I had to check the date of this production, as it seemed to look more like a mid-forties' horror feature. But no, this movie was made in 1958. Which to my mind, was one of the more charming features of this film. I see a particularly negative review disparages the 'Todd Slaughter' quality of the film, but I disagree with the writer. Todd Slaughter was the supreme ham of all hams, and I actually find Karloff quite good here. (Then again, I do enjoy Slaughter's scene-chewing gastronomes!)There is a good film in here, but it is talky and slow-going. I enjoyed the opening hanging scene, with the wicked wench at the window taking bites of her apple. The scenes at the 'Judas Hole' offer lascivious glimpses at the dancers, and, pushing the envelope even further, the director has a dead woman uncovered, and the face is shown with her eyes wide open in terror. Not exactly the Val Lewton 'touch' of subtlety that might have helped the film.There is the obvious parallel to Stevenson's 'Jekyll and Hyde' in Karloff's 'Doctor Rankin'. The psychic connection to the strangler's knife is interesting (the scene in which Karloff sees the flame in the lamp and imagines his knife brings a welcome remembrance to James Whales' masterpiece "The Old Dark House").But the story is not told well, and the movie seems longer than its seventy-eight minute run time. Karloff's change into the strangler is subtle, a la Spencer Tracy's in 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde'. It leaves the viewer wondering why no one noticed that it MIGHT be the good doctor, but Karloff pulls it off well. Any major transformation might be unbelievable. (As great an actor as Fredric March was, his 'Mr. Hyde' make-up is ludicrous...much too ape-like.)

The infamous serial killer "The Haymarket Strangler" may be long dead but writer James Rankin is convinced that the wrong man was hanged and sets out to investigate the crimes and the killer for himself. He makes progress into the case and it begins to appear that he is correct. However when he recovers the scalper supposedly used by the murderer he finds himself compelled to kill as his personality splits – with his normal, composed self becoming more and more desperate to prevent further deaths.This film has got so-so reviews and, always one to stick my nose in where not required, I'd like to agree with everyone who simply said "is OK" about it, because it is. Some have ripped into it and I think that is unfair because really the film delivers a basic B movie horror that didn't bore me even if it wasn't what I hoped it would be. For me the film falls down in its aspirations because it seems happy to be basic when it could have been more complex and engaging. The film takes too long to get to the point of finding the knife (and making the transformation happen) and up to this point, yes, it is a little dull. The bigger downside of this delay, though was that it mean the second half of the film (the potentially strongest half) is too short and rushed. So instead of a complex story where Rankin struggles with a demon from inside himself mostly it is just a straight "pull a face, get to killing" story.To make this work it does need to be urgent and scary but sadly it doesn't really deliver on that either, allowing the viewer to wander in their thoughts and think of what might have been. It is perfectly fine as a bit of Karloff b-movie and it does have some nice atmosphere and twists to the delivery but what with what "could" have been and all the weak material that does take up time in the first half, it only comes out as "OK". Karloff has his moments and I did think he was very good when Rankin was near-frantic as he understood what he was doing but mostly he just contorts his face and lurches forward in the time-honoured fashion. His supporting cast are OK but nobody really stuck in the mind – which I think speaks volumes.So an OK film but nothing special whatsoever. Meeting it on its own terms will help but it still isn't that good and one cannot help look at it and see several major ways that it could have been a lot better.

When you see a film title like GRIP OF THE STRANGLER that stars Boris Karloff you're not expecting a romantic musical . Bizarrely there's long segments in this film where the film does indeed resemble a romantic musical . We're introduced to Karloff's character James Rankin whose daughter has fallen in love with a young gentleman and he wants to marry her . Cut to the inside of a theater where can can girls kicking their legs out over their heads . If someone wanted to make a film that would appeal to dirty old men then fine but GRIP OF THE STRANGLER isn't a title that's easy to market to depraved reprobates . Goodness me I thought we'd be watching a film involving people getting strangled every ten minutes and within ten minutes you'll be wanting to strangle the producer Some people have commentated that this is a film that doesn't know what it's trying to be and while this is patently obvious there's a feeling at the back of my mind that it's trying to copy the style of a couple of films directed by Mark Robson that also starred Karloff namely ISLE OF THE DEAD and BEDLAM . Unfortunately the production team have neither the style or skill to pull it off and instead we have a very unfocused B movie at the very best

Having been - as was the case with THE TIN DRUM (1979) - the one to 'announce' several years ago the re-release on DVD of 4 Richard/Alex Gordon productions through Criterion on another online Forum (after writing to Image Entertainment to see if their bare-bones OOP editions were going to be re-issued), this set has been a long time coming indeed! As some of you may know, I'd never watched this one prior to purchasing the expensive "Monsters And Madmen" set - or, for that matter, its follow-up CORRIDORS OF BLOOD (1958); however, I knew enough of their reputation as two of Boris Karloff's best latter-day films to make me spring for them regardless.To be honest, as I lay watching THE HAUNTED STRANGLER, I was somewhat let down by it and my heart actually sank when, in the Audio Commentary, both Richard Gordon and Tom Weaver opine that they prefer this one over CORRIDORS OF BLOOD! Still, going through the film twice in a matter of hours can sometimes work wonders: at first glance, it's a handsome-looking yet rather lurid film - reveling in the permissiveness of the time to include as many (often gratuitous) instances of sleaze and sadism as it possibly could; in that respect, it's similar to THE FLESH AND THE FIENDS (1959) - incidentally, another well-regarded title I had long wanted to watch and been underwhelmed by on a preliminary viewing.The film actually precedes Hammer's DR. JEKYLL AND SISTER HYDE (1971) in that it mingles the Stevenson perennial with the equally popular exploits of Jack The Ripper; to these it attaches a thriller angle by having Karloff act as a detective investigating an old series of murders, ostensibly to prove a miscarriage of justice, but whose repercussions are far worse - to say nothing of closer to home - than he could have imagined (itself an oft-used device as in, say, THE BIG CLOCK [1947])! While I knew of the twist from reading about the film beforehand (and which is actually revealed fairly early in the game), I feel that it doesn't quite work here because, for one thing, the star was simply too old for the role (though I'll readily admit that he entered with glee into its quite physical attributes, even coming up with the economical make-up design himself!) but also because the character's mental condition and its effect on his backstory is conveniently kept under wraps until the revelation (when it should, at least, bother him equally as much as wanting to prove the innocence of an anonymous and legally convicted serial-killer). Incidentally, though strangulation is involved in the crimes, the film's title is somewhat misleading because it's the scalpel which sets the 'monster' off and, for this reason, the U.S. moniker is rather more accurate! Anyway, one of the film's major assets is surely Lionel Banes' black-and-white cinematography; the second half of the narrative, then, creates reasonable suspense and excitement with the scenes involving the rampaging 'monster' and his ultimate identity crisis. In the end, I wouldn't really classify THE HAUNTED STRANGLER as one of the star's very best vehicles - but it's undoubtedly among the more satisfying from his later work that I've watched (along with THE RAVEN [1963] and TARGETS [1968]).The DVD supplements are very adequate: the Audio Commentary featuring genre authority Tom Weaver and the film's producer Richard Gordon (with interjections from his late brother/partner Alex) is especially interesting - apart from the privilege of having Weaver and the two Gordons name their 3 favorite Karloff pictures, amongst many other things I learned that Boris once almost worked with Edward D. Wood Jr. (and Bela Lugosi and Lon Chaney Jr. to boot) on the project which eventually became BRIDE OF THE MONSTER (1955)!