SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

writtenbymkm-583-902097 It is absolutely useless for me to review this movie, because this site has made all viewer reviews useless. We can no longer find reviews from viewers who loved the movie, or felt neutral about the movie, or hated the movie. From now on all the reviews are listed simply one after the other without any reason whatsoever. For movies with tons of reviews, you are forced to scroll down endlessly in order to find anything. Up yours, IMDb.

Michael_Elliott The Drums of Jeopardy (1931) ** 1/2 (out of 4)Mildly entertaining mix of melodrama, horror and thriller as Dr. Boris Karlov (Warner Oland) seeks vengeance against the noble family he blames for the death of his daughter. The "drums", of the title, refers to a mysterious necklace that the doctor steals and whoever gets a piece of it is officially warned that they're going to die next. As far as "B" mystery-horror-thrillers go, THE DRUMS OF JEOPARDY isn't too bad but at the same time it's not all that good either. If you've seen enough of these types of films from the 1930's then you know that it seems they were being released weekly so you never quite know what you're going to get. Some of them feature nice budgets that allow their director's to do something with their weak screenplays whereas others have no effort behind them. This film is really split into two because it appears the first half was working on a decent budget and it almost feels as it was slashed because the second half of the picture takes away most of the action and instead features mostly dialogue scenes.The first half of the film is without question the best because it gives us a great set-up and a pretty effective scene as the grieving father confronts his dying daughter and this is followed up with a scene where he witnesses her death and takes it out on the family. From here we're given a couple effective murders scenes including one where we just see the shadows of the killer's hand going towards the victim. With that said, the second half really gets dragged down due to some boring locations as well as some dialogue scenes that just really drag on without much excitement.Oland, coming off playing Dr. FuManchu and a getting ready to take on a long Charlie Chan series, is in fine form, although, to be fair, this is the type of role that he could have played in his sleep. He's at least got enough energy to help carry the picture and a certain screen presence to help take the lower tier screenplay and bring it up a notch. The supporting cast isn't nearly in the same league and no one really stands out among them. THE DRUMS OF JEOPARDY isn't going to win any major awards and there are certainly much better thrillers out there but if you're a fan of the genre or Oland it's still worth watching.

MARIO GAUCI Like MYSTERY OF MARIE ROGET (1942), this is more thriller than horror but there is still enough atmosphere and thrills here to make it an entertaining ride (which, as with the above-mentioned film, clocks in at just over an hour and is therefore not allowed to overstay its welcome). The plot is that of a hoary melodrama – not unlike the Oriental Lon Chaney vehicle MR. WU (1927) – as an eminent personality (in this case, scientist Warner Oland: interestingly, his most famous role was the multiple genial appearances as popular Chinese sleuth Charlie Chan!) has his life virtually brought to a stand-still by the death, over her romantic attachment to a member of the aristocracy, of his young daughter. So, he swears vengeance and nearly accomplishes his mission, were it not for the intervention of an elderly but strong-willed lady (here, it is Clara Blandick, the landlady of the heroine who chooses to shelter one of Oland's 'targets') – though her annoying characterization reminded me of the middle-aged 'fraidy cat' maid in THE BAT WHISPERS (1930) and the romantically-inclined (albeit still very much way- past-her-prime) one in THE GHOUL (1933)!Incidentally, the title refers not to the musical instrument but to a diamond-studded necklace belonging to the upper-class family and which had been donated to Oland's daughter by her paramour. It eventually comes into play in the scientist's revenge scheme since he is gentlemanly (or is that sadistic?) enough to forewarn his next victim with a note accompanied by one of the jewels; by the way, Oland has an accomplice in a lanky and somber Mischa Auer, that is before he became everybody's favorite eccentric Russian! The few murder/action sequences deliver the goods – especially one in which Oland's shadow slowly bends over the kidnapped eldest nemesis to strangle him and then plants his body in a window so that, during a roof-top chase with the man's relatives and the Police, they take him for Oland and take several pot-shots at the poor soul! Then there is the finale where, as I said, it is Blandick who contrives to literally make the drop on Oland by pushing him through a trap-door down into the river running under his hiding-place/laboratory/operations center as he is about to blow everything sky-high via a potion he has concocted.Ultimately, this is a minor yet engaging outing that ought to be better-known (I only learned about it myself when I came across the film fairly recently)…if only because Oland's character here is named – brace yourself – Boris Karlov (the picture under review came out eight months prior to FRANKENSTEIN, released the same year and which, I am sure no-one needs reminding, immortalized its star who was soon to be billed simply as "Karloff, the Uncanny")!!

madcinephile I like the movie, for what it is. I would like to see the earlier version, and compare. I've always thought of Warner Oland as kind of a ham. But it's impossible to judge by 1931 standards in 2007, so what do I know? The Karlov question had me curious. This is what Wikipedia had to say (yeah, I know-- it's Wikipedia, so who knows if it's true?): "In 1922 the book was made into a Broadway play and the following year a motion picture. A second film version appeared in 1931. It is said that a young Boris Karloff, who previously had a few uncredited film roles, chose his stage name for his first screen credit in 1920 from a Russian mad scientist character named "Boris Karlov" in this novel. The name 'Boris Karlov' was used from MacGrath's book for the 1922 Broadway play, but by 1923 with actor Boris Karloff using the similar sounding variation, the film version renamed the character, played by Wallace Beery, 'Gregor Karlov'. In the 1931 film version, however, with Warner Oland playing the character, the mad scientist's name is restored to 'Boris Karlov', less than a year before Frankenstein would make Boris Karloff a household word for generations. Ironically, Boris Karloff would play many mad scientists on screen, but never 'Boris Karlov'."As a side note for those interested in original sources, the Harold MacGrath novel "Drums of Jeopardy" is available as a free e-text download at Project Gutenberg.