Description

Katharine Hepburn reprises her triumphant Broadway role as a spoiled heir on the verge of marrying a snoot...but not if her ex-hubby (Cary Grant) and smitten reporter (James Stewart) can help it! ... Read more

Reviews (92)

True classic, beautifully preserved and re-released.....
Despite the fact that this film raises issues that are not very potent today, it remains to be a timeless classic because of its sheer artistic value. This great artistic value is largely due to the brilliant idea (the idea of creating a play about Kathrene Hepburn [not literally, of course], for Kathrene Hepburn), the plot itself, and film's charming and witty script. Hepburn is the only and true star in this story, although I can appreciate Stewart and Grant in their roles. But truly, it would not have mattered much artistically, if different supporting cast was chosen. Apparently, it did matter to RKO commercially a great deal. Thank God for that, because Stewart, Grant, Hussey, and Howard all added something to the film. The result is a story with a "love...well, let's just say, more than a usual triangle", that revolves around one Philadelphia society girl and a few of her eccentric family members. The DVD has an outstanding sound and picture quality. Cute little menu and original theatrical trailer are also included. It is nice to know that this great film will stay with us for generations to come and enjoy it.

See it............ NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is all I need to say:

Cary Grant Katharine Hepburn Jimmy Stewart GREAT PERFORMANCES ALL AROUND, ESPECIALLY FROM THE THREE AMAZING STARS AND RUTH HUSSET!

But I'll say more anyway.

Upper class lady Tracy Lord is about to be married to George Kittridge, general manager of Quaker State something or other (I haven't watched it for a month or so) after two years before divorcing CK Dexter Haven.

Spy Magazine big cheese Sindney Kidd sends Macauly Conner and Elizabeth Imbry to get an inside story on the wedding of Tracy Lord, and George Kittridge. They are to get inside via Tracy's ex husband Dexter, who decides to help for revenge against his ex-bride.

Hilarity ensues via needle sharp dialogue, carefully hidden gags, and terrific performances.

I haven't seen one movie by Cary Grant that I haven't liked; I have seen thrity-two. I Have only seen two Jimmy Stewart and Kate Hepburn that I didn't really enjoy a-piece, and I've seen about twenty or more of theirs.

And Cuckor's direction inspired many directors to choose alternative direction styles.

YES, BUY THIS ONE, YOU WON'T REGRET IT.
This is my absolute favorite performance by the great Katherine Hepburn. She is breathtaking and absolutely wonderful. Brilliant performances all across the board, an especially funny performance by James Stewart is just the icing on the cake. Cary Grant,one of my faves, also delivers a magnificent performance. Also worth mentioning is the very beautiful Ruth Hussey, whose potrayal of Liz is stunning. She was one of the most attractive actresses at the time, in my humble opinion. This movie is very funny and the sets and costumes are among the best Hollywood has ever offered. I highly recommend this as a must own.

Perfection!
So well written, so elegant! My favorite film.

The REAL High Society
Branded by Hollywood as "Box Office Poison" (usually the death blow to an actor's career), Katherine Hepburn put all of her eggs in this ONE basket, to prove she's still a force to be recconned with. Reprising her stage role, Kate secures the rights for the film version of "The Philadelphia Story". The trick worked. Katherine Hepburn was back as a big star on the Hollywood Sky.

Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn), a spoiled socialite scheduled to remarry when her first husband, C.K. Dexterhaven (Cary Grant) shows up as uninvited wedding guest. Add to the mix, Mike Connor (James Stewart) a reporter who is supposed to be covering the wedding for the tabloids but winds up falling for Tracy himself. The brief triangle has a predictable ending.

Less glamorous than the 1955 Technicolor Musical re-make "High Society" with Grace Kelly and Bing Crosby, this black & white Classic remains the superior production. Somewhat dated (definitely 1940s Movie Star Magazine material), this is still a groundbreaking romantic comedy. Ted Turner: Please keep your crayons away from this one!**** ... Read more

Amazon.com

A classic screwball comedy with a supernatural twist, Topper starsthe incomparable Cary Grant and sparkling Constance Bennett as George andMarion Kirby, a fun-loving couple who cap an evening of jazz and champagneby running their car into a tree. They return as ghosts with a mandate toliven up the straight-laced hen-pecked life of bank president Cosmo Topper(Roland Young), who's hungry for just such a shake-up. Before long he'sboozing, dancing, and getting into fights, all of which gives him a rakishreputation--much to the consternation of his wife (Billie Burke, bestknown as Glinda the Good Witch in The Wizard of Oz). The sequelreplaces Grant and Bennett with Joan Blondell, who can't quite compare,but she's charming in her own way. Topper Returns is a rambunctiousmurder mystery with some gorgeous sets and elegant cinematography--thesequence of Blondell's death and ghostly rise is dazzling. --BretFetzer ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Funny 1937 Original w/1941 sequel now on remastered DVD!!
ARTISAN Home Entertainment brings us a remastered DVD of Hal Roach Studios (who brought us Laurel & Hardy and the Little Rascals in 1920's through the 1930's on the side experimented with full length feature films,greater than 65 minutes in length) original 1937 Topper. In 1937 Hal Roach used trick photography, camera magic and ground breaking FX technology for the amazing ghost creations.

"Topper" with a Star studded cast Cary Grant as Millionaire George Kirby (at his comedic best), Constance Bennett as his wife Marion (a beautifully devine actress), Roland Young as their Banker Cosmo Topper (nominated for Best Supporting Actor as "Topper") and Billie Burke as Mrs. Topper (best known as Glenda the "Good Witch" from the 1939 "The Wizard of OZ"). Included is a very young song writer/singer Hoagy Carmichael.

This wonderfully remastered Black / White Standard Feature DVD is delightful. Worth the price of admission alone but the 1941 sequel "Topper Returns" is also included. Note: a very weak sequel but still a cute storyline featuring Roland & Burke in reprise. A double feature DVD with no extras.

Summary: The jet setting, ever partying Millionaire Kirby's die in an automobile accident on a late night country road. They enter a state of limbo (earthbound ghosts) until they perform a good deed. So they go about trying to free their banker "Topper" from his dull routine high collar lifestyle and make him a jet setting man of high society. This is a great story with ghosts, floating objects and Topper talking to himself. Mrs Topper has the hardest time trying to figure out whats happening to her timid obedient husband. Lots of laughs here. Enjoy.

Hilarious and utterly charming!
As a screwball comedy, Topper has it all: high spirits and hijinks, wonderful acting all around, sharp dialogue, deft physical comedy, and a theme lots of people can relate to. If you're in the mood for a screwball comedy that still has a real message, this is one to watch.

Topper Returns is like an episode of Scooby Doo come to life: spooky mansion, secret corridors, creepy servants, and a masked murderer on the loose. Mix in a hard-drinking ghost, a befuddled detective, a blonde bombshell, and Eddie "Rochester" Anderson of Jack Benny fame, then add a string of razor-sharp one-liners, double-takes, and pratfalls, and you get a recipe for hilarity. Billie Burke, as Topper's ditzy, jealous wife, is even funnier in this one than in the original: she takes blithe cluelessness to a new level!

The special effects in both films are suprisingly good for the era, and the beautiful DVD transfer really brings them to life. Great films!

Well worth the price
Although I don't think Topper with Cary Grant is as good as some of his other B&W comedies, "Bringing up Baby", "The Bachelor and Bobby Soxer" or even "Monkey Business", it is a good old B&W movie to watch. However, I think I like "Topper Returns" even better, "Topper" gets bettter as the movie nears the end, but "Topper Returns" seems to keep laughs coming throughout the picture. I find the scenes with "Rochester" from the old Jack Benny show most memorable, the comments he makes ( he has a very memorable voice) , the way he rolls his eyes and responds to the ghost extremely funny. "Topper Returns" has more people doing the funny scenes, little things throughout the movie.

