Mysterious Intruder

1946 "A WOMAN SCREAMS! A KILLER STRIKES!"
6.4| 1h1m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 11 April 1946 Released
Producted By: Columbia Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A private detective is hired to find a young heiress but finds himself accused of murder.

Genre

Crime, Mystery

Watch Online

Mysterious Intruder (1946) is currently not available on any services.

Director

William Castle

Production Companies

Columbia Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
Mysterious Intruder Videos and Images
View All

Mysterious Intruder Audience Reviews

TinsHeadline Touches You
Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece
Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?
Micransix Crappy film
utgard14 A nice old gentleman hires private detective Don Gale (Richard Dix) to find a girl named Elora Lund he hasn't seen in seven years. Gale tries to rip the old man off by sending an impostor to pose as Elora. But then the old man is murdered (in a surprisingly brutal scene) and Gale finds himself on the spot.Another entertaining entry in Columbia's always-fun Whistler franchise. A contender for best in the series. Dix is terrific as the sleazeball private eye. Good supporting cast includes Barton MacLane, Mike Mazurki, Regis Toomey, and Charles Lane. Nice direction from William Castle. The plot in this one takes several twists and turns. It's a pretty good story, especially for a B movie. You should definitely check it out, even if you are new to The Whistler.
bensonj The screenplay of MYSTERIOUS INTRUDER is by Eric Taylor, based on his own story "Murder to Music," which appeared in the May 1936 BLACK MASK magazine. Taylor was not one of the first tier BLACK MASK writers, and his work for the magazine varies in quality, but this was a good one, one of his best. At around 16,000 words, the story could have been transcribed to a 61 minute feature with little expansion, and Taylor 's screenplay generally follows his story, but there are numerous small changes and some major ones, and they're all for the worse. A story that originally made perfect sense is often trashed for minor effects. In the story one knows from the beginning that the first girl is the detective's stooge. Actually showing the scene where she meets the old man means that, to fool the audience, she has to be afraid of Pontos (the only character name retained from the story), which makes no sense, since in fact he's her accomplice. A strong moment of surprise in the story is when the detective suddenly accuses the fake girl of trying to get him killed. Taylor has carefully set up the relationship between the two so that the revelation has some punch. In the film it seems like just another meaningless plot twist. In the story, he has his secretary call in and say she's the real girl so that the phony will be released. In the movie, he himself tells the newspapermen, so of course the cops know he sent the phony. The latter part of the film diverges significantly from the story. The denouement of the story is a great scene where the detective seems to be in a bad spot, with the bad guys having their guns on him, but he calmly points out that they have limited options unless they want to kill off "half of San Francisco." And a significant point in the story is that they're not really professional tough-guy crooks except for their hired man Pontos, so the detective's sudden action play after he has them unnerved makes sense. The stooge girl isn't killed, and there's no final scene back in shop, and of course the detective is not killed and the rightful owner, the authentic girl, gets the recordings. There doesn't seem to be much point to the film's end. Having the recordings broken seems a little hard on the character of the innocent young girl who deserves a break. There are other plot flaws in the end of the film. It ends with the ironic note of the cops thinking the detective was guilty. But he had made a call to the cops before he died, so presumably when they get back to headquarters they'll know that he was on the level. Also, at the beginning of the film Pontos apparently takes the recordings with him, yet at the end they are found in the store. And the old storekeeper hadn't seemed aware that he or the recordings were in danger, so why would he hide them inside a base drum? Aside from being more logical, the original story has a more authentic atmosphere, and Taylor adds a number of telling, small details not in the film.One doesn't necessarily expect a strong plot from a series film like this, but in this case the author based the screenplay on his own tightly plotted, excellent story. But instead of following the story, he restructured it so there are plot flaws and loose ends. Ah, well.The best thing about the film, and the biggest surprise, is that Richard Dix is perfect as the sleazy, not-so-smart, PI; who would have thought it? It's nice to see Charles Lane on screen for more than 30 seconds, quite a rarity. And Castle doesn't do such a bad job with the script that he's given; the film is reasonably atmospheric and the pace is good. If you like series programmers this film should satisfy.
Alonzo Church A MYSTERIOUS INTRUDER kills Richard Dix's kindly client before Dix can find out why he wants to spend his meager earnings to find a girl the client adopted long ago. Will Dix double cross his way into the big money before psycho-baddie Mike Mazurski kills him, or tough cop Barton McLane puts him away? This is full-blown film noir, with an even more morally ambiguous hero (Dix) than most. The full-blown crisis of conscience Dix endures through this movie anchors the fast-moving (and often incoherent) plot in something a little more substantial than is found in the usual private eye caper. The ending to this one is a very good double twist, one of which is a little surprising. Dix's performance is about as far as you can get from Humphery Bogart and Dick Powell -- eccentric and theatrical. It works quite well for establishing his character. The other actors play the usual set of tough cops, psychos, loyal secretaries and money grubbing blonds in the ways you might expect.In other words -- find this one if you like noir.
goblinhairedguy Here's another fine entry in Columbia's noirish Whistler series, the fifth chronologically, and fourth directed by soon-to-be schlockmeister William Castle. Like the first in the series, Castle imbues the film with an especially sleazy atmosphere. The shadowy b&w photography, threatening background detail and desperate lowlife characters evince a cynical view of the urban world, and the writers obliquely hint at sordid relationships and motivations which simmer below the surface of the story. Series lead actor Richard Dix, normally emotively challenged, gives a rather eccentric interpretation of a venal, socially inept gumshoe seeking a big score, who is ironically given the opportunity for redemption. Buffs will certainly savor the parade of iconic supporting actors like Mike Mazurki and Charles Lane. Much better than one would expect from a mystery series, this picture reflects the seamy side of life usually glossed over by the Hollywood veneer.