snicewanger
The Catman of Paris sounds more a movie about a jewel thief or second story man then a monster film. Lesley Selander was Republics go to western director and the cast has some recognizable faces but of course, no big stars. The catman is a were-creature and part of the fun is trying to guess who the shape shifter really is. Carl Esmond and Lenor Aubert are top billed and they give the proceedings a European flavor. There is bit more attention to period detail in the set and costume design then is seen in most of these little opuses.Selander directed westerns and Catman rolls like a western. John Dehner, Anthony Caruso, and Robert J Wilkie would all go on to make their make in television westerns in the 1950's. Republic in house eye candy Adele Mara is around to liven up the proceedings. Sherman L Loews screenplay is a no frills and move the story along quickly affair. The FX is kept to a minimum with minimal lighting and the use of shadows and darkness in the shots to convey a creepy look and cover up the cheapness of the sets.Catman of Paris is not going to entertain the blood, guts, and gore fanatics. Its an entertaining little, horror, western action film that keeps you guessing until the end.
gavin6942
Are mysterious killings in Paris of 1896 the work of man or monster?The best thing I can say about this film is that it has an awesomely choreographed fight in a restaurant, with plenty of flips and tables breaking. The waiter getting knocked over with a full tray (even though there are no customers, so who is the food for?).Hard to say if this is a horror film. Netflix seems to think so, and I guess the idea of a half-man, half-cat killing people is sort of horror. But it is really pretty tame. We could say it is an early serial killer film with a population getting terrorized, but whether or not it is horror is just a tough call.This warrants a second viewing.
dbborroughs
Republic pictures comes late in the game to the "werewolf" er Werecat genre. The plot has a writer returning to Paris after a long trip abroad during which he developed jungle fear during which he had blackouts. He is arriving to great acclaim as his novel that parallels an infamous trial is a best seller. The French government wants to know if he had access to secret documents, something that seems more likely when an official is killed by a "catman". Suspicion really falls on the writer when his fiancé ends up dead. Complicating matters is the return of the blackouts so the writer doesn't know if he's the killer or not.Okay thriller is much too leisurely to be fully enjoyed. There are too many musical numbers early on and too much dead time when things are all talk in the middle and later sections. The acting is fine and the sets quite good but there is a reason why most people I know only remember the top hatted killer, he's the most interesting thing in this film. despite its short running time (just over an hour) I think the reason that this film was rarely seen on TV was that after 20 minutes you begin to lose patience with it. As good as the talk is, I just wished someone would do something. When it finally did happen, in the closing minutes, it was too little too late..Take a pass.
mord39
I came across a copy of this rarely-seen film and I can safely say it's better off never seen. Some films just are too damned dull and uneventful for their own good, and this is one of the best examples of an uninvolving movie where nothing occurs.If you have ever seen bores like DEVIL BAT'S DAUGHTER, SCARED TO DEATH, THE UNDYING MONSTER, or SHE-WOLF OF LONDON (all from the 1940s) you'll know what to expect...or should I say what NOT to expect? The only worthy mention is Lenore Aubert (from ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN) on hand as the leading lady.The monster isn't seen until the very end, and you'll have given up long before that anyway. At 60 minutes or so, this feels like 60 YEARS.
AD