The picture and sound quality on this DVD seems better on our Hitachi 57S700 better than "Topper Returns" by Alpha Video. We have one of our Dtivos getting every Cary Grant movie for the past few years but never seemed to get Topper. We were at a store and saw "Topper Returns" by Alpha Video. After buying this I decided to buy Topper/Topper Returns here on Amazon, just to get "Topper" with Cary Grant, and glad I did. Once again, for those of you that like old B&W comedies, this DVD is welll worth the Amazon price.

THIS TWOSOME TOPS OUT IN HILARITY!
"Topper" is the supernatural screwball comedy about a pair of fun-loving ghosts who wreak havoc on the life of henpecked banker, Cosmo Topper (Roland Young). Cary Grant and Constance Bennett simply glow as George and Marion Kirby, a couple of devil-may-care free spirits who accidentally kill themselves by wrapping their car around a tree. They return as a couple of blithe spirits, determined to introduce Cosmo to the good life. Billie Burke costars as Cosmo's stuffy and hilarious bubble-head wife. The sequel, "Topper Returns" uses this same premise but replaces Grant and Bennett with Joan Blondell. Although she's amply cast, she doesn't quite eclipse the memory the original. The engaging murder mystery plot of "Topper Returns" with its sumptuous setting and elegant cinematography compensate, particularly the surreal visual splendor of Blondell's haunting death and her ghostly reincarnation.
THE TRANSFER: "Topper" is a little bit worse for the wear than "Topper Returns". This is to be expected since, after years of being a late night television fav', the rights to this classic have fallen into public domain. MGM is credited with originally making this classic. The gray scale is a trifle underexposed on "Topper" well seemingly close to dead on in "Topper Returns." Age related artifacts are more heavy and noticeable on "Topper" as well. Over all, the image has a dated appearance but contrast and black levels are generally good on both movies. Edge enhancement is present slightly on "Topper" only. The audio is mono for both films. "Topper" suffers from slight hiss and popping but "Topper Returns" is generally more natural sounding on the ears.
EXTRAS: None.
BOTTOM LINE: "Topper" is an outstanding Cary Grant comedy with few equals - save "Bringing Up Baby." Perhaps one day we'll see the release of that classic on DVD!

clear DVD from Artisan
This is a good transfer indeed. I know Artisan is hit and miss. This DVD title is clear. The 1st Topper is always my favorite. Why? Cary Grant and Constance Bennett are in it. Wow she has a figure no man today would turn away. And I am a woman saying that.

The second movie has the couple that play the Toppers. But Not the Kirbys. (No Grant and Bennett). he Kirby's haven't been re cast, they aren't in it. It is still an interresting movie though. A comedy/murder movie.

At the price this DVD can be bought at it is a steal. A must get for your collection. ... Read more

Amazon.com

At first glance, René Clair might seem an odd match for Agatha Christie's mystery thriller Ten Little Indians, but his buoyant touch is exactly what is missing from so many overly solemn remakes. Tenstrangers gather for a mysterious gathering on a secluded island. It turns out to be a farewell party, for they all have been sentenced to die for crimes in their past by a self-appointed judge, jury, and executioner who may be one of them. One by one, the guests are systematically dispatched in the manner described in the lyrics of the children's rhyme "Ten Little Indians," while the survivors nervously eye one another, splintering into tenuous alliances until the next murder throws suspicion on someone new. The terrific cast of character actors has a ball with Dudley Nichols's witty script. The flamboyant sparring of Barry Fitzgerald (whose paternal Irish lilt takes a sinister dimension) and Walter Huston is almost upstaged by Roland Young's deadpan drollery. Romantic leads Louis Hayward and June Duprez come off as arch and stiff in august company that includes a sinisterly detached Judith Anderson, a dotty and distractedC. Aubrey Smith, and a hilariously flippant Mischa Auer. The story has beenremade numerous times under the title of Christie's novel, Ten Little Indians, but never as well. Clair's effervescent, lively little gem is a fatal drawing-room comedy with a body count and a surreal mood of doom. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (53)

The BUTLER did it!! Or did he??
=====>

I watched this black and white 1945 movie (whose New York premiere was on Halloween day at the Roxy Theatre) of almost 100 minutes without first reading the novel that it is based on. I'm glad I did this! Why? Because I was forced to really watch the movie in order to deduce who the murderer was.

According to the opening credits, this movie is "based on the [1939] novel [of the same name] by [Dame] Agatha Christie" (1890 to 1976). However, this is not quite accurate. This movie is really based on the play version of this book that has a slightly different ending than the book. (Note: In America, this novel is known as "Ten Little Indians.")

As a synopsis, ten strangers are invited as weekend guests to the only mansion located on an isolated island. When the host, with the unusual name of "U.N. Owen" and his wife don't show up, the guests start dying, one by one, according to the lines in the children's poem entitled "Ten Little Indians." These guests and the viewer are constantly reminded of the body count as each of the ten figures on a ceramic display are secretly broken, one by one, directly after a murder is committed.

Who exactly are these ten strangers? They are as follows (in the order in which they are killed):

1. Russian Prince Starloff (played by Mischa Auer)
2. Maid Rogers (Queenie Leonard)
3. Retired General Mandrake (Sir C. Aubrey Smith)
4. Butler Rogers (Richard Haydn)
5. Spinster (?) Brent (Dame Judith Anderson)
6. Judge Quinncannon (Barry Fitzgerald)
7. Dr. Armstrong (Walter Huston)
8. Detective Bloor (Roland Young)
9. Explorer Lombard (Louis Hayward)
10. Secretary Claythorne (June Duprez)

The above cast does a stellar job in their roles. They make the movie come across not only as a mystery but also as a black comedy (thanks to a well-crafted script). Personally, I think the actor who portrayed the butler did the best job.

As the murders begin to occur, the guests realize that there is a person acting as "judge, jury, and executioner." And that person, they surmise, is Mr. Owen. Suspense is created when these guests (and the viewer) start asking themselves questions:

(1) Is Owen hiding in the mansion killing them one by one?
(2) Is Owen one of them? That is, is the "loose cannon" one of them?
(3) (Is Owen the boatman that drove them from the mainland to the island?)

The black and white gives the movie a claustrophobic feeling (adding another dimension to this movie). The cinematography is breathtaking. The main background music for this movie is unique, something I did not expect.

I thought this movie was a little rushed at the beginning. However, it slowed down as it progressed.

Finally, the DVD (the one distributed by the studio Image Entertainment) has just one extra. Even though it lasts less than two minutes, it is VERY interesting.

In conclusion, this is a fun movie, even if you have read the book. For those who haven't read the book, I have left clues as to who the murderer may be in the above review. If you think you know who it is, then view the movie to see if you're right!

<=====>

Stylish suspense that ranks with the greatest!
By far the best screen adaptation of Agatha Christie, (not to be mentioned in the same breath with the tepid "Death on the Nile," and "Murder on the Orient Express") you have tantalizing mystery, thrilling suspense, black humor, splendid acting, perfect production, and almost geometrically brilliant direction all in one highly enjoyable package. Internationally famous director Rene Clair here presents the classic mystery with such style and skill, that you truly have no idea what's going to happen next. His craftsmanlike care and attention to detail make all ten characters at once capable and incapable of the murders. The careful casting is also inspired, a troupe containing no types to suggest assured innocence or guilt; yet hardly a collection of no-name fresh off his Oscar-winning performance; Louis Hayward, a now forgotten, but hugely appealing playboy sort; Roland Young, delightfully bumbling; and the adenoidal Richard Haydn, in his most winning performance. These are particular standouts in a sterling cast which also includes Judith Anderson, C. Aubrey Smith, and Mischa Auer. The great mansion is also a triumph of art direction, handsomely photographed in moody black-and-white by Lucien Androit; and music likewise assists to create tempo and atmosphere. Humor is also in generous doses, provided by scriptwriter Dudley Nichols, ("Bringing Up Baby,""Stagecoach," etc.) a master at pointing up the action with the humor, rather than interrupting it. Finally, like all great movies, this one gets better and better as it goes along, culminating in a classic denouement with a neat sting in its tail. Even after the culprit is revealed, you'll want to go back and study the skill at which the mystery was sustained! A true classic totally undeserved of its indifference from the Academy and today's top-ten lists. It will challenge any armchair sleuth out there!

