VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,9/10
524
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA jewel thief suspected of being a local serial killer targeting police officers decides to solve the mystery himself to clear his name.A jewel thief suspected of being a local serial killer targeting police officers decides to solve the mystery himself to clear his name.A jewel thief suspected of being a local serial killer targeting police officers decides to solve the mystery himself to clear his name.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria in totale
Ivan F. Simpson
- Hutchinson
- (as Ivan Simpson)
Robert Adair
- Constable
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Norman Ainsley
- Reporter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Ted Billings
- Barfly
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
William A. Boardway
- Courtroom Spectator
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Barlowe Borland
- Waiter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Alfred Cross
- Reporter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Captain Francis
- Reporter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Victor Gammon
- Reporter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
Robert Montgomery is a gentleman jewel thief and in the films of the 1930s this would make him the hero...of sorts. However, his career is in jeopardy due to a serial killer named 'Mr. X'. You see, X has been killing and taunting police for some time and when one of Montgomery's burglaries happens to occur at the same place a copper is killed by X, the police now suspect that X and the gentleman thief are one in the same--which clearly are not. So, it's up to Montgomery to do what he can to help the police capture X--then, and only then, can they possibly sell the huge diamond. Things get complicated when the daughter of the police inspector on the case falls for Montgomery. By the end of the film, it's a life and death struggle between X and Montgomery--and guess who wins! In many ways, this film plays a lot like a Saint or Falcon outing, though with a higher quality budget. The overall product is enjoyable light entertainment--the sort they really haven't made in over 60 years.
By the way, couldn't you also see William Powell in the role Montgomery played? They both seemed to have a real knack for these sort of parts.
By the way, couldn't you also see William Powell in the role Montgomery played? They both seemed to have a real knack for these sort of parts.
Well-done mystery/thriller with Robert Montgomery playing a jewel thief suspected of being a police serial killer. The plot adapted by Philip MacDonald from one of his own novels is tightly woven and executed very nicely by director Edgar Selwyn. Selwyn, for a 1934 film, uses lots of flair and style in creating a suspenseful pace and good atmosphere. I particularly liked the way he used his cast - all of whom do excellent jobs. Montgomery is in top form as the "hero" out to find the killer in order to exonerate himself of the heinous killing spree. Aiding him is a love interest played by Elizabeth Allan, a truly lovely actress as the police commissioner's daughter. Henry Stephenson plays her father in that very stiff upper lip fashion he was so accustomed to. Lewis Stone also rounds out the cast playing a police superintendent convinced Montgomery is guilty of the crime of stealing a valuable diamond and killing the bobbies. Forrester Harvey gives an inspired portrayal as a London cabbie in on the jewel heist. He has marvelous comic timing in a more subtle way than just being a buffoon as so typically used in films like this. But it is Montgomery's portrayal that really gives the film its steam and he is as charming as ever. This is one of those rare diamonds one comes across every now and then from the Golden Age of film-making. This is a first-rate mystery with excellent direction, good performances, and an interesting,convincing script.
The Mystery of Mr. X (1934) :
Brief Review -
This film is so underrated simply for existing in the formative era of Hitchcock and others. The Mystery of Mr. X has to be one of those overlooked movies of the '30s that didn't receive its due because of the overwhelming consumption of many great films around the same time. You might remember some of Hitchcock's early thrillers from the late '20s and mid-'30s, as well as a few other good thrillers from others, including Lubitsch's rom-com featuring a con artist, so you'd surely enjoy Edgar Selwyn's pre-code comedy crime thriller. The film revolves around a series of murders occurring across the city at the same time a thief is at work trying to steal a precious diamond. One of the murders takes place on the same premises, and the cop suspects that both crimes are committed by the same criminal. They apprehend the wrong person, allowing the murderer and the thief to continue their activities. The thief, however, decides to save this innocent man and offers his good advice to the police. The cop suspects something fishy and conducts a different investigation simultaneously. The thief and the commissioner's daughter fall in love, complicating matters for him. Will he and the police be able to find the real killer? The entire film is light-hearted yet quite intriguing. The tricks are thrilling, even though the feature isn't particularly mysterious. It is executed very cleverly without making things too serious. The way the thief shifts the diamond from one ___location to another is absolutely mind-blowing when viewed in the context of any film from the 1930s. The suspense and curiosity are both well-built and well-served. This has to be one of the finest characters and performances by Robert Montgomery. What a charming and intelligent thief he portrayed! Elizabeth Allan was delightful, and Lewis Stone was fabulous. Philip MacDonald's original work deserves all the credit, followed by a brilliant screenplay and the director's fantastic grip on the narrative. I have seen hundreds of good thrillers from old Hollywood, yet I was glued to the screen for 80 minutes. Isn't that enough to tell how good this one is?
RATING - 7/10*
By - #samthebestest.
