IMDb > Black Magic (1944) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Black Magic (1944) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 18 comments in total 

15 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
More Comedy Than Mystery, 12 February 2006
6/10
Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States

This late-entry Charlie Chan movie gets marks simply for the entertainment, not for a deep-thinking suspenseful "whodunnit." It's just fun to watch with an always-smiling daughter (played by Frances Chen) replacing number-whatever-son and the eyes-popping-out-of-the-head Mantan Moreland adding humor, although of his humor is a bit stupid (and insulting to black folks, I'm sure). However, Moreland is a likable guy so it's hard to get annoyed at his silliness.

The story is a familiar one of the day, about the occult (seances) and, thankfully, another that exposes the mediums as crooks.

These Sidney Toler-Mantan Moreland collaborations, as opposed to the early Warner Oland/Charlie Chan movies, replied more on comedy and gimmicks rather than brains, and once you accept that, you just go along with an entertaining hour of lamebrain fun, especially when Chan starts to put people down with his sarcasm.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Wonderful Mantan Moreland, 10 April 2006
Author: Lechuguilla from Dallas, Texas

Nervous and bug-eyed Birmingham Brown (Mantan Moreland) "assists" Charlie Chan and his daughter at the murder investigation in the home of a woman who has a séance business. During one of her sessions, a man is killed, and one of six people at the séance table appears to be the murderer.

Moreland was a great comic actor with tons of talent, and he is one of two reasons to watch this film. The other reason is the high-contrast B&W lighting, that reminds me of some 1940's noir films.

Other than Moreland and the film's lighting, "Black Magic" has little to offer. With a runtime of just 67 minutes the story is razor thin and poorly developed, suggestive of a sketchy, hastily written screenplay. There are several plot holes, and the killer's modus operandi is rather far-fetched.

As in many Chan movies, production design is minimal. And the sets here are a little too familiar. The entry hall in the séance house looks exactly like the entry hall used in the Chan movie "The Jade Mask". And the elevator set here looks like the elevator set used in the Chan movie "The Scarlet Clue". But Monogram Studios had the reputation for being cheap. And in this film ... it shows.

Even so, I can see how this film might have appealed to viewers in the 1940s, particularly as a Saturday afternoon matinée feature. In its time it probably was delightfully entertaining and a welcome diversion from the grim business of WWII.

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Toler vs Moreland - Battle Of The Aphorism, 5 May 2006
7/10
Author: Gary170459 from Derby, UK

Average Monogram Chan potboiler, in the Mongram House with some of the Monogram staff - but then, I've always liked this one! The surviving print (in Chanthology) is in excellent condition, lending a nice overall atmosphere to the proceedings and helping a lot in following the story. One of the things that always makes me smile watching Monogram's is that the plots usually involve dispensing with some or a lot of accepted social conventions - they weren't meant to be analysed and mulled over decades later. In this Moreland and Frances Chan are in and out of the house like yo-yo's, and creeping all over the place unseen - it wasn't their house but as in a lot of Monogram's you weren't supposed to dwell on ownership issues which obstructed juvenile frisson or slapstick.

At a séance a man is apparently shot dead with what turns out to be an invisible bullet, as Charlie jocularly puts it. The quest is on to find out which of the clients around the table did it and how. The way in which Charlie solved it is depressingly familiar and trite, but everything was wrapped up nicely anyway. As usual Moreland was acting scared witless, in fact with "gremlins galloping up and down his spine" this time - a fantastic image! Frances Chan couldn't act very well but she certainly looked like she was enjoying the experience of making a movie with her constant smiles - her sunny disposition seemed to be rubbing off on Toler too who was enjoying his own aphorisms more than ever.

Overall, nice to watch once in a while especially in a Chan season. And I prefer big shoes to big corns.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
That's the Way the Fortune Cookie Crumbles, 29 January 2005
4/10
Author: BaronBl00d (baronbl00d@aol.com) from NC