And then there were none
I saw this movie on t.v. years ago. I am a fan of Agatha Christie. I thoroughly loved this movie!!! If you love mysteries you'll love this movie!!

Fun Until The End!
I loved this movie! Although the ending is different from the book, I thought this movie was very well done and well worth the money. I did notice however some parts where the movie was supposed to taken seriously, but ended up being funny through bad lighting or whatnot. But you must realize that this movie is older, so appreciate it. The story line is very well done, and the acting is surprisingly well done. PURCHASE THIS MOVIE! I know you'll love it to death and watch it over and over :D

Film, like book, unable to fully realize idea as a story
Agatha Christie's 1939 story idea captures the imagination. Ten strangers who each, in his or her own way, have gotten away with murder gather by invitation at an isolated mansion. Then their unknown host U. N. Owen systematically and mockingly murders them one by one. The idea was adapted into a film in 1945, 1965, 1974, and 1989. Each adaptation is worth seeing as an attempt to bring the idea to life. Unfortunately, neither Christie nor the filmmakers succeed in turning this compelling but at the same time confining plot concept into a truly fulfilling story.

The book's premise is clever and fascinating. Careful attention is paid to plot detail. Compared to the films, the book's assortment of past crimes and depictions of the characters' attitudes toward them are more varied, subtle, and interesting. The book gives the highly contrived events a certain plausibility. It is the least sentimental about the characters, treating them vaguely and suspiciously. This helps, even if it does not entirely succeed, in making them convincing as people who have killed in the past and could do so again. The book maintains more of a sense of fear, dread, menace, suspense, and purpose than the film versions. It explains at some length why and how Owen carried out the scheme.

However, once the imaginative premise is established, the story becomes thin and formulaic. There is little plot or character development. The storytelling seems flat, frigid, and, at times, slow-paced. There is no lead character to care about. The characters and their past crimes are sketched in summary fashion. Those crimes vary widely in originality, depth, and genuineness. The best are Claythorne's, the general's, Brent's, and the Rogers'. The past crimes of Blore, the doctor, the judge, and Lombard are trite, unexplored, and ineffective. There are only two real plot twists. The second creates a major logical problem, which the book acknowledges and tries to overcome by weakly suggesting that the ploy would trick or "rattle" the murderer. The guests' murders are designed to follow the nursery rhyme and little more. Some cosmetic frills aside, the killings show, in themselves, no special cunning, skill, strategic advantage, or plausibility. Owen strikes crudely without detection too effortlessly.

Worst of all, the book (and each film) has nothing serious to say about the powerful themes of survival, justice, and criminality that are at the heart of the story. The story is inherently an observation of human nature in a desperate situation. How do the characters behave? How do they try to reason? How do they try to survive? Also by its very nature -- as the book's last pages acknowledge -- this is a morality play. How is each character a "criminal"? How is each "beyond the law"? Does each get "justice"? Is justice the point, or simply a "lust" to torture and kill? Is the story about breaking the law or enforcing it, about mistakes or abuses in pursuing justice? None of this is meaningfully explored.

Overall, the films are worse in some respects and better in some respects than the book. The 1945 version develops the plot better in some ways. While as tightly written as the book, it is richer in deductive theories, in taking stock at each stage of the story, and in survival techniques. The dialogue seems sharper than in the book and provides some memorable lines. This adaptation pioneered the technique (repeated in 1965 and 1974 and omitted only from the 1989 version, to its detriment) of playing the Ten Little Indians nursery rhyme on the piano. This brings it to life and sets the stage for what is to come. The cast is mostly outstanding. Many characters -- Lombard, Claythorne, doctor, judge, Blore, Brent -- seem as smart, strong, or distinctive as in the book, or more so. They are more entertaining. Generally, the films do a better job of showing characters interact. Except in 1989, the films make more of an effort than the book to explain the relationship that develops between two characters.

However, the 1945 version handles the past crimes even less effectively than the book. The movie presents the general and his past crime in an obscure, lifeless way; even the weak 1989 adaptation does better. The 1945 version makes a ludicrous change to the judge's past crime. It waters down Brent's. In changing the story to allow characters to survive, it distorts their identities and/or crimes in fundamental ways. In the process, it replaces the book's most complex, interesting past crime with one that is bland, superficial, and false. This confuses the meaning of the host's actions, although it does suggest, but not develop, a new theme of false accusation not present in the book.

Generally, the film's attempts to make the characters entertaining (a re-named Marston, Rogers, doctor, judge, Blore) come at the expense of their plausibility as villains and of the story's seriousness. Characters confess their secrets and treat the horror unfolding around them as if it were a parlor game. Mischa Auer's farcical, clownish performance is a disaster. The character was poorly drawn to begin with, and the 1945 film does a particularly poor job of presenting his past crime. This, and the changed ending, are only the most extreme examples of a general problem with taking such a lighthearted approach to a fundamentally serious story.

Worst of all, the climactic scene, which reveals Owen's identity, means, and motives, is short, sedate, droll, unsatisfying, and leaves a lot unexplained. In 1945, Owen has a weary, rational, amiable armchair chat with the final victim precisely when the character should come alive as someone triumphantly and credibly capable of inflicting such horror. It is left to the otherwise flawed 1974 version to capture more of the tone and intensity of the book and to the generally inept 1989 film to provide an ending that is dramatic, reflects that a deadly serious killer has been at work, conveys a sense of Owen's menace and lunacy, and most fully explains Owen's behavior. ... Read more

Description

This is it! Agatha Christie's famous mystery, "Ten Little Indians," deftly brought to the screen by legendary French director Rene Clair in this restored original screen masterwork. Ten strangers are invited as weekend guests to a mansion on a remote island. When the host doesn't show up, the guests start dying, one by one, in uniquely macabre Agatha Christie-style. A brilliant cast lead by Academy Award-winning actors Barry Fitzgerald and Walter Huston. ... Read more

Reviews (53)

The BUTLER did it!! Or did he??
=====>

I watched this black and white 1945 movie (whose New York premiere was on Halloween day at the Roxy Theatre) of almost 100 minutes without first reading the novel that it is based on. I'm glad I did this! Why? Because I was forced to really watch the movie in order to deduce who the murderer was.

According to the opening credits, this movie is "based on the [1939] novel [of the same name] by [Dame] Agatha Christie" (1890 to 1976). However, this is not quite accurate. This movie is really based on the play version of this book that has a slightly different ending than the book. (Note: In America, this novel is known as "Ten Little Indians.")

As a synopsis, ten strangers are invited as weekend guests to the only mansion located on an isolated island. When the host, with the unusual name of "U.N. Owen" and his wife don't show up, the guests start dying, one by one, according to the lines in the children's poem entitled "Ten Little Indians." These guests and the viewer are constantly reminded of the body count as each of the ten figures on a ceramic display are secretly broken, one by one, directly after a murder is committed.

