Dauphin). This leaves Dupin's sweetheart Jeanette (Patricia Medina) virtually defenseless when she is targetted for extermination by Doc Marais. Outside of such incidental pleasures as seeing Merv Griffin play a French medical student, Phantom of the Rue Morgue offers a vast array of unsubtle 3D "shock" effects, which come off as hilarious when the film is shown "flat" (as it always is these days). ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Review
Chances are that most viewers will never get to see Phantom of the Rue Morgue as it was originally presented, i.e. in 3-D -- and that's a shame. There's so little else to recommend Phantom that taking away its major technical enticement just isn't fair. Make no mistake about it, Phantom is bad; to be fair, however, it's the kind of bad that can be a lot of fun when it's late at night and one is in a mood to laugh at rather than with a movie. The screenplay is a mish mash of plot strands, more or less thrown together in a way that just makes sense, even if it sometimes defies logic. The dialogue is over ripe to a delightful degree, filled with clichés and trite sayings. And, of course, the screenplay leaves plenty of room for a variety of objects to be thrust into the lens of the 3-D camera in a manner that is quite amusing. No one expects great acting from films of this sort, and Karl Malden willingly obliges, turning in a truly awful performance as the villain that takes hamminess to new extremes. Roy Del Ruth wins no points for his direction, but at least he's made a film that provides entertainment, albeit not necessarily of the kind he intended. ~ Craig Butler, All Movie Guide
