For me, "Haunted Honeymoon" was a perfect follow-up (although it was made almost half a century earlier!) to the Edward Petherbridge - Harriet Walter / Lord Peter Wimsey - Harriet Vane films; in the first one of those three films he meets her, in the second he courts her, in the third he finally wins her heart....and in this one they get married! They go to the country in search of a peaceful honeymoon, but encounter murder instead. And it is done by an ingenious murder trap - one that will be revealed only in the last 3 minutes of this fast-paced film (it may, in fact, be so fast-paced that some aspects of the mystery can be sketchy and confusing on the first viewing). Robert Montgomery may not be aristocratic (or British) enough for the role of Lord Peter Wimsey, but otherwise he is fine, and there is something pleasingly offbeat and idiosyncratic about his chemistry with the gorgeous Constance Cummings. On the whole, if you are a fan of the genre, this movie should be a part of your collection. Funny ending, too. **1/2 out of 4.
Add a Review
-
gridoon20246 January 2016
-
samuelsrenee2 April 2020I know the book by Dorothy L. Sayers backwards and forwards, and I love it. So knowing the film wasn't going to be true to the story and agreeing in advance that Robert Montgomery couldn't play Sayers' lightly handled Lord Peter Wimsey, I expected to be very disappointed. Imagine my delight when I found that not only didn't I mind that the story was so completely ignored but I actually liked the film. There's some good acting, and it holds together. Large and small defects: We have to listen to a ghastly hymn sung not once but twice. There is a compelte lack of humor in Doris Ruddle's character (she was one of the highlights of the book). Why is Harriet wearing a hat whilst reviewing wedding presents? A less pathetic actress could have been chosen for the pathetic role of Aggie Twitterton, and the Wimseys could have been less condescending to her; that was a large defect, because, as drawn by Sayers, Peter and Harriet are sympathetic, polite characters who would not be rude to people in less fortunate circumstances than themselves. There is a lot of humor, however, in general; my favorite line: "Let me take your stoat."
-
awblundell8 September 2002Watchable but missable adaptation of Dorothy Sayer's novel about just married amateur detectives, Lord Peter Wimsey and crime novelist Harriet Vane (now of course Lady Wimsey) Attempts to add whimsical comic touches fall short of the mark and the detective mystery doesn't really grip either. Shown in the UK as Busman's Honeymoon, but in the US and also these days on TCM as Haunted Honeymoon - a pointless and misleading change.
-
kmoh-125 February 2008As the other comments make clear, this is not a bad film. One of MGM's British-made films, it has several good moments, and lots of good performances. Its problem is that it makes the ultimately wrong decision to play down the mystery elements in favour of the romantic comedy. It could have been a marvellous comedy thriller, but instead looks more like a pale imitation of the great romantic screwballs of the thirties, or the fag end of the cycle. Montgomery and Cummings' opening scene reminds one of William Powell and Myrna Loy opening Christmas presents in The Thin Man, or indeed Montgomery's own opening scene with Carole Lombard in Mr and Mrs Smith. The two beautiful, funny, talented people sail brilliantly and wittily through life, with their perfect marriage (explicitly announced to be so), not taking themselves too seriously, not afraid to take a pratfall now and then ... you know the drill. And, of course, we as viewers are supposed to assume that Robert Montgomery and Constance Cummings, by extension, are also such wonderful beings.
So the picture is actually an hour old before we get going with the murder. We have had the clues front-loaded, interspersed with the comedy and romance, whereas in the book Wimsey pieces together the clues from his interrogations. The solution of the mystery ends up as a total afterthought, Montgomery casually piecing together the fiendish plot, and the film sloppily omits to give us any actual proof that that was how the crime was done.
And, to coin a phrase, why oh why oh why did anyone think that suave New Yorker Montgomery could be Lord Peter Wimsey, whose archetypal English "silly ass" manner concealed a brilliant brain? Ian Carmichael was much nearer the mark in the 70s TV series. Montgomery is a very pleasing screen presence, but an English nobleman he is not.
As usual it is the character actors that steal the scenes. Leslie Banks, in my humble, could do very little wrong, and doesn't here. Joan Kemp-Welch is excellent in what could be the very tedious role of Aggie Twitterton. Robert Newton gives an early eye-rolling performance complete with dodgy West country accent. Frank Pettingell is on good form, especially in the chimney sweeping scene, where he divests himself of a seemingly infinite number of sweaters. Googie Withers is great as the sexy barmaid. Roy Emerton is always good value. But the real star of the show, as other comments have also pointed out, is the old actor-manager Seymour Hicks, showing the youngsters how it is done.
So, much to please, much too long, more thrills needed. -
bkoganbing21 October 2020Taking the place of Robert Donat who pulled out at the last minute is Robert Montgomery whom we read happened to be in Great Britain and was rushed by MGM into Haunted Honeymoon. Montgomery plays the aristocratic British detective Lord Peter Wimsey who is married to Agatha Christie like mystery writer Harriet Vane played by Constance Cummings. They make a great team in the mystery solving game. And it's a game to Montgomery because without it he'd be one of those P.G. Wodehouse silly aristocratic types. Although he did serve in the Great War where he acquired batman now turned butler Seymour Hicks.
Montgomery and Cummings have just married and are on the way to spend their honeymoon at the childhood home of Cummings. The new owner having rented it to them.
The new owner ain't a popular guy and he's killed and body found the next day and it's like the Wimseys just can't get away from homicide. It's like Nick and Nora Charles solving mysteries as an afterthought.
This film was adapted from a play by Wimsey creator Dorothy Sayers. Lord Wimsey never quite made it here as a popular character the way Agatha Christie's sleuth characters have. Perhaps Donat would have been better in the lead.
In any event the Wimseys seem more like Jonathan and Jennifer Hart than anyone else. Like Wimsey, Jonathan Hart solves mysteries as an afterthought.
Good, but not a great film from MGM's British studio. -
dbkenner-7330416 June 2018Most of the reviews here are on target. This is a fun movie. It doesn't hold up to other mystery/comedies like The Thin Man Series. Also, it is not going to warm the hearts of Dorothy L. Sayers fans, who have very particular ideas about adapting stories featuring Lord Peter Wimsey.
One reviewer called the title change (from Busman's Honeymoon to Haunted Honeymoon) pointless and unnecessary. Whatever one thinks of the title Haunted Honeymoon, the title change was understandable. Very few in America are familiar with the phrase "Busman's Holiday," which the original title is meant to be a version of. The joke is lost in translation. Therefore, a new title was needed. -
boblipton12 June 2018When I think about whom to cast as Lord Peter Wimsey, I think of someone skilled at playing silly-ass aristocrats. I know that Ian Carmichael appeared in several television adaptations of Sayers' Wimsey novels in the 1970s, and I hope to have a chance to see them some day. For this one, they might have cast one of the Aldwych farceurs: Ralph Lynn (the descriptions of Lord Peter in the earlier novels make him sound like Lynn) or Claude Hulbert. Instead, MGM originally cast Robert Donat after his success in GOODBYE MR. CHIPS and, when he dropped out, used the visiting Robert Montgomery -- a fine actor, but not really suited for the role. Then they rewrote it so that Peter and Harriet (played by Constance Cummings) were more like Nick and Nora Charles in this hash of BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON.
Sigh. I'd still like to see Sayers' story done right, but that's not going to happen any time soon. Instead, I'll take some small comfort in the supporting characters. Leslie Banks as Lord Peters' philosophical brother-in-law, reduced to an admiring acoylite; Seymour Hicks, really too old for Buntner, but playing the imperturbable butler. Frank Pettingell is fine as the jack-of-all-trades Puffett, and Robert Newton as Frank Crutchley. Like many another movie "adapted" from another medium, bearing only a passing relationship to the original, I force myself to look at it as something having nothing at all to do with the source material, and find it pretty good on its own account. -
HotToastyRag9 April 2018Quite similar to the The Thin Man series, a witty married couple bands together to help solve a murder in Haunted Honeymoon. Robert Montgomery, a man who solves crimes as a hobby, and Constance Cummings, a crime novelist, are married and vow to give up that part of their lives. However, as soon as they arrive at an English cottage for their honeymoon, a man is murdered! There are an abundance of suspects, from the niece who was to inherit the deceased's money, Joan Kemp-Welch, to the poor handyman, Robert Newton, to the corrupt policeman, James Carney.
Their friend, Leslie Banks, is the detective assigned to the case, and he continually tries to goad them back into their greatest hobby. "You know where to find us?" Robert Montgomery asks as he and Constance physically leave the room to avoid the temptation. "I know where to find you," Leslie replies. "We won't be there!" Robert quips back before exiting. The chemistry between the three leads is very funny, as is the chemistry between Robert, Constance, and their butler, Seymour Hicks. Fans of Jeremy Swift, one of the butlers from Downton Abbey will see an uncanny likeness in Seymour's performance, from the facial expressions to the delivery of his lines.
