The Mystery Man (1935)

Such a frustrating disappointment

Good movie but grossly overrated

Good concept, poorly executed.

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

The Mystery Man (1935) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Decent mystery from Monogram has Robert Armstrong playing newspaper reporter Larry Doyle who after a big story gets a revolver as a gift. Later in the picture he's in need of money so he pawns the gun and is later arrested for a murder that was done using the same gun. Now Doyle must prove that he actually pawned the gun and that the killer known as The Eel was the real murderer. THE MYSTERY MAN is a fairly entertaining movie, although the story I've just given really doesn't tell everything. This thing clocks in at just 61-minutes and the murder doesn't take place until around the 37-minute mark, which should tell you a couple things. For starters, there's a lot of early filler in the film that probably could have been left and and in all honesty it probably should have been left out. The only problem then is that you wouldn't be left with a movie. The second problem is that the solving of the case happens in the final twenty minutes and in many ways this was simply way too fast for the crime to be solved. With that said, fans of Armstrong as well as the genre should find the material good enough to keep you entertained through the short running time. As you'd expect, Armstrong has no problems playing the smart aleck reporter who is constantly rubbing people the wrong way until he's finally the one being pushed around. Maxine Doyle is also very good as the woman who ends up helping the reporter on his mission. The two stars have some nice chemistry together and their work certainly helps keep the film moving. The biggest problem with the picture is that there's a bit too much comedy and sadly the majority of it never works. Still, the majority of the people remains entertaining as long as you're not expecting THE MALTESE FALCOLN or some sort of classic.

This really seems to be two movies in one. The first is a sweet romantic comedy that takes up the first 40 minutes of the film. Reporter Larry Doyle from Chicago gets $50 for breaking an important story and does too much celebrating. He ends up broke in St. Louis. He sits down at a lunch counter with beautiful Anne Oglivie (Maxine Doyle). She finds that she only has 10 cents to pay for her 20 cent coffee and donut. Larry secretly pays for her. Realizing that a young girl broke in the city could end up in trouble, Larry follows her around to help her out. Having no place to stay, he gets a hotel room for the two of them. Anne is reluctant, thinking he wants sex in return, but Larry reassures her that he's a square kind of guy. He orders an expensive $35 a day hotel suite which has two bedrooms with separate keys. He explains that Anne is as safe with him as she would be anywhere in the city.This part of the movie seems to inspired by Frank Capra's "It Happened One Night" which came out also in 1935. Suddenly with about 25 minutes left the movie turns into a more typical Monogram murder mystery. Larry, remembering that he's an investigative reporter, goes after a slippery gangster called "the Eel." As all Monogram murder mysteries are, its silly, cheap and quite a lot of fun.Robert Armstrong (King Kong, Son of Kong, Mighty Joe Young) gives a really strong performance. He's a sweet tough guy with a heart of gold. Maxine Doyle is excellent as the broke virgin in the city. Twenty years old at the time, this was one of her first starring movies. Over the next two years, in 1936 and 1937, she starred in about a dozen low budget movies and that was pretty much the end of her career. She did do some bit parts in the 1940's.Monogram generally made "C" or "D" movies. This one is actually a solid "B" movie.

This B-movie is from Monogram Pictures--a company known for low-budget and relatively low quality films. Now this isn't to say their films are not enjoyable--they are often VERY fun to watch--they just aren't particularly distinguished. In the case of "Mystery Men", it's obvious that the writing was poor--but somehow, despite many silly plot elements, the film was fun to watch.Robert Armstrong stars as a crime reporter. In the first of MANY irrational plot points, the local DA wants to show his appreciation for Armstrong's work...so he has a .45 caliber pistol awarded to him! Then, while he's on a trip to St. Louis, he meets a woman who is broke. Now what would you do in a situation like this? Well, you certainly would NOT pretend that she is your wife and then check into a hotel you cannot afford! Well, that is exactly what he does...and with no expectations of sex. Then, when he tries to get a job with the local paper and the prospective employer calls his old paper, what happens--yep, the old boss tells the St. Louis newspaper editor that the man in his office is a phony and the real reporter is back in Chicago!!! Huh?!? Then, when Armstrong eventually DOES get the St. Louis job anyway, he investigates a crime spree. And, when he sees the killer leaving with the money, what does he do? Yes, he pretends to be one of the gang and drives away with the loot! Can you see that none of this makes any sense? There are MANY more situations like this in the film--I am only naming a few. But, oddly, despite so many dopey moments, Armstrong manages to at least make it enjoyable and the film kept my interest...though it was a bad film from most respects.

The Mystery Man (1935)Well this is a fast hoot, and not a good movie by any means. It has a chipper tone and some comic twists, but the acting, the acting. The core idea is good--a news reporter with a thankless editor gets caught up in a story while on leave from his Chicago paper. But the St. Louis newspaper won't believe he's a reporter, and he gets stranded and eventually accused. Luckily his buddies back home help out, and even better, a pretty girl is also stranded and helpless and good for moral support and some cleverness in the nick of time. Coulda been something.It's not like 1935 is too early for a snappy, intelligent crime detective caper film. We've already had a string of absolute classics from Warner Bros. in the early 30s, and we're seeing the beginning of the "Thin Man" series with its high level of sophistication. But this is a B-movie through and through, and I guess there is only so much talent to go around. You would do better plodding through the worst of the Mr. Moto or the Charlie Chan films than this one.