Bluebeard Reviews

  • May 08, 2017

    A somewhat ineffective thriller that is saved by a stellar lead performance by John Carradine.

    A somewhat ineffective thriller that is saved by a stellar lead performance by John Carradine.

  • Sep 19, 2013

    An artist...his cravat...and a tender throat--Carradine's finest hour!!

    An artist...his cravat...and a tender throat--Carradine's finest hour!!

  • Greg S Super Reviewer
    May 15, 2013

    A painter/puppeteer kills his models in 19th century Paris. A dusty and lifeless serial killer relic; when John Carradine is acting (rather than over-acting) he's actually a pretty dull fellow. Hard to believe this was made by the same director who made the B-masterpieces THE BLACK CAT and DETOUR; even harder to believe that 100% positive Rotten Tomatoes rating.

    A painter/puppeteer kills his models in 19th century Paris. A dusty and lifeless serial killer relic; when John Carradine is acting (rather than over-acting) he's actually a pretty dull fellow. Hard to believe this was made by the same director who made the B-masterpieces THE BLACK CAT and DETOUR; even harder to believe that 100% positive Rotten Tomatoes rating.

  • Sep 11, 2012

    It's a good adaptation of the story I've heard in the past, but I prefer the story over the film, for this has more problems. PLOT:In 19th century France, Gaston (John Carradine) is a pretty successful artist and puppeteer, well known among his community. Little does his area know that he is the notorious killer known as "Bluebeard", who strangles his victims and dumps their bodies in the river. When he murders on of his fellow puppeteers, he hires another assistant named Lucille (Jean Parker) to design costumes for his puppets. Meanwhile, the painting of his latest victim hits the gallery via his business partner, Lamarte (Ludwig Stossel), and a couple inspectors try to trace the murders back through to the artist. Will Bluebeard be caught? Will he trick and do away with his new assistant? I'll leave you there. It's a pretty good plot executed fairly well. ACTING:The performances in here were pretty great, keeping in mind the time being. John Carradine played a very respectable role of Gaston or "Bluebeard", the artist and serial killer. I'd say he played the part in a very sauve manner. The other shiners would be Ludwig Stossel as Lamarte, Henry Kolker as Deschamps, Jean Parker as Lucille, and Teala Loring as Francine. SCORE:The score was a little annoying at times and unfitting at others. It followed you through the whole film and didn't cease to keep suspense at all. This is one of those films that nearly gets drowned out by the score. OTHER CONTENT:This film was a pretty good horror film considering the time being and the plot altogether. It was pretty well thought-out, creepy, and shot with good direction. However, this film did have a good few cons. Firstly, I feel it needed a bit more character development for some of the characters. Gaston's character had a slight explanation of why he paints and kills, but I felt it needed a bit more to express their personalities better. Secondly, there is very little suspense written into the plot. The audience knows who is going to be the killer right off the bat, and the kills aren't too suspenseful at all as compared to other films of this era. It also drifts from the story I heard with this same name a time ago, so I found it a bit misleading. It can be a little confusing to some, but I think it's a pretty good horror film for the time. OVERALL,a good horror film with a well-executed plot, great performances, annoyingly unfitting score, thought-out plot twists, creepy moments, and good direction, but it need more character development and suspense, along with matching source material.

    It's a good adaptation of the story I've heard in the past, but I prefer the story over the film, for this has more problems. PLOT:In 19th century France, Gaston (John Carradine) is a pretty successful artist and puppeteer, well known among his community. Little does his area know that he is the notorious killer known as "Bluebeard", who strangles his victims and dumps their bodies in the river. When he murders on of his fellow puppeteers, he hires another assistant named Lucille (Jean Parker) to design costumes for his puppets. Meanwhile, the painting of his latest victim hits the gallery via his business partner, Lamarte (Ludwig Stossel), and a couple inspectors try to trace the murders back through to the artist. Will Bluebeard be caught? Will he trick and do away with his new assistant? I'll leave you there. It's a pretty good plot executed fairly well. ACTING:The performances in here were pretty great, keeping in mind the time being. John Carradine played a very respectable role of Gaston or "Bluebeard", the artist and serial killer. I'd say he played the part in a very sauve manner. The other shiners would be Ludwig Stossel as Lamarte, Henry Kolker as Deschamps, Jean Parker as Lucille, and Teala Loring as Francine. SCORE:The score was a little annoying at times and unfitting at others. It followed you through the whole film and didn't cease to keep suspense at all. This is one of those films that nearly gets drowned out by the score. OTHER CONTENT:This film was a pretty good horror film considering the time being and the plot altogether. It was pretty well thought-out, creepy, and shot with good direction. However, this film did have a good few cons. Firstly, I feel it needed a bit more character development for some of the characters. Gaston's character had a slight explanation of why he paints and kills, but I felt it needed a bit more to express their personalities better. Secondly, there is very little suspense written into the plot. The audience knows who is going to be the killer right off the bat, and the kills aren't too suspenseful at all as compared to other films of this era. It also drifts from the story I heard with this same name a time ago, so I found it a bit misleading. It can be a little confusing to some, but I think it's a pretty good horror film for the time. OVERALL,a good horror film with a well-executed plot, great performances, annoyingly unfitting score, thought-out plot twists, creepy moments, and good direction, but it need more character development and suspense, along with matching source material.