Parts of Haunted Honeymoon are very funny, but parts of the crime-solving methods are a little far-fetched. If you like comedy better than sleuthing, you'll probably like this one. And if you're curious to hear Robert Newton sneaking in a pre-pirate accent, which was based on his natural accent, you'll get a kick out of his rough, bad-boy role. If you don't end up liking this movie, you can always take Robert Montgomery's advice after an unpleasant experience: "Don't mention it. Don't talk about it. Don't think it." -
planktonrules21 February 2018Only Hollywood would cast a very American actor as a member of the British aristocracy...but here they cast Robert Montgomery (with his very nice AMERICAN accent) to play Lord Peter Wimsey! With that huge strike against it, can "Busman's Honeymoon" be any good?
When the film begins, Lord Peter Wimsey is about to marry Harriet (Constance Cummings). To surprise her, he's bought her childhood home which has been owned by a horrible sort of rotter, Mr. Noakes (Roy Emerton). Peter doesn't know that Noakes is a total jerk who owes everyone and is a nasty piece of work. When the couple come to take possession of the home, Noakes is no where to be found. Eventually his body is discovered and this challenges the couple, as they both promised to retire and Peter is supposed to stop his sleuthing ways and she is to stop writing murder mysteries. Wanna make a bet as to whether or not they keep this promise?
Despite terrible casting, the film works reasonably well...mostly because MGM had a great knack at making good looking movies. An interesting plot. -
blanche-22 February 2015I don't understand how TCM gave this film four stars. It's okay but it's no four stars.
Haunted Honeymoon is based on Busman's Honeymoon, a Lord Peter Wimsey novel. Here, Peter (Robert Montgomery) has finally married Harriet (Constance Cummings), and as a wedding gift, Peter has bought Harriet's childhood home, Tall Boys, in Biddlecombe for her. Though they have both sworn off having anything to do with murders - him solving them, her writing about them -- they're faced with the murder of the former owner of the house, with plenty of suspects.
Though I love both actors, and there was an excellent supporting cast, this film didn't hold my interest. It was on the talky side, which is fine with scintillating dialogue, but this didn't really have it. The end result was somewhat boring.
Someone on this site mentioned that throughout the film you were reminded always that you were watching Robert Montgomery and not the character of Lord Peter Wimsey. Montgomery was a very good actor; he was suave, he had charm, and a good sense of comedy, but most of the time I'm not sure how much effort he put into some of his films. The end result is, most of the time I know I'm watching Robert Montgomery.
I have to disagree about Constance Cummings, a beautiful actress who captured Harriet's wit and intelligence very well, and actually, the two made a fine couple. My mom saw her in a play, Wings, later in her career.
All in all, disappointing. -
Lord Peter Wimsey has married Miss Harriet Vane and gone to live in a house named Tallboys. So far so good, although, I'm not altogether sure the house in the novel was called Tallboys. I think that was something to do with a later story.
After that it gets disappointing. First they have decided to give up crime, him detecting and her writing it???????? and then they arrive on the night after the death of Noakes, instead of a week later. Bunter is supposed to have been Wimsey's batman during the Great War so should be of an age as Wimsey but instead is here played by the ageing, Sir Seymour Hicks.
The accents are frightful, Deep welsh accents in the middle of Devon and the constable's name is changed from Joe to Tom. Added to that the whole banter between Wimsey and Superintendent Kirke, whom he has never met before going to Tallboys, regarding literary works is completely missing.
Additionally, for some unknown reason the writers changed the village name from Pagford/Paggleham to Biddlecombe and although Harriet Vane grew up in The village, her father having been the doctor, this is never mentioned. The villager's all act as if they have never known her when many of the elders in the village would certainly have known her as a child.
The acting is very good and if you can overlook the glaring inconsistencies between the novel and the movie, then it is worth watching. Do not read the book first, if you do not wish to be disappointed. -
Ron Oliver10 February 2001A titled amateur detective & his mystery-writing bride spend a BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON when a murdered corpse is discovered in their new Devonshire home.
Beginning with its first release in 1938 and for several years thereafter, MGM maintained a sister studio in England. In this way she could take advantage of the wealth of British acting talent available, and also get around the UK restriction on the import of foreign films. American stars were often sent over to take the top roles, an increasingly dicey maneuver as the Atlantic became dangerous with Nazi U-boats. BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON (called HAUNTED HONEYMOON in the USA) was one of those films.
BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON, while not unpleasant to look at, is not without its flaws. The mystery isn't all that enthralling, but the main difficulty seems to lie in Robert Montgomery's portrayal of Lord Peter Wimsey. It just doesn't click. This very fine actor made a career from playing suave, sophisticated characters, which Lord Peter should be, but you can never for a moment forget that this is only Robert Montgomery playing a role; nor for an instant do you believe that this is Lord Peter come to life. And the American accent surely doesn't help, either.
The lovely Constance Cummings, as Lady Harriet, suffers much the same fate.
A fine gaggle of British actors, including Robert Newton, Leslie Banks & Googie Withers, appear in supporting roles. But the real joy in watching this film is reveling in the rare opportunity to see the marvelous old actor Sir Seymour Hicks, who portrays Bunter the butler. Sir Seymour (1871-1949) had been one of the great actor-managers & dramatists of the turn of the century. With his plumy voice & broad, impish face, he easily steals scene after scene with his stagy intonations & mannerisms.
It would take the passage of several decades & the arrival of a completely new medium - television - before Dorothy L. Sayer's hero received superlative interpretations from actors Ian Carmichael & Edward Petherbridge. -
I'm twenty minutes in and still waiting for this to start. At this point, Haunted Honeymoon could be about anything: fishing in Scotland, mystery writing, financing a garage, and, maybe, a honeymoon. Thankfully, Noakes (Roy Emerton) eventually has the good sense to get himself killed, his shady dealings with locals having caught up with him. But no one seems to notice. Upon Lord Whimsey's (Robert Montgomery's) and his wife Harriet's (Constance Cumming's) arrival at their new home, another interlude of, well, whimsy, ensues.
One hour in and the body is finally discovered. Then, things do get interesting, as any of about a half dozen people are suspects. It is pretty clever how Whimsey solves the mystery. The problem is, do we care about any of the supporting cast enough to be satisfied or disappointed at the denouement? I'm more interested in the cactus, and the poor little stoat whom Whimsey flings at the camera. It's almost as though, since all the suspects are lower-class, any of them will do as the culprit. Whimsey is so nonchalant about the murder that there's no sense of drama; the atmospheric only thickens in the relatively short sequence just before the murder, before Whimsey's arrival. It's even more odd that Harriet treats the whole deal as a splendid game--Noakes is after all her uncle.
Others have noted, the suitability of Montegomery playing an English Lord is questionable. His performance isn't at all bad, but he's missing the Old World charm and sophistication that would be more convincing. Leaving the Whimsey role aside, the movie would've been better starting off with Noakes and his enemies circling each other to set the stage for the murder. This should be the crucial part of the plot. We could still have the 'Whimsical' newlyweds there to solve the mystery, but more as a subplot to the main action. As it is, Haunted Honeymoon is more of a padded short feature, trying vainly to win us over with a lot of extraneous scenes. The actual honeymoon lies in the couple's future, and, despite a great old house, there's no haunting going on. 6/10. -
Norm-3010 July 2000This film has the makings of a good mystery film -- detective hubby marries mystery-writer wife, and move into the house where the wife was born.
Unbeknownst to them, the last owner of the house was murdered the night before!
This film relies HEAVILY on "local color" and the "local characters" to keep it going. (The mystery is a flop). It's overlong (you wonder WHEN it will end!) and the title is misleading -- there's no "supernatural element" in it whatsoever. Recommended for insomniacs!
Norm -
The story, I mean. This picture takes forever to get underway, as it isn't until 20 minutes in that a crime is committed. Then ensues a lot of dialogue and alternate plot development, and then 30 minutes later, the body is discovered. That leaves less than 25 minutes to track down the murderer.
I did not read the book so I cannot comment on the pale comparison between the book and the film, or the unsuitability of Robert Montgomery as Lord Peter Wimsey. I can say that I am never disappointed by Montgomery's presence in a movie, and here he was dapper and sophisticated as always - although perhaps slightly out of place with an American accent.
I enjoyed the banter between Montgomery and Constance Cummings, the staid and stuffy presence of Seymour Hicks and the threatening appearance of Roy Emerton. The solution to the murder seemed slapped together and almost an afterthought, and the whole mood of the picture seemed as though it couldn't decide if it was a romantic comedy or a murder mystery. I have to say, though, that the whole picture had a very agreeable cachet about it that worked for me.
