Such a frustrating disappointment

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Blistering performances.

"Charlie Chan In London" is much too leisurely in its storytelling by today's standards, but it's well-plotted and well-directed. It's interesting, and rare, to see Chan working alone, with no sidekicks or family members, and also fun to spot a Ray Milland so young that he's almost unrecognizable! Warner Oland is assured as Chan, and Drue Leyton had the looks and acting chops for a longer screen career (only the actor playing the stable man overacts shamelessly). **1/2 out of 4.

Warner Oland first played Charlie Chan in 1931 however four films in the series from the 1932-33 period have been lost. So, "Charlie Chan in London" is widely regarded as the first of the classic Warner Oland Chans.Hugh Gray (Douglas Walton) is awaiting execution for the murder of an Air Force officer who had developed plans for improving certain defence systems. His sister Pamela (Drue Leyton) believes in his innocence and has pursued all manners of appeal with the help of her lawyer/boyfriend Neil Howard (Ray Milland) to no avail.As it happens Charlie Chan is visiting the Home Secretary (David Torrence) when Pamela arrives to plead her case. The Home Secretary upholds the guilty verdict but Charlie takes an interest in the case. He goes to see Pamela who is staying at the country estate of Geoffrey Richmond (Alan Mowbray)and agrees to take on the case even though there is only a scant 65 hours left before the scheduled execution.Charlie moves about gathering clues and evidence. He even escapes an attempt on his life with a dart which only convinces him that the real murderer is in the house. He gathers the principals into one room and declares that "murderer is in this room". Turns out that he is.In many of the Chan features young up and coming actors/actresses appear. Ray(mond) Milland was one of these. Alan Mowbray made a career out of playing stuffy aristocrats. Veteran E.E. Clive is also along as the bumbling Detective Sergeant Thacker. No number one son as yet.

The 1930s and 40s saw huge numbers of B-movies about detectives which included two different Sherlock Holmes series (one American and one British), the Falcon, the Saint, Crime Doctor, Boston Blackie and several others. However, of all these series, one of the very best was probably the Charlie Chan films. However, since they were made over a twenty year period and starred several different actors as Chan, they varied considerably in quality. In general, the early ones are the best and this is one of the earliest ones still in existence (at least two earlier films have simply disappeared or degraded beyond hope).While this Warner Oland effort is plagued by not having an Asian actor in the lead (typical of all the Chan films of the 30s and 40s), it is one of the best written. Unlike some of the later films, Chan's thinking and deducting are actually very sound and he seems more like a master detective than just a lucky guy who stumbles upon the solution to a crime (this happened a lot in the later Sidney Toler films). In almost every way this is a superior film compared to later versions except that I did miss the inclusion of a bit of humor. Using #1 Son and the other Chan children actually helped many of the later films--especially in such grand films as CHARLIE CHAN AT THE OPERA.Still, this is well written, well acted and a good genuine mystery. The end result is a film that is a standout for the genre and is worth a look--especially if you like this style of film.

I had fun with this. Like 'Chan in Egypt' and '..in Paris', it's early sound, it's creaky, it's filled w/ some over-acting(dig the scared blonde limey maid), it's slow.It's also interesting, centered around a involving, well-plotted mystery, and of course, one of the great characters of the thirties-Charlie Chan. This time he's in London to try and save a man on death row, he has 3 days to beat the hangman's noose. He does, but barely.I enjoyed watching Oland work. I have no problem w/ him as the Chinese detective, though he is quite obviously Swedish. (As a fan of Charles Bronson, I know-you can see Chuck playing scads of Apaches or Mexicans in his earlier movies. He was Lithuanian. I don't see the difference, to be honest-if it's okay for Bunchinsky to play Apache Warrior #2, it's okay for Oland to play Chan, you know?) The bad guy you won't spot that early on, either. I thought that the suspense was well handled, heck they even trot out the red-herring 'Butler did it' routine, the gathering all the likely suspects into one room, etc etc. Hits all of those clichés head on. And knows what to do with them, too.Do check this out if you are a fan of the series, or mysteries from the era.*** outta ****