Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Ameriatch One of the best films i have seen

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

bkoganbing After a couple of silent screen films, Charlie Chan was introduced to the talking picture with Behind That Curtain. Someone at Fox films had some faith in the character because after this film, it was that faith that created a series.To put it bluntly this was a stodgy overacted mess by a lot of the players who were just getting used to sound film. Except for Warner Baxter who would win the second Best Actor Oscar for In Old Arizona, the rest chewed the scenery, possibly to breathe some life into this story.Lois Moran has been swept off her feet by the dashing Philip Strange who is a real swine of a human being, a fact her father Claude King recognizes. He much prefers explorer Warner Baxter as a suitable husband for his daughter, but she's made her mind up and Baxter steps aside jolly good sport that he is.Afterward it's discovered that Strange has murdered a detective who King had hired to get dirt on him. And it's certainly alluded that there was dirt to get. Moran runs off to the Persian desert on Baxter's expedition, but Strange won't let her go.The end is in San Francisco where their top homicide cop Charlie Chan helps set the trap to nab Strange. E.L. Park plays Charlie who only has one real scene of consequence. Behind That Curtain is melodramatic, overacted, and dull. Good thing that Fox Studios kept the franchise for Warner Oland. This really doesn't deserve to be included in Charlie Chan films, but I suppose it has to be.

MartinHafer This is a globe-hopping film that begins in England, then moves to India, Iran and finally San Francisco. The story involves a sociopathic murderer who kills someone and then marries a nice girl. Once married, he treats her like dirt and cheats on her. She puts up with it until she discovers that he was a murderer. Then most of the film consists of her trying desperately to avoid him as well as scandal if the secret were be revealed.This is the earliest Charlie Chan film known to be in existence and it is absolutely nothing like the later films--nothing. Apart from the name "Charlie Chan", there is no similarities to the later exceptional series.Back in 1929, films were often a bit stilted and overly melodramatic. Because the studios weren't used to using sound, the actors tended to remain very stationary (due to poor sound equipment) and the dialog sounded more like plays than movies. I accept this and tend to rate these early talkies with this in mind. However, even keeping this in mind, BEHIND THAT CURTAIN is still a dreadful film--even for 1929. The main problem is not how constricted the actors were due to the sound equipment but how gosh-darn awful the dialog was. In fact, I would have to say that the love scene in the desert might just be the absolute worst love scene I have ever seen and heard--it was THAT overly melodramatic and stagy as well as laughable. I truly believe that most high school actors could do a better job today. In addition to horrible dialog, the movie suffered from being way too slow--and the first half in particular crawled at a snail's pace. Later, despite the horrid dialog and acting the film did pick up a bit--but certainly not enough to make it even passable entertainment! I think the biggest problem is that the film clearly shows those involved with the movie weren't used to talking pictures. However, my complaints weren't just about the wretched dialog and pacing, but also the acting and direction. For example, the film starred Warner Baxter who was an exceptional actor. He was famous not just during the silent era but in sound pictures like the Crime Doctor series and such excellent films as PRISONER OF SHARK ISLAND and KIDNAPPED. I loved how he played such realistic and likable "everyman" characters, but here in BEHIND THAT CURTAIN he was a simpering idiot who overdid the love scenes--making him one of the biggest liabilities in the film. The female lead, Lois Moran was perhaps even worse. The only actor who came off well (very well, actually), was Gilbert Emery as the Scotland Yard inspector.One reviewer pointed out that the only good element was the cinematography, though I would differ. While it was exceptional seeing the sound outdoor shots of the caravan (for 1929 getting this right was VERY tough), all too often the camera was static. At one point it was even laughable, as the scene began with just the tops of the characters' heads showing--like the camera should have been several feet lower. This was because the couple were about to stand and instead of moving the camera or using a cut, they just left the camera on and created a very awkward and sloppy scene.Now as for Charlie Chan, he was only a bit player who appeared in a very limited capacity in the last 12 minutes of the movie. Surprisingly, he was actually played by an Asian--something you'd never see in the 30s-50s. However, this isn't all positive as E.L. Park had the charisma and charm of a bag of lint. They simply gave this actor nothing to do--making him just a glorified errand boy for Emery. Also, Chan oddly was NOT a Hawaiian-based detective--instead serving in Chinatown in San Francisco. Also, Mr. Park didn't look as Chinese as Warner Oland (who was a Swede)--looking more like a native Hawaiian (though with a Korean name). Chan was supposed to be a Hawaiian but of Chinese descent. Because of these inconsistencies and a thankless part, the "Chanophiles" out there will no doubt find all this very disappointing.In conclusion, the plot wasn't bad but due to horrid acting, dialog and direction this is one supposedly lost film that might just as well as have remained lost!Also, in a small role is Boris Karloff. While it's not a huge role, this excellent actor acquitted himself well in the role of a devoted servant. It was nice to see him in a pre-Frankenstein role.

marquisdeposa This is an early example of the talking film. The delivery of the lines and emotions seem to be in slow motion. I am not sure if this was shot as a silent film as well. I tend to believe it was because much of the acting is done with eyes and face. Overall it is faithful to the plot line of the book, but characters have been removed and that lessens the "mystery" of the film. We know "who done it" about 30 minutes into the picture.Boris Karloff has a small role as a servant and Charlie Chan is seen even less (somewhere around the 42 minute mark).For film enthusiasts only. The regular "tv mentality" person won't be able to sit through it.

netwallah An international orientalizing romance mystery from the pen of Earl Derr Biggers, author of the Charlie Chan mysteries. Chan is not really in this movie, except indirectly—instead there is a British-explorers-in-the-East theme, India and Persia and Tehran and pith helmets. Eve Mannering (Lois Moran) has married the wrong man, Durand (Philip Strange), who is a bounder and who has killed an agent, Hillary Galt, to prevent Eve's uncle from finding out. A watchman, blackmailing him, writes to Eve in India, and she confronts her husband, who hurts her and acts threatening, so she disappears into the desert with dashing, dependable Col Beetham (Warner Baxter) who has been longing for her all his life. Meanwhile, the urbane Scotland Yard detective Sir Frederick Bruce (Gilbert Emery) pursues the mystery with a clue provided by Chan, and the story winds up in San Francisco will all wrinkles ironed out. A very early sound movie, this one is marred not so much by the spotty sound recording as by the stagy acting style: thrilling and plummy tones ("ohhhhhhhhh Erik!") from Moran and Baxter. She's sometimes quite winsome, and Boris Karloff has a tiny part as Beetham's oriental servant. Later films focus on Chan, but not this one. Interesting use of title phrase, first to indicate why explorers explore, and then to preface Beetham's film-illustrated lecture at the denouement.