Who exactly are these ten strangers? They are as follows (in the order in which they are killed):

1. Russian Prince Starloff (played by Mischa Auer)
2. Maid Rogers (Queenie Leonard)
3. Retired General Mandrake (Sir C. Aubrey Smith)
4. Butler Rogers (Richard Haydn)
5. Spinster (?) Brent (Dame Judith Anderson)
6. Judge Quinncannon (Barry Fitzgerald)
7. Dr. Armstrong (Walter Huston)
8. Detective Bloor (Roland Young)
9. Explorer Lombard (Louis Hayward)
10. Secretary Claythorne (June Duprez)

The above cast does a stellar job in their roles. They make the movie come across not only as a mystery but also as a black comedy (thanks to a well-crafted script). Personally, I think the actor who portrayed the butler did the best job.

As the murders begin to occur, the guests realize that there is a person acting as "judge, jury, and executioner." And that person, they surmise, is Mr. Owen. Suspense is created when these guests (and the viewer) start asking themselves questions:

(1) Is Owen hiding in the mansion killing them one by one?
(2) Is Owen one of them? That is, is the "loose cannon" one of them?
(3) (Is Owen the boatman that drove them from the mainland to the island?)

The black and white gives the movie a claustrophobic feeling (adding another dimension to this movie). The cinematography is breathtaking. The main background music for this movie is unique, something I did not expect.

I thought this movie was a little rushed at the beginning. However, it slowed down as it progressed.

Finally, the DVD (the one distributed by the studio Image Entertainment) has just one extra. Even though it lasts less than two minutes, it is VERY interesting.

In conclusion, this is a fun movie, even if you have read the book. For those who haven't read the book, I have left clues as to who the murderer may be in the above review. If you think you know who it is, then view the movie to see if you're right!

<=====>

Stylish suspense that ranks with the greatest!
By far the best screen adaptation of Agatha Christie, (not to be mentioned in the same breath with the tepid "Death on the Nile," and "Murder on the Orient Express") you have tantalizing mystery, thrilling suspense, black humor, splendid acting, perfect production, and almost geometrically brilliant direction all in one highly enjoyable package. Internationally famous director Rene Clair here presents the classic mystery with such style and skill, that you truly have no idea what's going to happen next. His craftsmanlike care and attention to detail make all ten characters at once capable and incapable of the murders. The careful casting is also inspired, a troupe containing no types to suggest assured innocence or guilt; yet hardly a collection of no-name fresh off his Oscar-winning performance; Louis Hayward, a now forgotten, but hugely appealing playboy sort; Roland Young, delightfully bumbling; and the adenoidal Richard Haydn, in his most winning performance. These are particular standouts in a sterling cast which also includes Judith Anderson, C. Aubrey Smith, and Mischa Auer. The great mansion is also a triumph of art direction, handsomely photographed in moody black-and-white by Lucien Androit; and music likewise assists to create tempo and atmosphere. Humor is also in generous doses, provided by scriptwriter Dudley Nichols, ("Bringing Up Baby,""Stagecoach," etc.) a master at pointing up the action with the humor, rather than interrupting it. Finally, like all great movies, this one gets better and better as it goes along, culminating in a classic denouement with a neat sting in its tail. Even after the culprit is revealed, you'll want to go back and study the skill at which the mystery was sustained! A true classic totally undeserved of its indifference from the Academy and today's top-ten lists. It will challenge any armchair sleuth out there!

And then there were none
I saw this movie on t.v. years ago. I am a fan of Agatha Christie. I thoroughly loved this movie!!! If you love mysteries you'll love this movie!!

Fun Until The End!
I loved this movie! Although the ending is different from the book, I thought this movie was very well done and well worth the money. I did notice however some parts where the movie was supposed to taken seriously, but ended up being funny through bad lighting or whatnot. But you must realize that this movie is older, so appreciate it. The story line is very well done, and the acting is surprisingly well done. PURCHASE THIS MOVIE! I know you'll love it to death and watch it over and over :D

Film, like book, unable to fully realize idea as a story
Agatha Christie's 1939 story idea captures the imagination. Ten strangers who each, in his or her own way, have gotten away with murder gather by invitation at an isolated mansion. Then their unknown host U. N. Owen systematically and mockingly murders them one by one. The idea was adapted into a film in 1945, 1965, 1974, and 1989. Each adaptation is worth seeing as an attempt to bring the idea to life. Unfortunately, neither Christie nor the filmmakers succeed in turning this compelling but at the same time confining plot concept into a truly fulfilling story.

The book's premise is clever and fascinating. Careful attention is paid to plot detail. Compared to the films, the book's assortment of past crimes and depictions of the characters' attitudes toward them are more varied, subtle, and interesting. The book gives the highly contrived events a certain plausibility. It is the least sentimental about the characters, treating them vaguely and suspiciously. This helps, even if it does not entirely succeed, in making them convincing as people who have killed in the past and could do so again. The book maintains more of a sense of fear, dread, menace, suspense, and purpose than the film versions. It explains at some length why and how Owen carried out the scheme.

However, once the imaginative premise is established, the story becomes thin and formulaic. There is little plot or character development. The storytelling seems flat, frigid, and, at times, slow-paced. There is no lead character to care about. The characters and their past crimes are sketched in summary fashion. Those crimes vary widely in originality, depth, and genuineness. The best are Claythorne's, the general's, Brent's, and the Rogers'. The past crimes of Blore, the doctor, the judge, and Lombard are trite, unexplored, and ineffective. There are only two real plot twists. The second creates a major logical problem, which the book acknowledges and tries to overcome by weakly suggesting that the ploy would trick or "rattle" the murderer. The guests' murders are designed to follow the nursery rhyme and little more. Some cosmetic frills aside, the killings show, in themselves, no special cunning, skill, strategic advantage, or plausibility. Owen strikes crudely without detection too effortlessly.

Worst of all, the book (and each film) has nothing serious to say about the powerful themes of survival, justice, and criminality that are at the heart of the story. The story is inherently an observation of human nature in a desperate situation. How do the characters behave? How do they try to reason? How do they try to survive? Also by its very nature -- as the book's last pages acknowledge -- this is a morality play. How is each character a "criminal"? How is each "beyond the law"? Does each get "justice"? Is justice the point, or simply a "lust" to torture and kill? Is the story about breaking the law or enforcing it, about mistakes or abuses in pursuing justice? None of this is meaningfully explored.

Overall, the films are worse in some respects and better in some respects than the book. The 1945 version develops the plot better in some ways. While as tightly written as the book, it is richer in deductive theories, in taking stock at each stage of the story, and in survival techniques. The dialogue seems sharper than in the book and provides some memorable lines. This adaptation pioneered the technique (repeated in 1965 and 1974 and omitted only from the 1989 version, to its detriment) of playing the Ten Little Indians nursery rhyme on the piano. This brings it to life and sets the stage for what is to come. The cast is mostly outstanding. Many characters -- Lombard, Claythorne, doctor, judge, Blore, Brent -- seem as smart, strong, or distinctive as in the book, or more so. They are more entertaining. Generally, the films do a better job of showing characters interact. Except in 1989, the films make more of an effort than the book to explain the relationship that develops between two characters.

However, the 1945 version handles the past crimes even less effectively than the book. The movie presents the general and his past crime in an obscure, lifeless way; even the weak 1989 adaptation does better. The 1945 version makes a ludicrous change to the judge's past crime. It waters down Brent's. In changing the story to allow characters to survive, it distorts their identities and/or crimes in fundamental ways. In the process, it replaces the book's most complex, interesting past crime with one that is bland, superficial, and false. This confuses the meaning of the host's actions, although it does suggest, but not develop, a new theme of false accusation not present in the book.

Generally, the film's attempts to make the characters entertaining (a re-named Marston, Rogers, doctor, judge, Blore) come at the expense of their plausibility as villains and of the story's seriousness. Characters confess their secrets and treat the horror unfolding around them as if it were a parlor game. Mischa Auer's farcical, clownish performance is a disaster. The character was poorly drawn to begin with, and the 1945 film does a particularly poor job of presenting his past crime. This, and the changed ending, are only the most extreme examples of a general problem with taking such a lighthearted approach to a fundamentally serious story.