I must confess a rather soft spot in my movie heart for the Chan(as well as Wong and Moto) mysteries of the 30's and 40's. They have some great stories to tell, inventive if not too logical puzzles to solve, some gifted supporting acting in most cases, and a friendly kind of spirit inflamed within. They also have some poor, wooden performances, harbor some of the most offensive stereotypes of OUR day, and seem hurriedly put together at times. Charlie Chan and the Meeting at Midnight(version which I saw) has qualities both with negative charges and positive. Sidney Toler always does a nice, wry job of playing Honoloulou's #1 detective, though I much prefer Warner Oland. This vehicle for Toler seems to be rather substandard. I'll chalk that up as it was made by Monogram. The story is a bit too far-fetched about a couple being killed...one at a séance table by a bullet that disappeared. The story of the bullet was intriguing, but some loose ends were not tied all too convincingly for me. No #1 son or #2 son or even #3 son here. We get Frances Chan(both her character's name and her name in real life). Frances plays Charlie's #1 daughter. Plays may be a bit generous as her performance certainly was wooden. Mantan Moreland is back as Birmingham Brown. I know he caught a lot of flack later in his life for his portrayals of being scared and so forth, but, for me, he is easily the best thing in this movie. All his gags don't work, but he keeps trying. Moreland was a natural comic presence and he should be viewed as such. Period. Not a bad Chan film but by no means one of the better ones.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
"Commissioner, that was a strictly private murder, to which I was not invited.", 15 September 2004
7/10
Author: classicsoncall from United States

On vacation from his government job and returning to Honolulu, Charlie Chan is compelled to investigate a murder case when Sergeant Matthews threatens to detain daughter Frances (Frances Chan) unless he helps. William Bonner is the victim, a psychic medium who is shot during a seance, but mysteriously, a gun or bullet is never found.

"Black Magic" offers the usual cast of characters/suspects, in this case most of the seance members have an ax to grind with the victim, from cheated business associates to jilted lovers (which is a mystery in itself, as Bonner did not have the personality or looks when it comes to the romance department).

Mantan Moreland gains progressively more screen time in this third Monogram installment to the Chan series, and this is his best appearance so far, although the racial comments continue as in past Chan films - "If spooks bother you, Sergeant will arrest them".

Another welcome break from the standard Chan formula is the replacement of Number #1, 2 or 3 son with daughter Frances - "Beauty of Chan family also have brains". Sadly though, her portrayal is wooden and uncomfortable at times, with repeatedly wasted lines.

We've seen it before - the seance, the lights out, the gunshot and the resolution exposed by Charlie. The frozen blood bullet is an interesting twist, but don't even try to understand the ballistics involved. A lot of liberty is taken to make all the pieces fit, nevertheless, prepare to be entertained by "Black Magic/Meeting at Midnight".

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
No Sons, Daughter, 25 July 2004
7/10
Author: dbborroughs from Glen Cove, New York

In a break from the typical Chan pattern Charlie is aide by his daughter this time. Interestingly he treats much better than he he ever did any of his boys.

This concerns a murder at a seance and more following. Its far from the best of the Chans, but at the same time its far from the worst, especially in light of there not being a son to get into mischief. Its the atypical nature that lifts it up from being a purely run of the mill story. Granted if you've not seen a good number of the Chan films the small differences may not seem like much, but for those of us who've seen every appearance its the little things that count.

7 out of 10 for those looking for a break in the Chan formula, 6 out of 10 for everyone else.

Was the above comment useful to you?

12 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :-
ARRGGHH!!! Like other Monogram Studios Chan movies, how can anyone score this a 10?, 2 September 2006
6/10
Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida

Okay, I must admit that I generally DO like B-movies and series films from the 1940s. I like to watch The Falcon, The Saint, Sherlock Holmes and even Charlie Chan--they are escapist fun. Predictable and occasionally poorly written? Sure,...but still fun. So, despite my love for the genre, I am still in complete shock that so many people gave this ordinary little film a 10 on IMDb!! Come on, people, this is NOT "high art" or even an especially memorable film and the IMDb ratings become irrelevant if such a film is given ridiculously inflated scores! I would really LOVE to know what scores the people that give this movie a 10 gave to OTHER films. Do they give them all 10s or are they scoring films like GONE WITH THE WIND, BEN HUR, CHARIOTS OF FIRE or ORDINARY PEOPLE with lower scores?! I'm just dying to know.

Okay, as for the movie itself, it's pretty much what you'd expect from a later Charlie Chan movie from Mongram Studios. Unlike the original Chan movies (which featured higher production values, better scripts and Warner Oland), this movie was made by a "Poverty Row" studio (Monogram)--known for exceptionally low budgets and a quick turnaround on the films (completing many in just days--regardless of the aesthetics). While a little more interesting because of its plot involving phony psychics and mind control as well as an unusual appearance by one of Chan's daughters instead of the ubiquitous #1, 2 or 3 son, it is still an essentially low-budget formulaic film. And, as usual, Chan is supported by the moronic antics of Mantan Moreland--a Black actor sure to offend many modern viewers due to his stereotypical characterization (as a scared and rather dim-witted Black man as "comic relief"). Despite this MAJOR problem with all the Monogram films, I try to overlook it and understand it was typical of the 1940s (sadly). The film, while occasionally very interesting, isn't well-written or produced and probably will satisfy Chan fans but fail to convince others of the merits of the series.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
"One murder. Too many suspects. Too many motives.", 24 November 2001
7/10
Author: LeRoyMarko from Toronto, Canada

