Konterr Brilliant and touching

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

ksf-2 The only big name i recognize in here is Hedda Hopper, who had started with bit parts in the silent films, become pretty well known years later, and then started her own "woman about town" gossip column, now playing herself in later films. (Gotta see he in "The Women" !) In "Dark Hour", two old timers are watching over their neice "Elsa", played by Irene Ware. ( Ware was apparently Miss United States 1926. ) Elsa will inherit EVERYTHING when the uncles go, so they are concerned that she might some bad decisions... and then... something TERRIBLE happens... and everyone tries to figure out who dunnit! Picture and sound quality are pretty turrible... but it's not so bad. Based on a novel by Sinclair Gluck.. couldn't find any info about him; this seems to be the only thing of his made into a film. Directed by Charles Lamont. He had been around in silents since the 1920s, writing and directing. Worked with some of the biggies in comedy and drama. Dark Hour is "okay"... it's just like every single "thin man", or any who-dunnit ever written. nothing in the middle really happens until the last five minutes when everything comes together. It's not so bad.

MartinHafer This film is a B-mystery from tiny Chesterfield Productions--one of many so-called 'Poverty Row' studios churning out extremely cheap and quickly made short films during the 1930s. It's only significant actor is Berton Churchill--a man who usually played blustering supporting roles (such as in "Stagecoach"). Here, however, he is co-lead in the film.The film begins with a woman going to talk to two detectives about her strange and rather nasty uncles. The two begin investigating and almost immediately a murder occurs--and one of the uncles is killed in a very peculiar manner (he was killed by gas and was stabbed AFTER he was already dead). The two detectives (one of which is Churchill) investigate the case almost like two Sherlock Holmes--which is a bit unusual, as in the mystery films of the era, usually the police are portrayed as idiots! How the murder occurred and who was behind it make this a VERY contrived film--and the ending offers too many twists to make the film realistic in any manner. Still, it's not a horrible film and is mildly entertaining--and is a film I'd recommend mostly to fans of these cheap murder mysteries. Others probably will be even less impressed by this one.

Lechuguilla A quick run-through of most of the plot suggests that this whodunit film might be an Agatha Christie creation, as complicated as the story is. There are five to seven suspects, depending on whom you count. And the murder occurs in the library of a large house. But though the underlying premise is okay, "The Dark Hour" is no Agatha Christie creation. Two brothers live together along with their various servants. A couple of other suspects live close by, together with a retired detective. A building fire figures prominently in the plot.It took two viewings to make sense out of the story. In the end it does all come together, though there is some conveniently coincidental timing in certain plot points. The main reason to watch the film is the ending. My guess as to the identity of the murderer was dead wrong. So the ending was a pleasant surprise, and I was able to go back and see the subtle clues that I missed. Near the end a major twist further adds to the film's enjoyment. Spine-tingling suspense erupts near the climax as an unknown person shines a flashlight into a darkened bedroom, and then fires a shot.Almost all the scenes take place on indoor sets, implying that this was a low-budget film. Production design is minimal. I'm constantly amazed at how old houses back in those days were built with such high ceilings, making rooms look cavernous. B&W lighting has a slight noir effect. The camera is largely static. Very little music occurs during the film, but I like the score during the opening credits. Sound tends to be scratchy and overall sound quality is poor, which makes dialogue hard to understand in a few spots. Acting is acceptable, my favorite performance being the actor who plays blustery Mr. Bernard.It's not the best whodunit out there by any means. The script could have been improved to enhance clarity. And production values are weak. Still, it's not a bad movie. The final twenty minutes or so are quite good, and render "The Dark Hour" worth at least a one-time viewing.

ny1mwd26 Chesterfield does it again--a tidy whodunit that, surprisingly, holds up pretty well despite its age. The race between the two detectives is quite droll and interesting; it shows, once again, that the fundamental lesson of integration between the old and the new still applies--regardless of decade and/or century. Of course, as the film was lensed nearly 70 years ago, some of the technical aspects of the plot do not age well. And, unless I missed something, I would have preferred a little more detail into the motive for the crime. Despite these minor quibbles, it was a relatively enjoyable 71 minutes, especially when Hedda Hopper was chewing up the scenery.l