kapelusznik18 ***SPOILERS*** On his way home from London to Honolulu after returning a wanted British murderer police inspector Charlie Chan, Warner Oland, is asked by British barrister Neil Howard, Raymond "Ray" Malland, to help prevent his brother-in-law Hugh Gray's, Douglas Walton, scheduled execution that's to take place, with his last appeal being rejected by the court, in three days. Charlie feeling that Gray got a raw deal in that there's was only circumstantial not eye witness or forensic evidence in his being convicted in RAF Captain Hamilton's murder cancels his flight and takes on the case. As it soon turns out a number of people who knew the truth about the circumstances of Capt. Hamilton's murder end up being murdered themselves with Charlie bearing escaping a murder, with a blow gun, attempt himself. Going the the scene of the crime the Richmond Country Home at Retfordshire Charlie soon sniffs out the reason for the late Capt. Hamilton's murder. That had to do with this gizmo that he invented for the British RAF a pre 1980's stealth-like aircraft that's not only invisible to the naked eye or later to be invented radar but is totally, like a UFO, soundless while in flight! With a fox hunt taking place another person who knew the reason behind Capt. Hamilton's murder Lady Mary Bristol's, Mona Barrie, horse was tampered with, by stuffing pepper under its nose, that caused it to buckle and fall to it's death with Lady Briston, who by some miracle survived,on board!***SPOILERS***** Charlie who by now knew who murdered Captain Hamilton as well as later murdered stableman Lake-because he knew too much-plans with Hugh Gray's life hanging in the balance to get the evidence to catch him red handed. That's by Charlie putting his life on the line by turning his back on the killer when he's about expose him to the police! Unknown to the killer Charlie had covered all the bases, 1st 2nd 3rd as well as Home plate, and had a trap about to be sprung on the killer when he, in order to shut him up, was about to plug Charlie. With a gun that Charlie made sure he didn't have any live bullets, but only blanks, in it!

Vogonavich You have to understand that I love these mystery movies from the 30's and 40's, hence the 8/10. It's fun to just suspend disbelief and watch the films for what they are. Get a bowl of popcorn then sit down in your comfy place and let your mind go back to a time before all of the special effects and CGI, before political correctness, and enjoy the show. There are terrific gems to be found in these old films. If you are like me then pick up the DVD; you won't be sorry. "Charlie Chan in London" is a good'un. The digital restorations are excellent. Same ol' cheezy sound and dialogue centric script but without the audio and visual noise. The shakiness of the original is gone as well.Sure you can criticize some of the ham acting but I find the characters and the dialogue fascinating. Although IMHO Elsa Buchanan is wonderful as the distraught maid who is shocked by the evil oriental skulking about the place, others would likely be less kind.E.E. Clive as the more than a little thick Detective Sergeant Thacker is perfect, especially his uncorrected references to Charlie as "Mr. Chang".I didn't realize Ray Milland was in the movie till I heard his unmistakable voice. What a distance from portraying Luke Skywalker's father! While I'm on about it: the quality of the acting in "Charlie Chan in London" is not much different from "Star Wars Episode IV". ;->The "Charlie Chan" character and its portrayal by non-Chinese actors has come under some heavy, and valid, criticism for stereotyping and for washing over issues of racism. However, I think that such criticism should be noted and should not prevent enjoyment of these wonderful films. We (audiences) are not stupid; we can see plenty of evidence of paternalism, sexism, and racism in these movies. Eh, so what? The story and the script are a product of the time and are a window into the past. Not into real life directly, but the film is enlightening with respect to what was acceptable. Eighty years from now, I'm sure many current films will be condemned for all sorts of things that we take for granted now. Food for thought.For me, the controversy and obvious difference in cultural values from today just makes these films more interesting. Mr. Chan's quiet approach to life in general and to racism in particular speaks well of his character. We pay attention to what Chan says because he is always interesting and insightful. What may be interpreted as a stereotyped, obsequious and blandly inoffensive "chinaman", is really a thoughtful individual with obviously strong family values and who is so confident that he does not have to try to change all of the flaws in the world around him.He just has to solve the mystery and go back to his family.

jan-603 "Charlie Chan in London" is the first Chan film I've seen and I'm very impressed.This movie should be studied in film classes because it's so nicely paced and well edited. There isn't one wasted scene or extraneous action - every step of the plot happens at just the right moment, making the film a very satisfying experience. Add Warner Oland's wonderful depiction of Chan (even so early in the series), an intriguing story, the fun of seeing a young Ray Milland, and the great architecture, clothing, and cars of the period, and you have one fine film. Enjoy!

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