Worst of all, the climactic scene, which reveals Owen's identity, means, and motives, is short, sedate, droll, unsatisfying, and leaves a lot unexplained. In 1945, Owen has a weary, rational, amiable armchair chat with the final victim precisely when the character should come alive as someone triumphantly and credibly capable of inflicting such horror. It is left to the otherwise flawed 1974 version to capture more of the tone and intensity of the book and to the generally inept 1989 film to provide an ending that is dramatic, reflects that a deadly serious killer has been at work, conveys a sense of Owen's menace and lunacy, and most fully explains Owen's behavior. ... Read more

Reviews (92)

One of the great comedies of all time
In 1940, Katherine Hepburn's movie career was in desperate condition. Her 1938 film BRINGING UP BABY, although recognized as a Howard Hawks's masterpiece today, was at the time a box office failure. The failure signaled the temporary end of demand for her talents in Hollywood, although she had HOLIDAY in the can (and costarring, like both BRINGING UP BABY and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY, Cary Grant). So, she went back to the stage, in a play written specifically for her, and the subsequent hit was an unexpected and triumphant return to the screen for Hepburn. Her career never looked back again, especially when two years later she teamed with Spencer Tracy for the first time. Ironically, she originally requested that Clark Gable and Spencer Tracy play the Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart roles.

THE PHILADELPHIA STORY is such an extraordinarily well-done film that one can watch it repeatedly, reveling each time in new and hidden details. It strikes the perfect balance of being spectacularly well-acted, hysterically funny, and delightfully silly while maintaining an elegant veneer. The cast is nearly overwhelming in its quality, with Hepburn and Grant turning in especially fine performances. Jimmy Stewart is also superb, though he won an Oscar for this year that he probably didn't deserve. The Academy in 1940 may have been giving him the award as an apology for not having won the year before for MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. Unfortunately, this meant that Jimmy Stewart's best friend Henry Fonda failed to win for one of the finest performances in the history of American cinema, as Tom Joad in THE GRAPES OF WRATH. Still, although the Oscar clearly should have gone to Fonda, Stewart manages a great turn. He and Grant manage a great moment when Stewart adlibbed a hiccup, and Grant, not batting an eye, adlibbed, "Excuse me." The rest of the cast is flawless. Too many excel to mention, but special mention must be made of Roland Young as Uncle Willie, Virginia Weidler in a marvelous turn as Tracy Lord's precocious younger sister, and the erstwhile Errol Flynn nemesis Henry Daniell as the devious and unscrupulous Sidney Kidd.

Although this film holds up magnificently upon reviewings, there is nothing like seeing it for the first time. I remember vividly how exciting it was to watch this in the lamentably demised Lincoln Theater in New Haven, Connecticut, having absolutely no idea how the film was going to end only five minutes before the closing credits. Who will Tracy marry? Will she marry? How will the film managed to tie up all the loose ends.

I have a list of my all time favorite lines from films. One of my favorites comes from this one. On the morning after Tracy has gotten rip-roaringly drunk, she has almost no memories of what happened, but what she does recall makes her fear that she might have been in a compromising situation with Jimmy Stewart. After Stewart assures the confused and fearful Tracy Lord that nothing happened because she was drunk and "there are rules about that sort of thing," the infinitely relieved Tracy says, "I think men are wonderful."

The film has managed to permeate our culture in subtle ways, from inspiring musical remakes, to providing famous adult movie stars with their names, to providing foundations for jokes (in the Rocky and Bullwinkle adventure "The Ruby Yacht of Omar Khayyam," whenever Bullwinkle sees his jewel encrusted small boat, he mutters under his breath, "Yar, yar").

A Funny, Breezy Comedy with All-Star Performances!
The Philadelphia Story is a fabulous filming of Katharine Hepburn's Broadway triumph, and was famous for several reasons; first, it returned Hepburn to Hollywood, after she had been declared 'Box Office Poison'; it gave Jimmy Stewart his only 'Best Actor' Oscar (albeit it was probably a consolation award for losing for Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, in 1939); and it further solidified the Cary Grant screen persona as a worldly and wise bon vivant (a move begun by directors Howard Hawks and George Cukor in the late '30s), playing a character which would fit Grant so well that he would continue playing variations of it for the next 25 years! In watching this sparkling comedy, note the wonderful supporting cast, particularly Ruth Hussey, as Stewart's partner (in an underrated performance...she is very good!) and Roland Young (the original 'Topper') as Hepburn's uncle. While the film is a bit static (and occasionally heavy with 'smart' dialogue that doesn't age well), there are so many comic gems that it's difficult to quibble. Hepburn is remarkably sexy as the 'once-and-future' bride, and it's easy to see why Grant, Stewart, and John Howard would all want her. While it's social classes subtext may seem a bit dated, today, the theme of a woman rediscovering the man who truly loves her is universal, and makes The Philadelphia Story a timeless joy!

YES, BUY THIS ONE, YOU WON'T REGRET IT.
This is my absolute favorite performance by the great Katherine Hepburn. She is breathtaking and absolutely wonderful. Brilliant performances all across the board, an especially funny performance by James Stewart is just the icing on the cake. Cary Grant,one of my faves, also delivers a magnificent performance. Also worth mentioning is the very beautiful Ruth Hussey, whose potrayal of Liz is stunning. She was one of the most attractive actresses at the time, in my humble opinion. This movie is very funny and the sets and costumes are among the best Hollywood has ever offered. I highly recommend this as a must own.

Perfection!
So well written, so elegant! My favorite film.

The REAL High Society
Branded by Hollywood as "Box Office Poison" (usually the death blow to an actor's career), Katherine Hepburn put all of her eggs in this ONE basket, to prove she's still a force to be recconned with. Reprising her stage role, Kate secures the rights for the film version of "The Philadelphia Story". The trick worked. Katherine Hepburn was back as a big star on the Hollywood Sky.

Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn), a spoiled socialite scheduled to remarry when her first husband, C.K. Dexterhaven (Cary Grant) shows up as uninvited wedding guest. Add to the mix, Mike Connor (James Stewart) a reporter who is supposed to be covering the wedding for the tabloids but winds up falling for Tracy himself. The brief triangle has a predictable ending.

Less glamorous than the 1955 Technicolor Musical re-make "High Society" with Grace Kelly and Bing Crosby, this black & white Classic remains the superior production. Somewhat dated (definitely 1940s Movie Star Magazine material), this is still a groundbreaking romantic comedy. Ted Turner: Please keep your crayons away from this one!**** ... Read more

Description

3 Great Movies on 1 DVD.Star Power, Exciting Genre with Extras on each DVD. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Though modern audiences may find the performances in this prototypical darkest-Africa adventure yarn somewhat creaky, vintage-film fans will relish this rousing adaptation of H. Rider Haggard's novel. Sir Cedric Hardwicke stars as Allan Quartermain, a Great White Hunter who aids a young woman (Anna Lee, who was married to the film's director, Robert Stevenson) in locating her father, who has gone missing in his search for the fabled diamond mines of King Solomon. With the assistance of the regal Umbopa (Paul Robeson), Quartermain and his party locate the mines, but quickly find themselves in the midst of two warring tribes. The use of African locations and indigenous tribesmen help to give the film a gritty authenticity, and the presence of the legendary Robeson (who sings three songs) adds a degree of historical importance to this engaging action-drama. --Paul Gaita ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Hey, it's not the best, but I had fun watching it.
You can call this movie all the names in the book, but you can't change my mind about it. I liked it. It was bad, yeah, but that's what made it funny. So make sure that when you watch this movie, you watch it with a light heart and don't be to critical on it.