Not one of the best in the Charlie Chan series, but still good. Charlie is now seen with is daughter, played by Frances Chan. Unfortunately, she doesn't knows how to act. Her character is not too inspiring either. But Birmingham Brown, played by Mantan Moreland, brings fun to the screen! He sees spooks all around and never wants to be involved... but always is: "this is strictly a private murder to which I wasn't invited". Once again, he makes us laugh with his gimmicks.

74/100 (**½)

Seen at home, in Welland, November 24th, 2001. And again at home, in Toronto, on February 14th, 2007.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Routine & Rather Dated, 20 June 2001
Author: Snow Leopard from Ohio

This is mostly a routine Charlie Chan mystery with only a couple of points in its favor. While there are a couple of interesting clues to the crime, the characters, dialogue, and action are all stereotyped or dated, and often dull. The beginning seems to hold some possibilities: a man is murdered at a seance, and although he was apparently shot, no trace of the bullet can be found. The police are baffled, and of course call in Charlie Chan to solve the crime. Charlie is assisted this time not by one of his sons, but by his daughter Frances. Unfortunately, it never really takes off from there.

The phony medium setting offers some opportunities for comedy, but most of those do not work too well. The climax has a bit of suspense to it, and the eventual solution has a couple of creative points in it, but there are a lot of listless stretches to sit through before you can get there.

Overall, "Meeting at Midnight" (or, "Charlie Chan in Black Magic") is not one of the better mystery films around.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
Lowest of the Low, 14 November 2005
5/10
Author: Vincentb341 from United States

How do you shoot someone with no gun and no bullets? That's the mystery Charlie Chan has to solve in Black Magic (a.k.a. Meeting at Midnight). Helping him (sort of) are his assistant Birmingham Brown (Mantan Moreland), and for a change, his number one daughter (played by Frances Chan?). William and Justine Bonner make a living holding seances, where people can "contact" their recently departed loved ones. During one of these seances, William Bonner (Dick Gordon) is shot. Yet there is no gunshot and no bullet, only a bloodstain on his shirt. But our killer has more than one way of disposing of his victims. When Charlie finds one of the woman at the seance, Norma Duncan (Helen Beverly) in a deep trance, he suspects foul play. Consulting with police lab chemist Dawson (Edward Erle), he finds she was given a drug which will make a victim do anything her killer suggests. However, there is an antidote, which Dawson gives Charlie. All of this comes too late to save Justine Bonner (Jacqueline DeWit), however, who, under the influence of the drug, jumps off the roof of a building when told to do so by the killer. Charlie himself is kidnapped and forced to take the drug, but tricks the killer and takes the antidote as well. He comes to his senses standing on the ledge of the same building.

This is the best Chan movie I have seen among the Monograms. It has a strong storyline which rivals anything that Fox ever did. The acting is poor, but Monogram didn't have the money to hire great character actors.

Of course, it's also got something to offend everyone. Mantan Moreland was a talented comedian, but his performance will not endear himself to many black people. If they appeared in movies at all, black actors could only play butlers and porters, and the actresses were maids. An unwritten rule of the 30's and 40's was that black men all had to be afraid of their own shadow. Mantan is no exception, fearful of being attacked by spooks, and snapping his fingers to try and disappear.

Charlie Chan is perhaps the ultimate Asian stereotype, the inscrutable but always-polite Chinaman. But even in the Fox films there is racism. In Charlie Chan At the Opera, Charlie receives a message in Chinese. Dumb detective William Demerest: "What's that? A laundry list?" The fact that Charlie is bilingual in English and Chinese has no value. But Chan gets the last laugh in the end, solving the crime while the other detectives remain clueless.

Monogram was considered "the lowest of the low" among Hollywood studios. A director could put fear into many an actor's heart by threatening to sell his or her contract to Monogram. (When it happened to Lauren Bacall at Warner's, the story goes, she ran to Humphrey Bogart in tears.) Along with bad acting, you're going to see some extremely cheap sets. But if you can ignore all this and watch it for what it is, a 40's B-picture, you will enjoy it.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user comments
Your vote history