FlushingCaps I don't need to detail the plot of this 82-year-old film with 30 other reviews already available here.I just saw this again. I remember thinking as a teen that this was the "scariest" of the Chan series and I believe it is primarily because Charlie was kidnapped, held prisoner, and later led into the den of smugglers where he certainly could have been killed in two different locations. In most Chan films, he rarely faces any danger other than someone taking a shot at him and running away, having missed. His fatherly relationship with son, Lee, was never warmer. Lee was not the bungler he and brothers were in later films. He was comical, but didn't hinder Charlie's work, and was quite helpful, quite possibly saving his life even. I loved the scene at the banquet early on where after a speaker spoke in Chinese for about 3 minutes, someone asked Lee what he said, and the response was "He said, 'Thank you, so much.'" Charlie gets to sing a song to some children early in the film, and he does the usual wise old sayings. The mystery was pretty good, as we had a few occasions where we were led to believe someone was a "bad guy" then saw the opposite, then...There was a cool scene where Charlie demonstrated how someone could have snuck out of a room, leaving behind a locked window.Very good entry in the series.

dwpollar 1st watched 7/18/2009 - 6 out of 10 (Dir- James Tinling): Good mystery crime drama from the Charlie Chan vault. In this one he's in his homeland and a murder occurs at his reception of a British Intelligence man. Chan and his number one son are put on the case which eventually leads to an opium gang in the mother land. This is a good complex mystery that you have to pay really close attention to if you want to understand how it is solved. The main characters are also fun to watch as the son is always getting caught on the phone with a girl while he's supposed to be waiting for a phone call for his father. Warner Oland plays the Charlie Chan character well as we see the quiet smarts win over --as happens in all his cases. Otherwise, this is a pretty basic story but is done well and is effective.

gazzo-2 And in this case, that's True! Honest. Sorta.Spoiler warning was in affect too you know.This entry was pretty good. I always enjoyed seeing Keye Luke, be it in Mash or Gremlins or the Chan flix. You know pretty early on that Russell Hicks ain't quite what he seems to be, you know that Halliwell Hobbes was slumming it, and you know that they just kinda wedged the reveal of who 'Merlott' was half-assedly at the end. It's okay-the real baddie, of course, is Hicks as the bogus G-Man.I appreciated the warmth between Chan and son, liked Keye Luke's little flying leap on the baddie from the stairs, and the whole Shanghai setting. Odd that this was the only one set in Asia, but then....it's the 30's, what did you expect? I'm a fan of the series so I enjoyed this one too and rec. it if you like all things Oland too.**1/2 outta ****

gftbiloxi Filmed in 1935, CHARLIE CHAN IN SHANGHAI is the 9th film in the Fox series. It is also, rather curiously the only Chan film that would be set in Asian--the only time Hollywood allowed Chan to make it back to China.In this episode, Chan travels to China--presumably on holiday. But Chan's holidays have a way of being investigations in disguise, and no sooner does his ship dock than he receives a warning note; later that evening a close personal friend is unexpectedly killed by an ingenious booby trap which may have been directed at Chan himself. Needless to say, Chan assumes a major role in the investigation, and quickly finds himself the target of several murderous assaults. Could it all be tied to an infamous opium smuggling ring? Could be! Although this particular Chan film does not offer a notable supporting cast, Keye Luke is once more along for the ride as Chan's "Number One Son" Lee, and every one plays a smart pace. The plot, while typically gimmicky, is superior and offers a final twist that Chan fans may see coming in advance--but only if they know Chan's character and very high standards.Chan films are often accused of being racist, and critics often complain that the actors playing Chan wore "yellowface" make up. The films, however, must be seen within the context of their era. In the 1930s, Hollywood presented most Asian characters as either servile or as Fu Manchu-like entities; Chan was actually just about the only positive Asian character going, and as such the films were tremendously popular with Asian-American audiences of the era.True enough, Chan is inevitably played by an occidental actor, but this was typical of the era, in which star status was considered more important than racial accuracy. (Other Asian characters were always portrayed by Asian actors, Keye Luke being a case in point.) Whatever the case, neither Warner Oland or the later Sidney Toler wore significant make-up for the role, and Oland--although a Swede by birth--actually had a strong strain of Asian ancestry in his family tree.While I cannot say that CHARLIE CHAN IN SHANGHAI is among my favorite Chan films, it is well-made, a solid entry in the series. Chan fans should enjoy it quite a bit.Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer