Simply A Masterpiece

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

The second Philo Vance film with William Powell in the central role was made in the same year as the first ("The Canary Murder Case"), but it is somewhat less of an antique. It's still often static, but at least there are a few panoramic shots of the house of the Greenes, and a more cinematic finale. Perhaps more importantly, the mystery is much more complicated than that of "Canary"; having read Maltin's comment about an obvious killer and remembering how easy it was to spot the killer in "Canary", I was certain I had it all figured out but I was fooled; I found the ending thoroughly surprising. Fans of Jean Arthur (she also appeared very briefly in "Canary") will be glad to know that her part is much bigger this time. **1/2 out of 4.

It is a pity that the studio didn't change the name of the detective, because while William Powell is good in these movies, Philo Vance he is not. Eugene Palette is superb as Heath, and most of the other actors are good. It is extremely strange that Philo Vance, one of the most popular characters in American detective fiction, has been so universally trashed by critics. The hostility of contemporary critics, who gave the books grudging admiration, seems to have been the result of personal dislike of the author, who has been described by one as"the most fascinating UNLIKABLE man I ever met". It seemed that nobody loved Vance but the American public! Vance really was not a snob in the ordinary sense. Members of society came in for contemptuous remarks more often than not, and he liked and respected simple, unpretentious people, such as Heath.Vance could be described as an "American Lord Peter Whimsey", and very likely was partly based on that character. The same critics who like Whimsey hate Vance! Strange that the studios so altered Vance's character, because they thought that the public would resent Vance's erudition and "elitism", the same public that loved those quirky characteristics in the books! Had the studios made the movies more faithful to the books, they likely would have been more successful;as it was they never really caught on. As it is, this movie is a very good atmospheric murder mystery, well worth watching. With different casting(Warren William was the best Vance) and making the character more faithful to the books, it would be a real classic.

Following the sensational success of The Canary Murder Case (1929), William Powell was soon asked to reprise his role as Philo Vance in The Greene Murder Case (1929). Powell was again joined by Eugene Palette as Sergeant Heath and E.H. Calvert as the D.A. Jean Arthur was also cast, but this time as one of the main participants. S.S. Van Dine's 1928 novel (actually the third in the series) served as a basis for Louise Long's wordy screenplay, while Frank Tuttle again directed in the same studiously static, sound-bound style (aside from a brief flourish after the credits, obviously filmed with a silent camera). One point of major interest, however, and the secondary reason (Tuttle's uninvolved and uninvolving direction is reason number one) for rejecting this movie as a film noir is the toning. Whereas Canary was issued on tinted stock, for this entry Paramount opted for toning instead. Tinted stock, as the name implies, involved using film stock of different colors, e.g. blue for night scenes, yellow for interiors, etc. Toning, on the other hand, was accomplished by adding pigments to the emulsion itself. In this movie, only one color, a light pink, is used throughout. The color has been added to almost every scene, particularly to the frilly costumes worn by Miss Arthur. The effect is certainly most attractive but it does not enhance a film noir mood.As for the mystery itself, few connoisseurs will have any difficulty selecting the guilty party. The fiend is obviously not the beautiful, super-charismatic Florence Eldridge on whom all the suspicion is cast. More than that I will not reveal.Acting is of a high standard throughout. Eugene Palette is especially heartening in this one, and Powell, of course, makes for the perfect Philo. Ullrich Haupt as the doctor and Gertrude Norman as the bedridden mother also make a significant impression.

As a life long fan of murder mysteries in general and William Powell in particular, I was thrilled to finally get a chance to see this early sound Philo Vance mystery. A follow-up to Paramount's THE CANARY MURDER CASE (1929), this was adapted from "SS Van Dine's" third Philo Vance novel(originally published in 1928 to runaway business) and also stars the wonderful Eugene Pallette as Sergeant Heath and a young Jean Arthur in the ingenue role of Ada Greene.The intricate plot finds gentleman detective Philo Vance assisting his old friends District Attorney Markham and Sergeant Heath in a case of multiple and attempted murders at the Greene Mansion in New York's Upper East Side. It seems that someone is killing members of the Greene family, ostensibly for a stake in the large inheritance left by the long dead patriarch, Tobias Greene, whose fortune was accumulated (we come to suspect) by less than honorable means.I'll admit that, although anxious to finally see this film after reading about it for years, I wasn't expecting much. I had heard that the film was talky, creaky, and static, as many early sound productions seem to modern sensibilities. Perhaps it was because of these lowered expectations, but I was pleasantly surprised by some of the great stuff found here. The film abounds with wonderfully creepy atmosphere and a real sense of menace, and the climax, set in the rooftop garden of the formidable Greene mansion (a fantastic set, by the way), is thrillingly shot, with trick photography and a last minute-in the nick time-rescue.The screenplay is a faithful simplification of the Van Dine novel (the book's first two murder victims, for example, are compressed into one and the character of Julia Greene is jettisoned) and Powell's Philo Vance is much more likable than his literary counterpart. The identity of the murderer, while possibly surprising to the relatively innocent audiences of 1929, is fairly easy to spot by the more jaded modern viewer raised on scores of mysteries and taught to always suspect the least likely. This does not detract from the fun.Playing the part of Philo Vance was a huge boost to Powell's career, and allowed him to move from villainous heels to debonair man-about-town roles. After a parody appearance as the detective in 1930's PARAMOUNT ON PARADE, Powell played Vance twice more [in Paramount's THE BENSON MURDER CASE (1930) and Warner Bros. THE KENNEL MURDER CASE (1933)] before moving to MGM and forever being associated with the role of Nick Charles in THE THIN MAN series (an even BIGGER boost to his career!)Yes, the film is invariably hampered by the limitations of the early sound era, but once the modern viewer accepts these limitations, there's a lot to enjoy here.