Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

MartinHafer PRC annoying lady--voice from hell--neighborIn most B-mysteries, there are a lot of clichés you come to expect if you watch a lot of these films. One of the most familiar is the stupid cop investigating the case. In reality NO COP is as dumb as these guys and they specialize in coming up with elaborate theories and trying to make the evidence fit their crazy preconceptions. In the case of "A Night for Crime" the cop (Hoffman) isn't just dumb...he's practically brainless! This is a deficit in the film as you can't help but wonder WHICH police force would ever hire such a guy or give him such authority! Fortunately, the other cliché the films has are the amateurs who somehow know MORE than all the cops...and in this case Susan (Glenda Farrell) and Joe (Lyle Talbot) can't help but be smarter than the police!The case begins with a scream...and Joe and Susan find a body in the nearby apartment. Almost instantly, the dopey detective shows up and Hoffman proves he's one of the dumbest policemen in the history of films. Plus, in addition to the body, there's a missing woman to be found. So, the reporter and publicity man decide to figure out the case when the police are so easily baffled. So is the film any good? Not really. As I already mentioned, it has a lot of clichés. The only thing that saves it, a bit, is Glenda Farrell--an actress who usually plays snappy-talking broads. She is enjoyable.

gridoon2018 There is low budget, there is no budget, and then there is "A Night For Crime". This is an astonishingly cheap movie, with few exterior shots and even fewer wide shots, probably to avoid exposure of the underdressed sets. Glenda Farrell plays a character very similar to her famous Torchy Blane (a reporter with a knack for solving murder mysteries), only without the same spark (though she has the occasional good line). Lyle Talbot is OK as the male lead, though he doesn't do anything that a hundred other male leads couldn't do in his place. Ralph Sanford has some amusing moments as a Gahagan-like dumb cop, though I found him funnier in "Adventures Of Kitty O'Day" (where he played practically the same part). The mystery plot is not uninteresting, however this film is overcome by its cheapness. ** out of 4.

mark.waltz While Glenda Farrell and Lyle Talbot don't come close to becoming a second rate Nick and Nora Charles, they are somewhat amusing as they get involved in a disappearance and a murder investigation in this low budget mystery. You can't expect a Glenda Farrell film without wisecracks (see any of her 30's Warner Brothers films with Joan Blondell for proof of this), and she has many here as a variation of her former Torchy Blane character. Fellow Warners alumnus Talbot is the publicity man who helps her solve the mystery of what happened to movie star Lina Basquette. The film slows down to a snail's pace every time Farrell is off screen, but for a low budget film, the set is pretty snazzy looking. Fellow former "A" lister Jean Parker would move into the ranks as a variation of Farrell's character in two "Kitty O'Day" features which had similar formulas.

csteidler Joe Powell, movie studio publicity man, visits Susan Cooper, Hollywood reporter, at her apartment. He proposes, she laughingly refuses, Joe takes a phone call from the boss…and suddenly there's a scream from across the hall! A young actress is found murdered in her room. Who did it? And where is Mona Harrison, the studio's biggest star? Mr. Hart, studio producer, is going to be out $300,000 if Mona doesn't show up to finish her work on their latest picture….It's a Hollywood mystery that makes no sense and contains no great suspense yet somehow manages to be quite entertaining. Lyle Talbot and Glenda Farrell are enthusiastic as Joe and Susan; Farrell is fine as the spunky and quick-thinking reporter, while Talbot makes a game effort at portraying a smooth talker with a winning wit—a task made difficult by a script that is sorely lacking in originality and cleverness.Since it's a pretty silly movie, Ralph Sanford probably comes across best as the very silly police detective Hoffman. Big and dumb, Hoffman is supposed to say idiotic things—and indeed he does, often amusingly. Ralph Sanford does look like he's having fun.A typical exchange occurs when Farrell pretends to confess to the murder and meets Hoffman's objections: "But I had a motive, Hoffman, I had a wonderful motive." "Yeah? What?" "Well, you see, Ellen bought a dress exactly like one of mine. Now you know what that does to a woman…" --Is that funny? Not exactly. But delivered by actors who look like they're convinced that it is funny…it is actually kind of humorous. And that's pretty much true of the film as a whole.The Hollywood setting is interesting….On Talbot's studio office wall is a movie poster for another PRC production, The Panther's Claw. Presumably the film's "Motion Picture Associates" is a studio not unlike the genuine Producers Releasing Corporation. So does the film's creative but ethically challenged studio boss, Mr. Hart, bear any resemblance to real life studio execs? I could not say.Overall, it's an enjoyable enough picture for viewers willing to let its good-natured and unassuming air overshadow its many weaknesses.