Tag Archives: richard dix

Saturday I watched not one but two Whistler movies DVR’d from TCM (does that sound like I’m spelling things so some little kid doesn’t know what I’m talking about?).

The first was Return of the Whistler. I confess, I spent most of Monday morning trying to remember what the plot was so I could write about it. So, yeah, I guess you could say it is not very memorable.

A man and woman are on their way to get married. We sense there is something about this woman she is not telling us. At least, I think we’re supposed to. I was mostly trying to figure out what her accent was supposed to be. She’s French, we find out later. OK.

When they go in to see the Justice of the Peace, somebody stops and monkeys with their car with the result that they are stuck. Which is just as well, because the JP as been called away and can’t marry them till morning. By morning, however, the bride has disappeared (come now, you didn’t think they could spend the night in the same room before they were married, did you?). Then things get complicated.

And that is pretty much all I can tell you without giving away some of the jolting twists of the plot. I don’t want to do that, because jolts are about all this movie has going for it. The romance is blah, the solution is silly, and there is zero comic relief. And no Richard Dix! I don’t think anybody even gets killed, which makes it a little odd that the Whistler is even involved.

I did not realize the second movie was a Whistler movie till we actually watched it. I couldn’t recall the title of that one this morning, but luckily had made a note of it in the TV Journal: The Mysterious Intruder. When we watched it, we noted a subtitle “A Whistler Movie.” Richard Dix stars in this one, and it is directed by William Castle. So right away I liked it better.

I DVR’d it because I liked the description, something about a detective tracking somebody who leaves a trail of bodies. Now, in the scheme of things, serial killers do not interest me nearly as much as a personal murder for an understandable reason. But for a cheesy old movie, trail of bodies sounded good. As it turned out, all the murders were for a sound reason, all stemming from the original killing for gain.

This, by the way, is often the case. Hercule Poirot said murder is a habit. You steel yourself to kill one person for what you think is a compelling reason. The next thing you know, you have to kill some other guy, because he’s onto you, and then somebody else, because she’s going to get the thing you killed the first guy for. Less and less steel is required.

But I digress. Anyways, there is no indication that this killer had any problem killing the first guy.

Richard Dix plays a private investigator. The movie opens with this old guy trying to hire him to trace this little blonde girl he used to know. He’s pretty cagey about it, but indicates that great wealth is at stake.

And this is where, once again, I really don’t want to go on, because I would no doubt give away major plot points. In fact, it may be giving too much away to tell you that things are not what they seem. Oops.

The movie clips right along, fast enough that you don’t notice the pick-up-truck-sized holes in the plot. In fact, I spent a good portion of Monday morning (when I wasn’t trying to remember the other movie) saying, “Waaaait a minute!” But at the time, I zipped right along with the rest of them.

In conclusion, I’d say either movie is entertaining enough to catch on a dull night home. And trying to remember one plot and saying “Wait a minute!” about another added some interest to my Monday morning. I don’t have a rating system like thumbs up or three apples. Maybe that’s what I’ll spend my Tuesday morning thinking about.