Mon 14 Feb 2011
A Movie Review by Dan Stumpf: STRANGE ILLUSION (1945).
Posted by Steve under Mystery movies , Reviews[11] Comments
STRANGE ILLUSION. PRC, 1945. James Lydon, Warren William, Sally Eilers, Regis Toomey. Director: Edgar G. Ulmer.
Much better on all counts than Fear in the Night [reviewed here ] is Edgar Ulmer’s remarkable Strange Illusion, an ultra-cheapie from PRC with James Lydon, Sally Eilers, Warren William and Regis Toomey, that would have been a forgone Disaster in lesser hands.
Ulmer could always dress up the most threadbare of tales in positively sardanapalean splendor, and here he turns a well-worn mystery plot into a Modern-Dress Hamlet, with Lydon getting a message from his recently-departed father to protect his mother from opportunists.
Next thing he knows, Mom’s being swept off her feet by Warren William (clearly way past his prime here, and looking marvelously suited to his sleazy role) who, it turns out, may have caused Dad’s death. And the only way young Lydon can think of to prevent the nuptials is to feign insanity — which puts him in the hands of William’s Polonius-like understrapper, who runs a “Rest Home.”
I mentioned once that Ulmer’s films sometimes amaze one by the very fact of their existence, and this is no exception. He can do more with L-shaped sets, inadequate actors and bad scripts than most filmmakers could manage with the cast and budget of Lawrence of Arabia.
Here he plays off Lydon’s typecast callowness against William’s lethally seedy charm and even brings off a totally unexpected — and rather disturbing — ending, which I won’t reveal.
Editorial Note: For Mike Grost’s in-depth commentary on this film, check out his website here.
[UPDATE] 02-15-11. Every Tuesday on Todd Mason’s blog, he lists an assortment of “Overlooked Films” offered up as Prime Examples by other bloggers on their own
blogs. This week on Dan’s behalf I suggested Strange Illusion. For the rest of this Tuesday’s recommendations, please give Todd’s blog a look-see.
February 15th, 2011 at 12:15 am
I’ve never quite agreed with the cult status of this film. I enjoy it for what it is, but it’s not in a class with FEAR IN THE NIGHT in terms of working. It’s probably more interesting for exceeding its grasp than actually succeeding.
Likely the best thing about the film other than a few touches of Ulmer’s direction is William’s performance. He was far off his best days, but still could dominate the screen.
I might have found this a bit better with someone other than Jimmy Lydon in the lead — HENRY ALDRICH MEETS HAMLET or HENRY ALDRICH’S FILM NOIR ADVENTURE kept popping into my mind while watching it. For me it was the equivalent of casting Eddie Quillan as Ellery Queen (and that didn’t work either).
I kept waiting for someone to squawk: “Hennnnn—rrry, Hennnn–rrry Aldrich!”
Ulmer is an interesting director, but was anyone ever more overpraised for a less impressive resume? Three really interesting films (THE BLACK CAT, DETOUR, and BLUEBEARD) and a host of misses, near misses, near hits, and too odd to says.
February 15th, 2011 at 1:27 am
It’s not a movie I’ve seen, but I own a copy, and I guess I ought to see it. I’ve never been an Ulmer fan, but until DVDs came along, I never had the chance to see any of his work, other than DETOUR, of course. I’m still catching up.
Here’s what I think, though. Any movie review that uses the words “sardanapalean” and “understrapper” makes me wonder where I was when those words came up in English class.
February 15th, 2011 at 5:54 am
Steve,
Thank you so much for the link!
This review by Dan Stumpf is terrific.
Ulmer’s work is uneven, and does suffer from the hopeless low budgets of his B-movies. STRANGE ILLUSION is probably somewhere is the middle of Ulmer’s achievement. It is a fun movie with many creative ideas.
Ulmer is an endlessly creative director, with a rich imagination, and who often did things that were original, inventive and not a re-hash of standard approaches. My favorite of his thrillers is MURDER IS MY BEAT. THE BLACK CAT, TOMORROW WE LIVE and DETOUR are also good. His music films like AMERICAN MATCHMAKER, JIVE JUNCTION and the glorious CARNEGIE HALL are wonderful. RUTHLESS is my favorite of his serious dramas.