I thought the overall effect was delightful, and I enjoyed it thoroughly, warts and all. If you are a Robt. Montgomery fan or an aficionado of peculiar murder stories, this picture is for you. And there is plenty of 'down' time to go to the fridge. It aired on TCM the other morning. -
hogwrassler24 June 2021I just watched Haunted Honeymoon on TCM. Robert Montgomery and Constance Cummings were good actors but they didn't didn't really click in this one. Robert Montgomery sure doesn't pass as an English lord with his American accent. It might have worked as a "Thin Man" movie with Nick and Nora on the case in upstate New York instead of the English countryside. The plot develops very slowly with the murder not being discovered until an hour after the start. There are couple of funny slapstick bits which could have been done by the Three Stooges. The first involves cleaning a chimney with a shotgun blast that results in enough blackface to have been in "The Jazz Singer." The second is a collision between Lord Wimsey's touring convertible and a hay truck, resulting in a hay filled convertible. The supporting actors are all great, especially Robert Newton. This is an OK murder mystery but nothing to fret about if you miss it.
-
An adaptation of Dorothy L. Sayers play and novel 'Busman's Honeymoon' that is less a mystery story and more a comedy with a mystery element. Robert Montgomery is plainly miscast as Lord Peter Wimsey but supporting him are a fine cast of British actors like Seymour Hicks, Leslie Banks, Robert Newton (obviously a villain), Googie Withers, Joan Kemp-Welch, Roy Emerton and Aubrey Mallalieu who keep one's interest going as the film's unsurprising plot unfolds.
-
SnoopyStyle3 October 2021Gentleman sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey (Robert Montgomery) and mystery author Harriet Vane Wimsey (Constance Cummings) are newlyweds. Both are trying to get out of the crime mystery business. They move into their new home in Scotland. There's a murder. Crime just keeps following them.
I expected this to be all Peter and Harriet. The movie opens with them and then spends over fifteen minutes with the locals and their personal melodramas. It's too much. The story needs to stay with Peter and Harriet. They generate a different tone from the other cast anyways. We, as the audience, need to discover the story along with them. It's an hour before they find the body. It's really a leisurely country stroll with a cast of country characters. Peter and Harriet are more side characters until they get to solve the case in the last act. This could be a fun mystery couple although this one is more about the various character actors. -
utgard1417 April 2022Not without its charms but for the most part it's a dry film that doesn't get the best use out of its charismatic star. Robert Montgomery doesn't shine here. If you've seen one made-in-England comedy from the period you pretty much know what to expect from this: a likable enough cast of mannered actors with few laughs and a patience-testing slow pace. It's not a terrible film of its type but I really can't recommend it.
-
Svengali-200111 July 2000Constance and Robert have a great deal of fun with this film although he is not my perfect idea of Lord Wimsey although he has a certain ironic charm. Hot on the heels of the great Night Must Fall, he lets his hair down here to ham it up a bit, but the locals are a match for anyone and everyone. This shows the British idea of eccentricity at its bizarre best.
-
mrnunleygo7 August 2021I recently watched this film on Turner Classic Movies, thinking that since I am long time fan of Dorothy Sayers' detective stories, I would probably like it. The opposite is likely true: someone who has never read a Sayers mystery might find some enjoyment in the film. It's hard to count the number of ways the film went wrong. First, the title. "Haunted Honeymoon?" There is no haunting whatsoever here, and no character in the movie who thinks there might be. Second, casting. I like Robert Montgomery, but he is too obviously American too play pass for such a quintessentially British character as Lord Peter Whimsey. Has anyone read Sayers' books? Constance Cummings, an American who'd lived in England for a number of years by the time this was filmed, does a little better as Harriet Vane. The movie handles this problem by ignoring it, and just assuming Montgomery--who doesn't even attempt at a British accent--will be accepted as Whimsey. Third, premise. At the film's beginning, we learn Whimsey has given up detective work and his bride-to-be Vane has given up writing novels. Are you kidding me? There is no way either character from the books would do that; it would be especially outrageously for the fiercely independent Vane. What's she planning to do? Be a little house-wifey? Fourth, characterizations. Here we have Bunter as a long-suffering valet who stumbles around, dropping things and not always understanding what's going on. Harriet Vane's Bunter is entirely masterful; it is one of the sources of humor in the book that he can solve problems that even the talented Lord Whimsey can't. Fifth, script. So much time is wasted on the ridiculous giving-up-detectiving premise that we get hardly any chance to get to know the villagers who comprise the supporting cast; each one gets to have a one-dimensional character with a single motive. Moreover, the investigative part, which is the core of any Peter Whimsey story--as it is of any good detective story--is delayed for over half of the movie. Two stars for fine acting all around--even from the miscast Montgomery--but the writers, director, and producer should all have been mysteriously murdered.