This film is so underrated simply for existing in the formative era of Hitchcock and others. The Mystery of Mr. X has to be one of those overlooked movies of the '30s that didn't receive its due because of the overwhelming consumption of many great films around the same time. You might remember some of Hitchcock's early thrillers from the late '20s and mid-'30s, as well as a few other good thrillers from others, including Lubitsch's rom-com featuring a con artist, so you'd surely enjoy Edgar Selwyn's pre-code comedy crime thriller. The film revolves around a series of murders occurring across the city at the same time a thief is at work trying to steal a precious diamond. One of the murders takes place on the same premises, and the cop suspects that both crimes are committed by the same criminal. They apprehend the wrong person, allowing the murderer and the thief to continue their activities. The thief, however, decides to save this innocent man and offers his good advice to the police. The cop suspects something fishy and conducts a different investigation simultaneously. The thief and the commissioner's daughter fall in love, complicating matters for him. Will he and the police be able to find the real killer? The entire film is light-hearted yet quite intriguing. The tricks are thrilling, even though the feature isn't particularly mysterious. It is executed very cleverly without making things too serious. The way the thief shifts the diamond from one ___location to another is absolutely mind-blowing when viewed in the context of any film from the 1930s. The suspense and curiosity are both well-built and well-served. This has to be one of the finest characters and performances by Robert Montgomery. What a charming and intelligent thief he portrayed! Elizabeth Allan was delightful, and Lewis Stone was fabulous. Philip MacDonald's original work deserves all the credit, followed by a brilliant screenplay and the director's fantastic grip on the narrative. I have seen hundreds of good thrillers from old Hollywood, yet I was glued to the screen for 80 minutes. Isn't that enough to tell how good this one is?
RATING - 7/10*
By - #samthebestest.
Some pictures I can watch again-and-again. This is one.
Set in London, it is a romantic, mystery thriller (with comedy elements). It is also a fascinating window on a world now seventy-five years removed. Its pace, plot, acting, and dialog are all excellent.
Robert Montgomery is most charming as a gentleman thief. Elizabeth Allan is exquisitely lovely as his romantic interest. She's somewhat reminiscent of Paula Prentice in looks and manner, and comes across as intelligent, vivacious, wholesome, natural, and honest. (Yum!) Also, Forrester Harvey, as Montgomery's Cockney cab driver stooge, does an excellent turn as comedy relief.
What really sets this movie apart from others, however, is the absolutely amazing chemistry and timing between Montgomery and Allan. I find it a joy to replay their scenes over-and-over to watch the many nuances that occur. It really is a great shame that they never again worked together.
Finally, the villain himself appears to be the evil twin (in dress and features) of the contemporary pulp-magazine hero "The Shadow." Could this just be a coincidence? Naa! I don't think so.
Set in London, it is a romantic, mystery thriller (with comedy elements). It is also a fascinating window on a world now seventy-five years removed. Its pace, plot, acting, and dialog are all excellent.
Robert Montgomery is most charming as a gentleman thief. Elizabeth Allan is exquisitely lovely as his romantic interest. She's somewhat reminiscent of Paula Prentice in looks and manner, and comes across as intelligent, vivacious, wholesome, natural, and honest. (Yum!) Also, Forrester Harvey, as Montgomery's Cockney cab driver stooge, does an excellent turn as comedy relief.
What really sets this movie apart from others, however, is the absolutely amazing chemistry and timing between Montgomery and Allan. I find it a joy to replay their scenes over-and-over to watch the many nuances that occur. It really is a great shame that they never again worked together.
Finally, the villain himself appears to be the evil twin (in dress and features) of the contemporary pulp-magazine hero "The Shadow." Could this just be a coincidence? Naa! I don't think so.
One of the many Robert Montgomery B movies that are fun to watch. It's what they used to show on the "Late Show" or maybe the "Late, Late show" before sign off. My enjoyment may have as much or more to do with nostalgia as good movie making, but give it a try. Turn off the cellphone, fix yourself a cup of hot chocolate and a bowl of popcorn, curl up on your sofa in the den and enjoy the movie.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizPreview audiences rejected the original ending, where "Nick" did not get "Jane". Retakes and additional scenes were ordered, but directed by Richard Boleslawski because director Edgar Selwyn was unavailable.
- BlooperWhen Robert Montgomery lists the crime scenes, he says that X always strikes in a deserted area of London. However, one of the crime scenes mentioned is Marble Arch, which is a very busy area in central London. Also, the first murder shown takes place on the bank of the Thames, but none of the crime scenes mentioned is anywhere near the river, and Gates End Lane, the scene of the last murder, is a fictitious street, although the other streets named are real.
- Citazioni
Jane Frensham: Do you know why I like you?
Nicholas 'Nick' Revel: No, Why?
Jane Frensham: Because you're so straight. I think you're the straightest man I've ever met.
- ConnessioniVersion of Il terrore di Londra (1952)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 24 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti

Divario superiore
By what name was Il mistero del signor X (1934) officially released in Canada in English?
Rispondi