I had to look up Sardanapulus. According to legend, he was the last king of Assyria. Byron wrote a play about him, which I’ve never read, and Delacroix made a painting.
I’ve never seen any of the Henry Aldrich films – which maybe helps me enjoy Jimmy Lydon. Ulmer’s teenagers are intelligent, thoughtful, intellectual, energetic and morally committed. They sound like good role models!
February 15th, 2011 at 11:29 am
“Ulmer is an interesting director, but was anyone ever more overpraised for a less impressive resume?”
How many hours to do you have, David? Oliver Stone, Brian De Palma, Bernardo Bertolucci (as good as his eye for leading women was…De Palma no slouch there, either)…
“Hamlet! Hamlet Aldrich!” Haven’t seen the film versions, but the radio series was interesting enough. I will have to give this a try…but probably should see BLUEBEARD, finally, first…and MURDER IS MY BEAT, maybe…
February 15th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Sardanapalean? Had to reach for the dictionary for that one. And I thought I was such a wordsmith.
OH! and so did Steve, now that I look back on the other comments. Good, I don’t feel too vocabulary impaired now.
February 15th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
I keep thinking that there is a cat in some old mystery called Sardanapalus. He’s owned by a British vicar who’s a classical scholar. If not, there should be 🙂
I love learning things – so am glad when writers expand my vocabulary. It’s a Good Thing.
February 15th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
And, thanks, Steve, for the suggestion and for the directed link.
February 15th, 2011 at 7:13 pm
Very strange. And strangely intriguing.
February 15th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Mike
I forgot RUTHLESS on my list of Ulmer’s best films, and it really is the most commercial and perhaps the slickest film he made with outstanding performances by Zachary Scott, Louis Hayward, Diana Lynn, and Sydney Greenstreet. It is the most mainstream of his films, and probably the most accesible, with one of Greenstreet’s best screen performances. Raymond Burr has a good role in it as well.
For anyone who doesn’t know it, its a roadshow CITIZEN KANE, but well done for all that.
I left an impression of more disdain for Ulmer than I feel. THE MAN FROM PLANET X is damn inventive considering the budget — did fog ever cover up more defects (I’m reminded of Robert Mitchum, who said OUT OF THE PAST was dark and noirish because they couldn’t afford better lighting, and that it was the fifth film in a row he made wearing that same trenchcoat)?
At the same time Ulmer is mostly a diretor of interesing failures. MURDER IS MY BEAT is a good example, probably more interesting for the presence of Barbara Peyton than anything else — but there is one stunning sequence in the woods in the snow that shows what might have been. The story is pretty standard stuff, and Paul Langton a decent if dull lead, but that one sequence almost lifts it out of the doldrums.
TOMORROW WE LIVE I don’t recall at all. There is an interesting, but largely failed French film JOURNEY BENEATH THE DESERT based on Pierre Benoit’s Haggard like and oft filmed ATLANTIDA, and though it is a failure HANNIBAL at least features a restrained though still scene chewing performance by Victor Mature.
In general though I think Ulmer is a bit overpraised like many cult directors. In Ulmer’s case though a couple of films — certainly RUTHLESS— justify wondering if he might have done more if he ever had the budget.
There is a wonderful book by Theodore Rozack called FLICKERS which features a mysterious cult director modeled to some extent on Ulmer and others of the German Expressionist movement who found themselves in Hollywood (Lang, May, Freund, Wilder, Sirk, Zimmerman …). Fans of film noir, horror, and literary thrillers should take note. Not many books successfully blend movies, conspiracy theory, the Cathar heresy, and film criticism.
February 16th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
I first saw this in pursuit of different film versions of Hamlet, and as such it’s not too bad. Makes for an interesting comparison with all the fancy-dress versions.
April 2nd, 2018 at 11:47 pm
Hi. How do you explain the final vision?