The Return of the Whistler (1948)

Not even bad in a good way

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Don't listen to the negative reviews

An absolute waste of money

by the end of the 1940's, the entrance of television into American households cause movie-going audiences to drop weekly box office since they could watch many of the same type of shows at home for free. One of the first movie genres to be affected was the crime series, low budget B pictures that often at the bottom of a bill. After eight films, "The Whistler" series ended its four year run with a new leading man, Michael Duayne, replacing Richard Dix. Obviously younger than Dix, Dwayne was more realistic being cast opposite the younger leading ladies, and in this film, he is quite good, having been in previous installments of the series in supporting roles.The plot is very film noir like in atmosphere, dealing with Duane on the verge of marrying his French sweetheart, Lenore Aubert, and various circumstances end up getting in the way of their getting hitched. Hwr sudden disappearance brings on more mystery, and along the way Duane is introduced to a series of odd characters who seemingly have sinister motivations that Duane completely understand. Among the standouts in the supporting cast are Ann Shoemaker as a seemingly sweet but devious matriarch and Olin Howland is a rather obnoxious hotel clerk. Hints of something big going on will keep you glued, making this one of the better entries in the series which deserved a longer run or at least a T.V. series of its own.

This being the final entry in the superlative Whistler series, I was expecting a dud. But it's not. Overall, the movie is definitely second rank but still representative of many of the series' better elements. The mystery sets up quickly as prospective bride (Aubert) disappears from her hotel room, leaving prospective groom (Duane) wondering what went wrong. After all, she seemed so sincere and loving. The hotel clerk (Howland, I believe) is worse than no help and may make you glad for Motel 6. The mystery deepens as detective Lane turns up clues and things begin to appear not as expected.Duane is serviceable in the lead, replacing series regular Richard Dix. More importantly, I'm not sure how well the aging, dissipated Dix could have matched up with the innocent bridegroom role, anyway. What the entry lacks is the trademark provocative ending and the suffused atmosphere that characterize the William Castle directed entries, suggesting that Castle was more formative to the series' overall excellence than perhaps thought.Still, it's puzzling to me that the series ended so abruptly, even without Dix. The material certainly reflected popular noirish programming of the period, so I would surmise that an audience was there. Perhaps there's an inside story. Nonetheless, in my little book, The Whistler series remains the most memorably unusual to emerge from the movie- drenched 1940's, even if this entry falls short.

This was the eighth and final Columbia Whistler film and the only one without Richard Dix who had retired from movies and was to die the following year. It's still a competent thriller, the machine carried on without him perfectly, but – something was missing: Dix! The stories in the Whistler series were always interesting, sometimes brilliant, the screenplays often noir always atmospheric, but it wasn't only the Whistler himself that hung it all together on screen, Dix did too.Young couple stepping out for a whole fortnight get the urge to marry in the pouring rain but are thwarted when the potential bride first disappears then is discovered to already be married before she apparently goes mad. Is the potential groom put off, even when the private dick he's hired to find her suddenly slugs him and lams, or is love blind? Who's twisting who is the question. Michael Duane in his penultimate film is OK if a bit of a wimp, lovely Lenore Aubert's finest moments came next film in Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein, and Richard Lane was wonderful as ever on loan from Boston Blackie. Also the only outing where the Whistler himself must have got wet from slouching about in the rain, unless he got sprayed with sea foam in Voice.A lot happened in this last hour, well worth watching over and over again as usual to fans of the genre like me. The Whistler radio series begun in 1942 carried on until 1955 clocking up nearly 700 half hour shows, nearly all of which are available on mp3 and based upon what I've heard so far nearly all of which are well worth listening to as well.

I hate reading reviews that say something like, 'Don't waste your time, this film stinks on ice.' It does to that reviewer yet for me, it may have some sort of naïve charm. If you like the other 'Whistler' series films, this one will be watchable. If you like 40s noirish films, this one will be watchable.This film is not as good, in my opinion, as any of the earlier series entries which starred Richard Dix as the protagonist. It's much slower, and the plot is trite. You've seen this same narrative device used in many other films, and usually better.But the acting is good, and so is the lighting, and the dialog. It's just lacking in energy and you'll likely figure out exactly what's going on and how it's all going to come out in the end not more than a quarter of the way through.The 'Whistler' series is semi-noir, and there character, mood, lighting, camera movement and angles are more important than the story itself. But this film is not noir. It's too light weight and Hollywood innocent for that. Neither Richard Dix's character nor those of any of his ladies in the previous films had to come to a good end. You just never knew until the end.But still, I'll recommend this one for at least a single viewing. I've watched it at least twice myself, and got a reasonable amount of enjoyment out of it both times.