utgard14 A missing heir shows up and is promptly killed before he can collect his inheritance. Now Charlie has to investigate his greedy family to figure out which one is the murderer. This one's got séances and psychics and a nice little mystery. For some reason, a lot of fans seem to dislike this movie. I'll admit it's not in my top five favorite Warner Oland Chan films but it's still good. The biggest problem is that Keye Luke isn't in this one. Instead we have generic comic relief Baxter the scaredy-cat butler (Herbert Mundin). At least he's not Stepin Fetchit! If you're a Charlie Chan fan, you've probably already seen this one. If you haven't or if you're new to Charlie Chan films, this is a good entry in the series. Not the best but an enjoyable way to spend an hour and change.

malvernp "Charlie Chan's Secret" (1936) is unique. Its predecessor is "Charlie Chan in Shanghai" (1935)---which featured Keye Luke in his usual role as Number One Son. All the remaining Warner Oland films in the series up to his final entry, "Charlie Chan at Monte Carlo" (1938), also had Keye Luke in the cast. However, "Charlie Chan's Secret", as others have pointed out, does not have Keye Luke on board. Rather, his "place" was taken (sort of) by the comic British actor, Herbert Mundin. Why did Keye Luke not appear in this film? Everyone seems to have missed him.In the new DVD of "Charlie Chan's Secret", the extended commentary on the film fails to explain the cause of Keye Luke's absence-----only the fact that he does not show up in the film.Is it possible that Keye Luke's void could be due to the fact that he was loaned by Twentieth Century Fox to Warner Brothers Studio around the same time to appear in the small but pivotal supporting role as Paul Muni's son in the classic Pearl Buck epic "The Good Earth" (1937)? Such loan out arrangements were not uncommon between studios in this period.In any event, "Charlie Chan's Secret" survives his absence very nicely and emerges as a solid entry in the series with its own particular charm and entertainment value. But it does illustrate how the chemistry between Warner Oland and Keye Luke was very special and without doubt one of the greatest strengths of the "Charlie Chan" films.

JohnHowardReid I'm always a pushover for spooky old house mysteries, and this is one of the best, not so much for the intriguing puzzle itself but for the creepy noir atmosphere conjured up by Rudolph Maté's superlative cinematography (reminiscent of his work on Dreyer's Vampyr) and the marvelously bizarre background created by Hogsett and Cramer.I like the screenplay and I love the cast too, especially Herbert Mundin, one of my favorite character actors. For once he has a major role and even figures most inventively at the climax. Warner Oland dispenses his customary bon mots with ease, while Gloria Roy steers a remarkably skillful line in making her "used" medium a sympathetic oddball.My only quarrel is with director Gordon Wiles, the art director that William K. Howard and Jimmy Wong Howe had all the trouble with on Transatlantic and for which, after fighting Howard and Howe all the way, he then won the industry's big award! Mr Wiles was obviously not a man open to experimentation unless someone forced him into it. Left to his own devices, Wiles always preferred the safe, conservative approach. His record as a director is not an impressive one and Charlie Chan's Secret is the highlight of that 11-picture interlude from which he was rescued by Albert Lewin for whom he designed The Moon and Sixpence, The Picture of Dorian Gray and The Private Affairs of Bel Ami.

ccthemovieman-1 I always enjoy listening to Charlie Chan quote his famous proverbs, or friendly digs to his kid or helper and I always appreciate his wonderful manners. Charlie's parents certainly taught him how to say "please," "thank you" and respect other human beings. He always carries himself in a gentlemanly manner. Mr. Chan never gets mad, just never loses his temper no matter what happens. He takes everything in stride.I mention all of this because those were the main attributes to this story - his manner. Missing were two key ingredients that make Charlie Chan films fun to me: his kid (whoever he or she might be) and the humor. This story didn't have any of Charlie's kids helping him and they were missed. It just wasn't the same without Number One Son either helping him or getting in his way. Also, where was the comedy? That, too, was sorely missed.That isn't to say I still didn't enjoy the movie; I did, but it wasn't as much as most of them. I did appreciate the ending which was clever but not confusing. The story was fair-at-best, and sometimes all these occult-type themes get tiresome, at least when these séance scenes get silly, as they did in this film. Still, some parts will get your attention, such as a missing man suddenly showing up at the reading of the will, and then moments later being killed!Overall, a more serious "Chan" story that fans of "B" horror flicks might enjoy more than those of us who want a little humor and kinship along with our Charlie Chan fables.