The Saint's Double Trouble (1940)

Wonderful character development!

Good concept, poorly executed.

It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

While some are better than others, pretty much all of the Saint films starring George Sanders are watchable at least once, even the lesser efforts. 'The Saint's Double Trouble' is a contender for the weakest of the series, and somewhat of a let-down after one of the best of the series with 'The Saint Takes Over'.There are good things here. The sets are suitably atmospheric, it is one of the better looking films of the series and jauntily scored. The best thing about the film is Sanders, not just playing the title role but also his criminal double. He is super-suave, sophisticated and wonderfully caddish, while also giving a charming and humorous edge and delivering some cutting lines with aplomb.Jonathan Hale is also very good, while the ending is effective.On the other hand, the script is a complete mess and is enough to bring the film down more than one notch. It is just too underdeveloped and has too many loose ends, with a lot of corn and very little mystery. The story is also one of the series' least involving, it fails to maintain momentum and gets needlessly over-complicated with very few twists and turns.It is interesting for featuring Bela Lugosi, who tries to depart from his horror roles to prove that he could do more than that. However he makes very little impact in a role with nothing to it whatsoever, a real waste. The characters are just not interesting at all and sometimes confusingly written.In summary, a contender for weakest of the Saint films with Sanders. Sanders and Hale are fine but the script and story certainly aren't and bring the film down significantly. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Simon Templar (George Sanders), known as "The Saint", whom everyone believed to be in Egypt, suddenly turns up back in Philadelphia, at the home of his friend, Professor Bitts (Thomas W. Ross). Although the reasons aren't given in the film, apparently there is some disagreement over Simon's moral character. When bodies start turning up with incriminating evidence pointing to The Saint, the police try to track him down. However, it turns out that there is more to the story than meets the eye.I probably shouldn't be reviewing this film until I watch it again (if I do), but I'll just revise my review then if appropriate. As it stands, I have to give this film a generous 4 out of 10.While The Saint's Double Trouble has promise--nice black and white photography, some good performances (especially by Sanders and Jonathan Hale as inspector Fernack), one of my favorite actors/character actors, Bela Lugosi, has an odd part in it, and the story seems like it should be interesting--the script was a disaster. Part of the problem may have been that this is apparently an entry in a long-running series, and there's no way it's going to make sense out of the context of the series. I haven't seen any of the other films yet, so I have to review this one in isolation.The script ends up being largely loose threads. Important parts of the backstory are neither shown nor explained. There is a mummy (the presence of which got me very interested in the beginning) that ends up being meaningless to the plot (the little use it had could have been much more easily accomplished by another means). At one point, half of a knife makes an appearance as a token of a mystery, but it is never mentioned again. Characters completely drop out of the film.Worst of all, the plot hinges on the appearance of Boss Duke Bates, a look-alike for Simon Templar, also played by George Sanders. As can be expected, there are a number of points that rest on confused identities (that's the bulk of the film, actually). The problem is that by the end, I was also so confused that I had no idea which appearance of George Sanders was supposed to be which character, and confusion on this didn't seem to be the point of the conclusion.Again, maybe this is a fine chapter in a longer story when viewed with the other Saint films, in order. But to start here, I can't recommend The Saint's Double Trouble. It doesn't work as a stand-alone film.

This really is the worst Saint film starring George Sanders. The whole idea of the Saint having an exact double is not too credible but the filmmakers milk it for all it is worth. This results in a confusing film that is short on mystery and long on ridiculous coincidences. The crooks are a very stupid lot in this film. Even the presence of Bela Lugosi does nothing to help the film. He just turns out to be as stupid as the others. George Sanders does what he can with the limited script. He is as suave as ever as Simon Templar but flat as the head of the criminal gang. The scenes pairing Simon with Inspector Fernack(Jonathan Hale) are easily the best in the film. Sanders and Hale click well together as they did in their previous Saint films together. Too bad the story is such a let-down. Only worth seeing for Sanders and Hale. I give it 3 halos out of 10.

Unlike James Bond, the equally debonair Saint never made a successful transition to film from the fictional works of Leslie Charteris. Charteris hated all the film Saints - George Sanders, Hugh Sinclair and Leslie Howard. He thought that Cary Grant was the ideal choice for the role. But in the 1940s, the film industry would only make B-movies featuring the Saint. Since Cary Grant did not appear in B-movies, George Sanders got the role. He was popular in it at that time. Sanders always played suave cads extremely well. The Saint of the novels was also a suave cad, yet his creator did not approve of George Sanders. Charteris probably disliked Sanders because the latter did not physically resemble his creation. Roger Moore, the Saint of the small screen, came much closer to Charteris' ideal."The Saint's Double Trouble" is worth watching if you are Saint fan. If you like the sneering, sardonic George Sanders like I do, you will like it.(Reviewed by Sundar Narayan)