Load of rubbish!!

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

This is formulaic. But that is a very good thing when the formula is very good. And this formula is terrific. When it was designed — and it was very clearly specified — it was designed so that the plugged in variants were so powerful in the narrative twists that each mystery seemed unique. The setup with the characters was nothing new: a mistress/secretary, a thorough detective/colleague, the easy familiarity with the prosecutors and police.What was new was the balance between trial lawyer and murder detective. The trial is an inherently cinematic device: a place where narrative can be both shown and explained. It is a device whereby all sorts of narrative perspectives can be shifted among, allowing for shades of untrusted narration. Gardner took the Agatha Christie's device at the end of her mysteries and expanded it. Christie had all of the suspects in a single room while Poirot or Marple recounted the solved mystery, but in a way that did some fast shuffling. Gardner integrated that into a cinematic setting that allowed for the untrusted narration and discovery to be spread through the detecting.It is brilliant, and well exploited in how Gardner devised twists within each of his plot modules. Here we have an old Christie trick where neither the body nor the original murder is not as thought. The twist is at such a radical level that even today this thing thrills. Narrative structure matters. It can make up for tedious stereotypes, bad acting and poor production.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Typical Perry Mason mystery from Warner Bros. in the '30s, features RICARDO CORTEZ as a much less abrasive version of the famous sleuth than Warren William--and much less cocky. The result is a good Mason yarn with a fine supporting cast. GARY EVANS supplies some humor as sidekick Paul Drake.JANE BRYAN is the young woman who is cut out of her grandfather's will. Grandpa is an angry old man played by HARRY DAVENPORT. JUNE TRAVIS is a more serious minded Della Street helping Mason solve his case, and CRAIG REYNOLDS is one of the main suspects.The mystery is cluttered with sub-plots involving the theft of diamonds but the twist at the end comes as a real surprise.Some cryptic dialog helps a lot. "Sam doesn't like cats or old men. He thinks both should be put out of their misery." Another surprise is the fact that the cat in the story is not a black cat at all but a gray and white one that doesn't seem to mind being handled by anyone and yet in the story is a cause of much distress with its noisy howling.

In the 1950's I faithfully watched Perry Mason on TV and as many of my generation came to think of Raymond Burr AS Perry Mason. However I will confess that until very recently, I had never read any the novels. I started to read them more or less chronologically by copyright date beginning in the 1930's. I was delighted to view a copy of The Case of the Black Cat. Although Ricardo Cortez was a bit more charming than the literary Perry Mason, I found the story and style to be vintage Erle Stanley Gardner. I hope that if film ever revisits Perry Mason that homework is done and this film is viewed, and perhaps set as a period piece. Certainly,at a time when so many remakes are being done, there is room for a new (or rather an Old )treatment of this literary icon. Erle Stanley Gardner wrote over 100 Perry Mason novels over a thirty year period, a wealth of idea's to draw from.

Because no actor has ever been more closely associated with his character than Raymond Burr as Perry Mason, modern audiences are often unaware that Earl Stanley Gardner's books and character predate the television series by over twenty years.It is unfortunate indeed that the actor most commonly associated with the role of Perry Mason in the 1930's is Warren William, not at all attractive and with an annoying tendency to play Mr. Mason as a less-than-scrupulous drunken buffoon of whom one marvels he was even able to find his way out of a gin joint, let alone find a murderer. With each successive Perry Mason film, Mr. William's portrayal grew more drunken and buffoonish, probably an attempt to cop the fantastically popular Thin Man of the day.Sorry folks, but Ricardo Cortez IS Perry Mason. In the only Mason film to cast Cortez in the lead role, Mr. Cortez ruins the role for all others and particularly blows Mr. Warren out of the water. Cortez is everything Mason is supposed to be; beautiful, rich and elegant, sophisticated and brilliant. No drunken buffoon here.As for the story, I remain clueless why the American version of this film was re-titled "The Case of the Black Cat". The book, and the episode of the television series some 25 year later, were named "The Case of the CARETAKER'S Cat", and even the cat that appears in the 1936 movie is not black. Aside from this peculiarity, this is a great story and well worth the watch. Easily the best of the Perry Mason movies produced during this time period, it compares favorably to the Philo Vance and Thin Man serials of its era.