-
dougdoepke10 February 2015MGM specialized in upper-class motifs. Here it's newly-weds Lord and Lady Wimsey moving into a baronial mansion in rural England only to find that the previous owner has taken up final residence in the cellar. So, Wimsey being an amateur sleuth and she being a crime writer, the Lord and Lady's honeymoon must be postponed, despite their pledges to leave detecting to the police.
The film's generally too long such that the tepid script gets stretched beyond plot capacity. As others point out, the mystery doesn't get going til the last 20-minutes. The production does manage some local color, especially the lady who dabbles in exotic jams. That reluctant tasting scene is really well done, showing the Lord and Lady's comedic potential. Too bad there's so little follow-up. Also, there's the handyman who cannonades his gun up a chimney flue, perhaps the movie's high point as the soot comes raining down on the shooter.
But a key problem is the talented Montgomery who, for whatever reason, lacks flair here for a William Powell type role. As Wimsey, he stirs up neither much interest, nor amusement. Maybe, if the script had given him a quirky habit, that might have helped. But, I guess his role is an adaptation of a literary figure, so he may have felt constrained. Nonetheless, between his uninspired turn and a limp narrative, there's not much left to recommend. All in all, the movie's a really minor entry in the Gentleman Sleuth Sweepstakes. Too bad. -
CinemaSerf13 February 2023The criminal fraternity is about to breathe an huge sigh of relief. "Lord Peter Wimsey" (Robert Montgomery) and his crime-writing fiancée "Harriet" (Constance Cummings) are to marry - and to hang up their magnifying glasses. That is, until they arrive at their new/her old home and first thing they discover after he has carried her over the threshold is - a body! It belongs to "Noakes" from whom "Lord Peter" bought the property and soon they must work with old friend "Insp. Kirk" (Leslie Banks) to identify the killer - and boy, are there a few suspects who loathed the unpopular old fellow. The remainder of their investigation involves a cactus and some well timed electrics - and Robert Newton's ("Crutchley") and his girlfriend - and the deceased man's beneficiary -"Aggie" (Joan Kemp-Welch) are heading to the top of the list. Sir Seymour Hicks chips in occasionally as their friend "Bunter" but to be honest this film really only serves to suggest the end of something... The war had started and the days of this kind of whimsical "Wimsey" were already numbered. It's far too long too - it could easily lose half an hour and that way offer us a better, more condensed mystery but it's still just about worth a watch.
-
malcolmgsw23 September 2015This was one of the MGMfilms made at Denham studios prior to the construction of their studios at Boreham Wood.Probably made in the UK to take advantage of the me quota requirements introduced by the 1938 act.This gave double quota for more expensive films.Michael Balcon was briefly in charge till he clashed with Louis B Mayer and left for Ealing.The problem with this film is that it is far too long.It spends the first 20 minutes without starting to advance the plot.The result being that by this time you have lost all interest in the film and therefore by the time the film really starts you could not care less.Looking at the credits 3 writers get credit but it probably had the input of many more.So. it becomes something of a dog's dinner.Any thriller made at Merton Park is better than this
-
Michael_Elliott2 July 2012Haunted Honeymoon (1940)
* 1/2 (out of 4)
British film from MGM has Lord Peter Wimsey (Robert Montgomery) marrying mystery writer Harriet Vane (Constance Cummings) but their honeymoon is very short as they investigate a murder together. If you look at the title and are expecting some sort of supernatural film then it's best to get that out of your mind. After viewing this film I started to look around and read some other reviews and it seems that the majority of them were negative, although very few were as negative as my thoughts on the film. To me this was one of those films where as soon as something happens it hits your eyes, travels to your brain and then your brain forgets what you just saw in the matter of seconds. I really can't remember too many films where what was going on was simply traveling past me simply because of how uninterested I was in anything going on. I think there are a couple major problems with this picture but the main one is Montgomery. There's no question that he was a fine actor but this here has to be one of his worst performances if not the worst. I think to say he was miscast would be an understatement because it's clear that he was just the wrong person for this part. Perhaps had the film stayed closer to its source material, the play Busman's Honeymoon, then the actor could have done more with it. This film version goes for more romantic charms than mystery and the actor just suffers the entire time. Cummings really isn't any better and the two lack any real chemistry. Another major problem is that the director just never makes anything interesting happen on the screen in terms of style, energy or anything else that you can think of. HAUNTED HONEYMOON is a real snoozer from start to finish.