The only good movie version of this book
This is a superb film version of Rider Haggard's thrilling adventure story. The actors all perform their roles with zest and conviction, with Paul Robeson outstanding as the rightful chief of the tribe returned to claim his birthright. Best of all, the film has a satisfactorily evil and terrifying Gagool, because what is King Solomon's Mines without Gagool the Witch?She is unbelievably left out of the bland and boring Stewart Granger version. This is the only version of the film worth watching, I cannot believe another reviewer thinks that the later versions are better. He obviously wouldn't recognise a good film if he fell over it.

Poor!
As generous as I have been handing out stars, I can't recommend this movie to anyone for any reason. Taking in to account it was produced in 1937, and the limited production capabilities then, it still doesn't warrant much. Do yourself a favor, look to enjoy some of the more modern versions.

Quality Complaint
The picture quality of this video can only be described as AWFUL.
After only a few minutes viewing I trashed it. It is disgraceful that this rubbish can be sold as new when it is obviously a copy of many back generations.

My Favorite Version of the Story!
I had seen Richard Chamberlain's goofy Indiana Jones imitation in the 1985 version, which is not an entirely bad movie. It does have its funny moments, like when he bursts through the door to face at least a hundred rifles and says, "Great reflexes, guys!" As for the 1950 version with Stewart Granger, all I can recall is the words of one critic who described his performance as "hypervirile." I might also add that it was a little too 1950's, which is ok if that's what you're in the mood for (and sometimes I am!). I have to say, though, that my own favorite is the little known 1937 version with Sir Cedric Harwicke as Allan Quatermaine (the great White Hunter), the great Paul Robeson as Umbopa, and Anna Lee as the stereotypical Irish lass. For those of you who know her only from her performances in John Ford's movies, check out the brogue! Roland Young radiates dry humor as Commander Goode, R.N. ("retired!")and John Loder places the stereoptypically adventurous 19th century English nobleman. Harwicke is not as rugged as Granger, or as humorous as Chamberlain, but he displays a quiet credibility. The end is a little far stretched, the deus ex machina of all deus ex machinas. But I think it only adds to the charm of the film, in which the underlying implication is, "Off course the English can work their way out of anything!" It is Robeson, whose performance is both larger than life and yet subtly understated, who gives the film its power. He sings, he acts, he grins, he wins the day! It's a shame he had to go to England to get decent roles in films which were denied him in America because of his race. Watch this one, I think you'll like it! ... Read more

Reviews (53)

The BUTLER did it!! Or did he??
=====>

I watched this black and white 1945 movie (whose New York premiere was on Halloween day at the Roxy Theatre) of almost 100 minutes without first reading the novel that it is based on. I'm glad I did this! Why? Because I was forced to really watch the movie in order to deduce who the murderer was.

According to the opening credits, this movie is "based on the [1939] novel [of the same name] by [Dame] Agatha Christie" (1890 to 1976). However, this is not quite accurate. This movie is really based on the play version of this book that has a slightly different ending than the book. (Note: In America, this novel is known as "Ten Little Indians.")

As a synopsis, ten strangers are invited as weekend guests to the only mansion located on an isolated island. When the host, with the unusual name of "U.N. Owen" and his wife don't show up, the guests start dying, one by one, according to the lines in the children's poem entitled "Ten Little Indians." These guests and the viewer are constantly reminded of the body count as each of the ten figures on a ceramic display are secretly broken, one by one, directly after a murder is committed.

Who exactly are these ten strangers? They are as follows (in the order in which they are killed):

1. Russian Prince Starloff (played by Mischa Auer)
2. Maid Rogers (Queenie Leonard)
3. Retired General Mandrake (Sir C. Aubrey Smith)
4. Butler Rogers (Richard Haydn)
5. Spinster (?) Brent (Dame Judith Anderson)
6. Judge Quinncannon (Barry Fitzgerald)
7. Dr. Armstrong (Walter Huston)
8. Detective Bloor (Roland Young)
9. Explorer Lombard (Louis Hayward)
10. Secretary Claythorne (June Duprez)

The above cast does a stellar job in their roles. They make the movie come across not only as a mystery but also as a black comedy (thanks to a well-crafted script). Personally, I think the actor who portrayed the butler did the best job.

As the murders begin to occur, the guests realize that there is a person acting as "judge, jury, and executioner." And that person, they surmise, is Mr. Owen. Suspense is created when these guests (and the viewer) start asking themselves questions:

(1) Is Owen hiding in the mansion killing them one by one?
(2) Is Owen one of them? That is, is the "loose cannon" one of them?
(3) (Is Owen the boatman that drove them from the mainland to the island?)

The black and white gives the movie a claustrophobic feeling (adding another dimension to this movie). The cinematography is breathtaking. The main background music for this movie is unique, something I did not expect.

I thought this movie was a little rushed at the beginning. However, it slowed down as it progressed.

Finally, the DVD (the one distributed by the studio Image Entertainment) has just one extra. Even though it lasts less than two minutes, it is VERY interesting.

In conclusion, this is a fun movie, even if you have read the book. For those who haven't read the book, I have left clues as to who the murderer may be in the above review. If you think you know who it is, then view the movie to see if you're right!

<=====>

Stylish suspense that ranks with the greatest!
By far the best screen adaptation of Agatha Christie, (not to be mentioned in the same breath with the tepid "Death on the Nile," and "Murder on the Orient Express") you have tantalizing mystery, thrilling suspense, black humor, splendid acting, perfect production, and almost geometrically brilliant direction all in one highly enjoyable package. Internationally famous director Rene Clair here presents the classic mystery with such style and skill, that you truly have no idea what's going to happen next. His craftsmanlike care and attention to detail make all ten characters at once capable and incapable of the murders. The careful casting is also inspired, a troupe containing no types to suggest assured innocence or guilt; yet hardly a collection of no-name fresh off his Oscar-winning performance; Louis Hayward, a now forgotten, but hugely appealing playboy sort; Roland Young, delightfully bumbling; and the adenoidal Richard Haydn, in his most winning performance. These are particular standouts in a sterling cast which also includes Judith Anderson, C. Aubrey Smith, and Mischa Auer. The great mansion is also a triumph of art direction, handsomely photographed in moody black-and-white by Lucien Androit; and music likewise assists to create tempo and atmosphere. Humor is also in generous doses, provided by scriptwriter Dudley Nichols, ("Bringing Up Baby,""Stagecoach," etc.) a master at pointing up the action with the humor, rather than interrupting it. Finally, like all great movies, this one gets better and better as it goes along, culminating in a classic denouement with a neat sting in its tail. Even after the culprit is revealed, you'll want to go back and study the skill at which the mystery was sustained! A true classic totally undeserved of its indifference from the Academy and today's top-ten lists. It will challenge any armchair sleuth out there!

And then there were none
I saw this movie on t.v. years ago. I am a fan of Agatha Christie. I thoroughly loved this movie!!! If you love mysteries you'll love this movie!!

Fun Until The End!
I loved this movie! Although the ending is different from the book, I thought this movie was very well done and well worth the money. I did notice however some parts where the movie was supposed to taken seriously, but ended up being funny through bad lighting or whatnot. But you must realize that this movie is older, so appreciate it. The story line is very well done, and the acting is surprisingly well done. PURCHASE THIS MOVIE! I know you'll love it to death and watch it over and over :D

Film, like book, unable to fully realize idea as a story
Agatha Christie's 1939 story idea captures the imagination. Ten strangers who each, in his or her own way, have gotten away with murder gather by invitation at an isolated mansion. Then their unknown host U. N. Owen systematically and mockingly murders them one by one. The idea was adapted into a film in 1945, 1965, 1974, and 1989. Each adaptation is worth seeing as an attempt to bring the idea to life. Unfortunately, neither Christie nor the filmmakers succeed in turning this compelling but at the same time confining plot concept into a truly fulfilling story.

