Movie Review – Bishop Murder Case, The
Principal Cast : Basil Rathbone, Leila Hyams, Roland Young, Alec B Francis, George F Marion, Zelda Sears, Bodil Rosing, Carroll Nye, Charles Quartermaine, James Donlan Sidney Bracey, Clarence Geldart, Delmer Daves, Nellie Bly Baker.
Synopsis: When the body of a man nicknamed “Cock Robin” is found with an arrow in the heart on an archery range along with a chess bishop as a clue, Philo Vance investigates.
********
The third of the Philo Vance film series and the only one to feature Basil Rathbone in the title role, The Bishop Murder Case would have to be one of the more uneven efforts of the popular detective franchise to this point – at least in terms of films. Rathbone, who would go on to star as the eponymous Sherlock Holmes over a decade later, is perhaps more Alfred Pennyworth and less Philo Vance as we’ve come to know him here, although the upright posture and self-assured attitude William Powell had established in both The Canary Murder Case and The Greene Murder Case remains intact. The film was also the first to be distributed by MGM rather than Paramount, which saw various series characters recast through necessity; I’m unable to find anything specific about why MGM and Paramount appear to have released competing films involving the Philo Vance character but various unconfirmed statements indicate that each SS Van Dine novel in the Vance literary series was optioned to competing studios (even Warner Bros took a shot) separately, rather than a single studio having access to the IP wholesale. The Bishop Murder Case was released on December 31st 1929 to try and cash in on Paramount’s success with the previous Powell entries, also released that year, and while I think this film is a far cry from the steadfast style of other entries its brilliantly mounted and directed, making it a worthwhile film project to watch.
The story unfolds as the urbane detective Philo Vance (Rathbone) is called to solve a macabre series of murders tied to chilling nursery rhymes. When a young associate of a wealthy city socialite is found dead, impaled by an arrow and accompanied by a note referencing “Who Killed Cock Robin?”, Vance realises that the killer is orchestrating an intricate puzzle using literary riddles. As more bodies surface, each connected to a different rhyme, Vance enlists the help of District Attorney John F.X. Markham (Clarence Geldart) and the inept but dogged Sgt. Ernest Heath (James Donlan) to untangle the clues. The suspects include the enigmatic Sigurd Arnesson (Roland Young), Belle Dillard (Leila Hyams), and her father, Professor Bertrand Dillard (Alec B. Francis), all of whom seem to harbour secrets that deepen the mystery. Others, like Adolph Drukker (George F. Marion) and his sister Miss Drukker (Zelda Sears), add to the complexity as Vance races to identify the murderer before more victims fall.
In terms of the story, the perplexing nature of the relationship of the characters to the nursery-rhyme motif carried on through is likely an issue around generational understanding – modern audiences would have no real idea about “cock-robin”, an English popular rhyme dating from the mid-1700’s that told of a poor robin shot through the chest with an arrow. Analogous to the initial murder in this film, and with mixed use of the “note left by the scene of the crime” motif prominent in crime films generally, the increasing body-count soon rapidly diminishes the available suspects, and the film isn’t quite able to parse the red herrings it throws up to confuse us leaving an eventual reveal of “whodunnit” to fumble badly at the last hurdle. Lenore Coffee is credited as the screenwriter, adapting Van Dine’s novel, and to her credit there’s a lot of interesting characters and interpersonal plots that could work in many other films – just not in this one. The pace is too rapid, the direction too theatrical, to maximise nuance where exposition and inept gags might work.
On the positive side, the film looks an absolute treat. The opening act makes use of matte paintings to expand the backdrop of New York City against standing sets, a terrific effect that the Paramount films hadn’t quite managed by this stage. Co-directors David Burton and Nick Grinde go all-out to give the film some flashy, engaging camerawork, from dolly tracks to the aforementioned matte work, I think The Bishop Murder Case is one of the strongest visually of the early Vance films. For 1929, and the technology available, there are some nice little surprises for film history buffs to spot – a clever early split-diopter shot-type effect is achieved with a character appearing in a mirror behind somebody looking off-camera, and even now I’m puzzled as to how this effect was executed. The set design and use of costumes and lighting, not to mention the exemplary cinematography by Roy Overbaugh, make this a technically excellent example of early sound filmmaking when creative ingenuity was being tested.
Sadly, there’s also a downside. The film’s performances are all very stilted, as if the directors had simply used Take 1 from every shot and scene to edit together. Awkward conversational pauses, gaps mid-sentence as if actors were struggling to remember their lines, and complete moments of what appears to be removed ADR from actors performing with unheard dialogue – it’s very clunky, hugely distracting, and feels very amateurish. Rathbone, surprisingly, is the biggest contributor to this – perhaps because he has the most to say – with his stilted yet commanding delivery, pausing often to await some kind of reaction that arrives seconds too late, leaving the viewer to wonder if maybe the film was broken. It’s a baffling thing, really, a film seemingly made from rehearsal takes instead of spending some time to make sure vocal delivery and film performance was on-point. I suspect it’s because the cast were performing as if they were on a stage, overdoing their delivery and pausing “for effect”, even if the effect is lost in the moving image.
In on of the series’ most gag-worthy meta-references (even if, at the time, the phrase hadn’t even been invented yet), at one point a character refers to Philo Vance and District Attorney Markham as “Holmes and Watson”, which made me spit out my drink I was laughing so hard; how was this film so prescient to realise that Basil Rathbone would play Sherlock Holmes to great acclaim in future years? The sheer audacity of coincidence, I howled with laughter when I heard this. unfortunately, it’s about all I howled at: the cast, Rathbone aside, are all great but underserved by a script that rattles along too quickly, with particular mention to James Donlan as the “best detective on the force” a particularly long bow to draw as the insufficient Sergeant Heath. The romantic relationship between Roland Young’s Sigurd Arnesson and Leila Hyams’ Belle Dillard feels more like a father-daughter one, largely due to the fact that nearly two decades separated the actors in age (yikes), while Alec Francis’ dithering patriarchal character is arguably the most amenable to watch outside of Rathbone himself. A garden variety ensemble of hunchbacks, cripples, elderly and “foreign” character populate this indiscriminately misogynistic and chaotically plotted narrative, and while the climax is a little too on-the-nose for my liking (and hard to believe), it’s satisfying that there’s resolution to leftover plot threads rather than just having Vance or Heath give a snide remark before the credits rolled.
The Bishop Murder Case is an uneven, cumbersome detective film that has a lot going for it, and equally as much working against it. The direction, production design and casting are all on-point, but the scripting, acting and clunky delivery often leaves much to be desired. The pacing crackles along without pause, throwing exposition and leaps in logic at the wall like flies on shit, covering a lot of material in its nearly 90 minute runtime, and if you’re not paying attention at all times you will definitely miss things. Otherwise, with those caveats in place, series fans should make sure they check out Rathbone’s only Philo Vance turn as a curious forerunner to his work as Holmes in later years.
Who wrote this?