  • Sep 11, 2012

    It's a good adaptation of the story I've heard in the past, but I prefer the story over the film, for this has more problems. PLOT:In 19th century France, Gaston (John Carradine) is a pretty successful artist and puppeteer, well known among his community. Little does his area know that he is the notorious killer known as "Bluebeard", who strangles his victims and dumps their bodies in the river. When he murders on of his fellow puppeteers, he hires another assistant named Lucille (Jean Parker) to design costumes for his puppets. Meanwhile, the painting of his latest victim hits the gallery via his business partner, Lamarte (Ludwig Stossel), and a couple inspectors try to trace the murders back through to the artist. Will Bluebeard be caught? Will he trick and do away with his new assistant? I'll leave you there. It's a pretty good plot executed fairly well. ACTING:The performances in here were pretty great, keeping in mind the time being. John Carradine played a very respectable role of Gaston or "Bluebeard", the artist and serial killer. I'd say he played the part in a very sauve manner. The other shiners would be Ludwig Stossel as Lamarte, Henry Kolker as Deschamps, Jean Parker as Lucille, and Teala Loring as Francine. SCORE:The score was a little annoying at times and unfitting at others. It followed you through the whole film and didn't cease to keep suspense at all. This is one of those films that nearly gets drowned out by the score. OTHER CONTENT:This film was a pretty good horror film considering the time being and the plot altogether. It was pretty well thought-out, creepy, and shot with good direction. However, this film did have a good few cons. Firstly, I feel it needed a bit more character development for some of the characters. Gaston's character had a slight explanation of why he paints and kills, but I felt it needed a bit more to express their personalities better. Secondly, there is very little suspense written into the plot. The audience knows who is going to be the killer right off the bat, and the kills aren't too suspenseful at all as compared to other films of this era. It also drifts from the story I heard with this same name a time ago, so I found it a bit misleading. It can be a little confusing to some, but I think it's a pretty good horror film for the time. OVERALL,a good horror film with a well-executed plot, great performances, annoyingly unfitting score, thought-out plot twists, creepy moments, and good direction, but it need more character development and suspense, along with matching source material.

    It's a good adaptation of the story I've heard in the past, but I prefer the story over the film, for this has more problems. PLOT:In 19th century France, Gaston (John Carradine) is a pretty successful artist and puppeteer, well known among his community. Little does his area know that he is the notorious killer known as "Bluebeard", who strangles his victims and dumps their bodies in the river. When he murders on of his fellow puppeteers, he hires another assistant named Lucille (Jean Parker) to design costumes for his puppets. Meanwhile, the painting of his latest victim hits the gallery via his business partner, Lamarte (Ludwig Stossel), and a couple inspectors try to trace the murders back through to the artist. Will Bluebeard be caught? Will he trick and do away with his new assistant? I'll leave you there. It's a pretty good plot executed fairly well. ACTING:The performances in here were pretty great, keeping in mind the time being. John Carradine played a very respectable role of Gaston or "Bluebeard", the artist and serial killer. I'd say he played the part in a very sauve manner. The other shiners would be Ludwig Stossel as Lamarte, Henry Kolker as Deschamps, Jean Parker as Lucille, and Teala Loring as Francine. SCORE:The score was a little annoying at times and unfitting at others. It followed you through the whole film and didn't cease to keep suspense at all. This is one of those films that nearly gets drowned out by the score. OTHER CONTENT:This film was a pretty good horror film considering the time being and the plot altogether. It was pretty well thought-out, creepy, and shot with good direction. However, this film did have a good few cons. Firstly, I feel it needed a bit more character development for some of the characters. Gaston's character had a slight explanation of why he paints and kills, but I felt it needed a bit more to express their personalities better. Secondly, there is very little suspense written into the plot. The audience knows who is going to be the killer right off the bat, and the kills aren't too suspenseful at all as compared to other films of this era. It also drifts from the story I heard with this same name a time ago, so I found it a bit misleading. It can be a little confusing to some, but I think it's a pretty good horror film for the time. OVERALL,a good horror film with a well-executed plot, great performances, annoyingly unfitting score, thought-out plot twists, creepy moments, and good direction, but it need more character development and suspense, along with matching source material.