The book's premise is clever and fascinating. Careful attention is paid to plot detail. Compared to the films, the book's assortment of past crimes and depictions of the characters' attitudes toward them are more varied, subtle, and interesting. The book gives the highly contrived events a certain plausibility. It is the least sentimental about the characters, treating them vaguely and suspiciously. This helps, even if it does not entirely succeed, in making them convincing as people who have killed in the past and could do so again. The book maintains more of a sense of fear, dread, menace, suspense, and purpose than the film versions. It explains at some length why and how Owen carried out the scheme.

However, once the imaginative premise is established, the story becomes thin and formulaic. There is little plot or character development. The storytelling seems flat, frigid, and, at times, slow-paced. There is no lead character to care about. The characters and their past crimes are sketched in summary fashion. Those crimes vary widely in originality, depth, and genuineness. The best are Claythorne's, the general's, Brent's, and the Rogers'. The past crimes of Blore, the doctor, the judge, and Lombard are trite, unexplored, and ineffective. There are only two real plot twists. The second creates a major logical problem, which the book acknowledges and tries to overcome by weakly suggesting that the ploy would trick or "rattle" the murderer. The guests' murders are designed to follow the nursery rhyme and little more. Some cosmetic frills aside, the killings show, in themselves, no special cunning, skill, strategic advantage, or plausibility. Owen strikes crudely without detection too effortlessly.

Worst of all, the book (and each film) has nothing serious to say about the powerful themes of survival, justice, and criminality that are at the heart of the story. The story is inherently an observation of human nature in a desperate situation. How do the characters behave? How do they try to reason? How do they try to survive? Also by its very nature -- as the book's last pages acknowledge -- this is a morality play. How is each character a "criminal"? How is each "beyond the law"? Does each get "justice"? Is justice the point, or simply a "lust" to torture and kill? Is the story about breaking the law or enforcing it, about mistakes or abuses in pursuing justice? None of this is meaningfully explored.

Overall, the films are worse in some respects and better in some respects than the book. The 1945 version develops the plot better in some ways. While as tightly written as the book, it is richer in deductive theories, in taking stock at each stage of the story, and in survival techniques. The dialogue seems sharper than in the book and provides some memorable lines. This adaptation pioneered the technique (repeated in 1965 and 1974 and omitted only from the 1989 version, to its detriment) of playing the Ten Little Indians nursery rhyme on the piano. This brings it to life and sets the stage for what is to come. The cast is mostly outstanding. Many characters -- Lombard, Claythorne, doctor, judge, Blore, Brent -- seem as smart, strong, or distinctive as in the book, or more so. They are more entertaining. Generally, the films do a better job of showing characters interact. Except in 1989, the films make more of an effort than the book to explain the relationship that develops between two characters.

However, the 1945 version handles the past crimes even less effectively than the book. The movie presents the general and his past crime in an obscure, lifeless way; even the weak 1989 adaptation does better. The 1945 version makes a ludicrous change to the judge's past crime. It waters down Brent's. In changing the story to allow characters to survive, it distorts their identities and/or crimes in fundamental ways. In the process, it replaces the book's most complex, interesting past crime with one that is bland, superficial, and false. This confuses the meaning of the host's actions, although it does suggest, but not develop, a new theme of false accusation not present in the book.

Generally, the film's attempts to make the characters entertaining (a re-named Marston, Rogers, doctor, judge, Blore) come at the expense of their plausibility as villains and of the story's seriousness. Characters confess their secrets and treat the horror unfolding around them as if it were a parlor game. Mischa Auer's farcical, clownish performance is a disaster. The character was poorly drawn to begin with, and the 1945 film does a particularly poor job of presenting his past crime. This, and the changed ending, are only the most extreme examples of a general problem with taking such a lighthearted approach to a fundamentally serious story.

Worst of all, the climactic scene, which reveals Owen's identity, means, and motives, is short, sedate, droll, unsatisfying, and leaves a lot unexplained. In 1945, Owen has a weary, rational, amiable armchair chat with the final victim precisely when the character should come alive as someone triumphantly and credibly capable of inflicting such horror. It is left to the otherwise flawed 1974 version to capture more of the tone and intensity of the book and to the generally inept 1989 film to provide an ending that is dramatic, reflects that a deadly serious killer has been at work, conveys a sense of Owen's menace and lunacy, and most fully explains Owen's behavior. ... Read more

Reviews (92)

True classic, beautifully preserved and re-released.....
Despite the fact that this film raises issues that are not very potent today, it remains to be a timeless classic because of its sheer artistic value. This great artistic value is largely due to the brilliant idea (the idea of creating a play about Kathrene Hepburn [not literally, of course], for Kathrene Hepburn), the plot itself, and film's charming and witty script. Hepburn is the only and true star in this story, although I can appreciate Stewart and Grant in their roles. But truly, it would not have mattered much artistically, if different supporting cast was chosen. Apparently, it did matter to RKO commercially a great deal. Thank God for that, because Stewart, Grant, Hussey, and Howard all added something to the film. The result is a story with a "love...well, let's just say, more than a usual triangle", that revolves around one Philadelphia society girl and a few of her eccentric family members. The DVD has an outstanding sound and picture quality. Cute little menu and original theatrical trailer are also included. It is nice to know that this great film will stay with us for generations to come and enjoy it.

See it............ NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is all I need to say:

Cary Grant Katharine Hepburn Jimmy Stewart GREAT PERFORMANCES ALL AROUND, ESPECIALLY FROM THE THREE AMAZING STARS AND RUTH HUSSET!

But I'll say more anyway.

Upper class lady Tracy Lord is about to be married to George Kittridge, general manager of Quaker State something or other (I haven't watched it for a month or so) after two years before divorcing CK Dexter Haven.

Spy Magazine big cheese Sindney Kidd sends Macauly Conner and Elizabeth Imbry to get an inside story on the wedding of Tracy Lord, and George Kittridge. They are to get inside via Tracy's ex husband Dexter, who decides to help for revenge against his ex-bride.

Hilarity ensues via needle sharp dialogue, carefully hidden gags, and terrific performances.

I haven't seen one movie by Cary Grant that I haven't liked; I have seen thrity-two. I Have only seen two Jimmy Stewart and Kate Hepburn that I didn't really enjoy a-piece, and I've seen about twenty or more of theirs.

And Cuckor's direction inspired many directors to choose alternative direction styles.

YES, BUY THIS ONE, YOU WON'T REGRET IT.
This is my absolute favorite performance by the great Katherine Hepburn. She is breathtaking and absolutely wonderful. Brilliant performances all across the board, an especially funny performance by James Stewart is just the icing on the cake. Cary Grant,one of my faves, also delivers a magnificent performance. Also worth mentioning is the very beautiful Ruth Hussey, whose potrayal of Liz is stunning. She was one of the most attractive actresses at the time, in my humble opinion. This movie is very funny and the sets and costumes are among the best Hollywood has ever offered. I highly recommend this as a must own.

Perfection!
So well written, so elegant! My favorite film.

The REAL High Society
Branded by Hollywood as "Box Office Poison" (usually the death blow to an actor's career), Katherine Hepburn put all of her eggs in this ONE basket, to prove she's still a force to be recconned with. Reprising her stage role, Kate secures the rights for the film version of "The Philadelphia Story". The trick worked. Katherine Hepburn was back as a big star on the Hollywood Sky.

Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn), a spoiled socialite scheduled to remarry when her first husband, C.K. Dexterhaven (Cary Grant) shows up as uninvited wedding guest. Add to the mix, Mike Connor (James Stewart) a reporter who is supposed to be covering the wedding for the tabloids but winds up falling for Tracy himself. The brief triangle has a predictable ending.

Less glamorous than the 1955 Technicolor Musical re-make "High Society" with Grace Kelly and Bing Crosby, this black & white Classic remains the superior production. Somewhat dated (definitely 1940s Movie Star Magazine material), this is still a groundbreaking romantic comedy. Ted Turner: Please keep your crayons away from this one!**** ... Read more

Description

The third and final entry in Hal Roach's famed "Topper" trilogy may very well be the best of the lot. Returning for their third portrayal of Mr. and Mrs. Cosmo Topper, Roland Young and Billie Burke are consistently upstaged by a sparkling new addition to the "Topper" troupe, Jack Benny's famed manservant, the loveable and irascible Eddie "Rochester" Anderson. This time around there is a "new" ghostly presence in the shapely form of Joan Blondell, who is unceremoniously dispatched by a cloaked knife murderer in a case of mistaken identity. Naturally, Joan floats over to the Topper's quiet abode and nags Cosmo into investigating her death. Back they come to the spooky scene of the crime, where Topper is accused of the murder by a houseful of creeps headed by ghoulmeister George Zucco. And who else should be the lead detective on the case, but the uproarious Donald McBride of "Room Service" fame, thoroughly bungling everything in sight! ... Read more

Reviews (16)

CHUCKLES AND LAUGHS!
This is the first Topper I've seen minus Cary Grant. But Joan Blondell holds her own and carries the day. There are constant laughs to be had here and frequent giggles, the biggest instigator of them being the briskly clever dialogue and the performance of Eddie (Rochester) Anderson, who for many years performed with Jack Benny. His terror at the "ghostly" goings on is replete with humor.

It is a pleasure to see a young Dennis O'Keefe acting opposite Carole Landis, sweet, beautiful and a fine actress (what a tragedy she committed suicide over an ill-fated love affair with the then married Rex Harrison - or should I say what a waste, since in this film she displayed such potential as an actress). And there is a wonderful, laugh till your sides split, performance by Billie Burke, who lets all the stops out in this one. She seems to relish her role and uses her up and down tremolo voice, sometimes raising it to a hilarious screech. This is definitely one of her best films.

Watch it and have fun! Because it's a fun movie at heart.

Topper's RETURNED!
And he's got a carload of women! Actually, not a carload ,just two... One of whom happens to be a ghost! She drags topper to an old creepy house to find out who killed her. The house happens to be full of all sorts of secret passages, and WEIRD personalities.And of course, Mrs. Topper suspects that the young lady who got Cosmo over here is 'the other woman'. This movie is truly funny, and it's backed up by Eddie, or Rochester, Jack Benny's Valet. A Must-See!

Wonderful!
I love this movie! I hadn't seen it in years, but remembered loving it, so today I watched it. I love it. It's funny, mysterious, and dramatic. Plus it's always nice to watch an oldie and realize how different they are from today's. I would definately reccomend this!!

A great old movie
Topper Returns is an example of how old Hollywood could do classic work, with a movie that isn't great, but exceedingly good, and at times downright hilarious. Roland Young, the woman who plays his wife (forgot her name) Joan Blondell and Eddie Anderson make this a comedy, albeit a black comedy with it's overtones of murder, worth buying. And don't forget, it was nominated for two Academy Awards. It's good viewing for Mom, Dad and kids who aren't really young.

Pure fluff
The story is wafer thin and it matters little. There is more crammed in this little unsung film than most comedies. Despite the racist undertones, Rochester shows why he was regarded as such a great comic actor. It is a pity he did not make more films as he seems the equal of Bob Hope as the scared driver of Topper.

Indeed the whole film is a battle between which lunatic can hold the camera for more than a few seconds. There is just too much going on. I particularly liked Topper's wife who was so dizzy and stole scene after scene. It is a who dunnit, but that really does not matter as it is all great fun.

Sit back and enjoy a piece of nonsense. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Bob Hope at his best!
Mr. Hope stars as Freddie Hunter, a reporter who is chaperoning a troop of scouts aboard a ocean liner. The scouts see it as their duty to save Freddie from himself by making sure he doesn't smoke, drink or enjoy the hug of a woman "other than his Mom". The fact that the head boy of the troop is the son of Freddie's boss doesn't help Freddie when he decides to flirt with the Duchess Alexandria. But women are the least of Freddie's troubles. There is a killer on board. This killer decides to frame Freddie for his murderous deeds. Fortunately, there is a detective on board, hot on the trail of the true murderer, but wait, Freddie discovers the body of the murdered detective. How will Freddie prove his innocence? This is an entertaining film for the whole family. It also stars Rhonda Fleming, George Reeves, Jim Backus and Roland Young. So grab the popcorn, dim the lights and enjoy this wonderful movie!.

Funny movie,awful print
The dvd of this is a real let-down.The picture quality is really washed out.If you can put up with this,Hope is on good form,the story is above average and Jack Benny's brief appearance is a hoot.Shame about the transfer,though...

A young viewer
Bob Hope is wonderful in this delightful movie. I recomend it to everyone! ... Read more

Reviews (16)

CHUCKLES AND LAUGHS!
This is the first Topper I've seen minus Cary Grant. But Joan Blondell holds her own and carries the day. There are constant laughs to be had here and frequent giggles, the biggest instigator of them being the briskly clever dialogue and the performance of Eddie (Rochester) Anderson, who for many years performed with Jack Benny. His terror at the "ghostly" goings on is replete with humor.

It is a pleasure to see a young Dennis O'Keefe acting opposite Carole Landis, sweet, beautiful and a fine actress (what a tragedy she committed suicide over an ill-fated love affair with the then married Rex Harrison - or should I say what a waste, since in this film she displayed such potential as an actress). And there is a wonderful, laugh till your sides split, performance by Billie Burke, who lets all the stops out in this one. She seems to relish her role and uses her up and down tremolo voice, sometimes raising it to a hilarious screech. This is definitely one of her best films.

Watch it and have fun! Because it's a fun movie at heart.

Topper's RETURNED!
And he's got a carload of women! Actually, not a carload ,just two... One of whom happens to be a ghost! She drags topper to an old creepy house to find out who killed her. The house happens to be full of all sorts of secret passages, and WEIRD personalities.And of course, Mrs. Topper suspects that the young lady who got Cosmo over here is 'the other woman'. This movie is truly funny, and it's backed up by Eddie, or Rochester, Jack Benny's Valet. A Must-See!

Wonderful!
I love this movie! I hadn't seen it in years, but remembered loving it, so today I watched it. I love it. It's funny, mysterious, and dramatic. Plus it's always nice to watch an oldie and realize how different they are from today's. I would definately reccomend this!!

A great old movie
Topper Returns is an example of how old Hollywood could do classic work, with a movie that isn't great, but exceedingly good, and at times downright hilarious. Roland Young, the woman who plays his wife (forgot her name) Joan Blondell and Eddie Anderson make this a comedy, albeit a black comedy with it's overtones of murder, worth buying. And don't forget, it was nominated for two Academy Awards. It's good viewing for Mom, Dad and kids who aren't really young.

Pure fluff
The story is wafer thin and it matters little. There is more crammed in this little unsung film than most comedies. Despite the racist undertones, Rochester shows why he was regarded as such a great comic actor. It is a pity he did not make more films as he seems the equal of Bob Hope as the scared driver of Topper.

Indeed the whole film is a battle between which lunatic can hold the camera for more than a few seconds. There is just too much going on. I particularly liked Topper's wife who was so dizzy and stole scene after scene. It is a who dunnit, but that really does not matter as it is all great fun.

Sit back and enjoy a piece of nonsense. ... Read more