Too many fans seem to be blown away

an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

On December 2, 1889 Thomas Edison made some wax cylinders of Johannes Brahms personally playing his compositions on the piano. These went underground somewhere for 48 years until resurfacing, and were given to the Berlin State Library in 1937. They miraculously survived WWII, resurfaced again and still exist in Germany. In recent years modern state of the art digital methods have produced recordings derived from the original cylinders. Edison and others made recordings of extremely famous 19th century individuals, cylinders that either have been discovered or are waiting to be found. So the basic premise of "Mysterious Intruder" is feasible and broadly based on historical fact: the existence of such cylinders.Richard Dix does a good job in "Mysterious Intruder" as a sleazy private eye out to grab some lost cylinders of a famous singer from the 1880's. It is a tight script and well made, released by Columbia Pictures in 1946. It moves briskly and is filmed with stark noir-style lighting.Another thing I find interesting about this movie is its use of some talented and now totally obscure actresses, namely Nina Vale, Helen Mowery and Pamela Blake (no, not Amanda Blake). Who? They are unknown but worth your time to discover here, wherein we luckily find all three featured in the same movie. The very solid actor Barton MacLane (Maltese Falcon '41) also is a great asset portraying a police detective.This movie has a unique story and is one of Dix's better performances (not great acting, but good for Dix) and is directed by William Castle. I find it to be both entertaining and interesting in its own b-movie sort of way.

The first four "Whistler" films may have been low-budget, but they were neither cheap nor dull; "Mysterious Intruder" is both. It plays more like a run-of-the-mill private-eye film, and the revelation of the killer(s) is pretty ho-hum as well. It doesn't really feel like a part of the series, apart from the ironic ending, which at least remains intact. The cast is pretty unmemorable this time as well; only an uncredited Kathleen Howard, as a vaguely threatening middle-aged lady, manages to make something of her role in about five minutes of screen time. The film is not without interest - however all its predecessors in the "Whistler" series are significantly better. ** out of 4.

The 1940's were full of private eyes from Sam Spade to Phillip Marlowe. None, however, equals the sheer sleaze of key-hole peeper Don Gale. He's a distinctive creation of writer Eric Taylor's clever little screenplay, with more twists and turns than one of those old Toni home permanents. The brief opening between Gale and his secretary tells all we need to know about his brand of professional ethics and is a great bit of subtle innuendo. Richard Dix is perfect as Gale with all the phony charm and shifty eyes of an oily medicine man. If Gale has any redeeming qualities like Spade or Marlowe, I can't find them, making him one of the most unusual lead characters of the day.The movie starts off posing a neat little mystery-- why would anyone want to kill for some worthless old keepsakes. The solution is a novel one, although the story sometimes unfolds in a complex fashion that's hard to follow.There're some nifty little touches, such as the trigger-happy neighbor who apparently shoots at anything that moves or the safe-house matron who looks like she could go a few rounds with Mike Tyson. However, not everything is roses. Little old man Stillwell should carry a sugar-overload warning, while plug-ugly Mike Mazurki mugs it up shamelessly as the towering menace. The bare-bones street scenes might blemish most movies, but here they come across as just plain cheap like Gale himself.How surprising that the schlockmeister of 1950's gimmick movies, William Castle, stands as the moving force behind many of these little Whistler gems. He had a real feel for them. Too bad he's identified now with such exploitation flicks as The Tingler (1959) and 13 Ghosts (1960), (Tingler wired certain certain theatre seats for a mild jolt and then insured the patrons! ). Anyway, the ending here is particularly ironical, even for a series that prided itself on irony. As they say, they just don't make 'em like this any more. Too bad.

The fifth of the seven Richard Dix Whistler's is a complicated hard boiled affair, coming in at just under an hour with the usual high quota of dizzying plot twists to keep you on your toes. Although be warned if you've never seen it before the IMDb plot summary just about gives it all away, not the ideal thing to do with these films. Nicely noirish and a good print lend a doom-laden atmosphere which the excellent cast make the most of, and at warp speed.Seedy private eye Dix is hired by a trusting old shop owner to find his friend a missing girl who has an intriguing if extremely improbable present worth USD 200,000 awaiting her. From there it unravels in the best sleazy Chandleresque fashion, the sequence of events all logical and believable … mostly. Favourite bits: Dix and his lady … friend tracking down and finding manic Mike Mazurki's house at night; the greed in weak-willed but still a goodie Dix's eyes when the real Elora Lund shows up. Ker-ching! I believe the Whistler himself was never as amused as by the ending of this episode judging by his gleeful sneering at the end. Tremendous fun for the fan, one of my favourites in a series that never failed to deliver.