  • Mar 11, 2012

    Interesting but doesn't offer too much. It's a decent mystery but can be a bit slow and confusing.

    Interesting but doesn't offer too much. It's a decent mystery but can be a bit slow and confusing.

  • Feb 08, 2012

    The streets of Paris live in fear because a serial killer of woman runs ad-mist, known to the locales as Bluebeard. Gaston a rather famous painter and puppeteer is well-regarded and the actual killer of these woman, unbeknownst to the authorities. Gaston is very sheltered emotionally and the viewer is really not given much insight into why he performs these murders. All we know is that he tends to strangle his victims soon after painting them. Enter Lucille, a woman in which Gaston is instantly entranced by and begins to fall in love with. John Carradine is really great in this film as Gaston. He captures this stone-cold demanor and mystery of the character well, and exudes this weird sense of "something isn't right with this guy". The opening sequence really sets up the story well with a short montage capturing the terror and fear flowing through the streets of Paris over Bluebeard. It's atmosphere and lighting is very Noir-like and obviously fits the mood of the story. The film almost feels like a dream at times and Ulmer takes full advantage of using the puppets to escalate the creepiness of it all. The thing that separates this film from some similar films I have seen, notably Hugo Fregonese's "Man in the Attic" is Ulmer really has a lot of interest in understanding Gaston to the point where he almost wants the audience to sympathize with him on some level. In the final scene we are shown Gaston's mental anguish and reasoning for his actions and while they don't make us necessarily sympathetic but they do create give us some form of understanding about this cold character. An above average horror/thriller which features John Carradine in an early role which is quite different than what he does typically.. fun.

    The streets of Paris live in fear because a serial killer of woman runs ad-mist, known to the locales as Bluebeard. Gaston a rather famous painter and puppeteer is well-regarded and the actual killer of these woman, unbeknownst to the authorities. Gaston is very sheltered emotionally and the viewer is really not given much insight into why he performs these murders. All we know is that he tends to strangle his victims soon after painting them. Enter Lucille, a woman in which Gaston is instantly entranced by and begins to fall in love with. John Carradine is really great in this film as Gaston. He captures this stone-cold demanor and mystery of the character well, and exudes this weird sense of "something isn't right with this guy". The opening sequence really sets up the story well with a short montage capturing the terror and fear flowing through the streets of Paris over Bluebeard. It's atmosphere and lighting is very Noir-like and obviously fits the mood of the story. The film almost feels like a dream at times and Ulmer takes full advantage of using the puppets to escalate the creepiness of it all. The thing that separates this film from some similar films I have seen, notably Hugo Fregonese's "Man in the Attic" is Ulmer really has a lot of interest in understanding Gaston to the point where he almost wants the audience to sympathize with him on some level. In the final scene we are shown Gaston's mental anguish and reasoning for his actions and while they don't make us necessarily sympathetic but they do create give us some form of understanding about this cold character. An above average horror/thriller which features John Carradine in an early role which is quite different than what he does typically.. fun.

  • Sep 13, 2011

    It has its share of flaws, including a wretched wall to wall score. However, this is an intriguing and eccentric low-budget film with plenty of visual style that borders on the baroque.

    It has its share of flaws, including a wretched wall to wall score. However, this is an intriguing and eccentric low-budget film with plenty of visual style that borders on the baroque.

  • Jul 26, 2011

    Bluebeard is a good-looking crime thriller, weakened by wall-to-wall music.

    Bluebeard is a good-looking crime thriller, weakened by wall-to-wall music.

  • Jun 18, 2011

    The story is alright, and the acting is about the same. The potential for a terrifying thriller is there though.

    The story is alright, and the acting is about the same. The potential for a terrifying thriller is there though.