The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse

2013 marks the 75th anniversary of Anatole Litvak’s The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse, starring Edward G. Robinson, Claire Trevor and Humphrey Bogart.  Since no one else will celebrate it, I will.  Why?  Well, for starters, did you see that title?  No one has character names like that anymore nor are they described as amazing unless they’re Spiderman.   The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse does something else more common to the thirties of the 20th century than the teens of the 21st century:  It goes all over the place, mixing comedy, thriller and crime elements with just a touch of social commentary and class satire.  And, for the most part, it succeeds.

Amazing Dr Clitterhouse 01

Seven years after Little Caesar, Edward G. Robinson was comfortable enough playing the non-gangster role that he fit into the role of Dr. Clitterhouse with ease.  Clitterhouse is a curious fellow, in both meanings of that phrase:  he’s both strange and has an inquiring mind when it comes to crime.  So much so that he decides to start robbing people he knows so that he can see what it feels like to commit a burglary.  The movie opens in the drawing room of a mansion, with a woman singing an operatic aria to dinner guests below while above, on the second floor, Dr. Clitterhouse empties the safe of its jewels.  As he’s doing this, another man enters through the window and Clitterhouse shines a flashlight in his face and tells him to freeze while he continues to calmly empty the safe.  The man is a member of a gang run by Rocks Valentine (Humphrey Bogart), who ducks out the window when he sees Clitterhouse detain his man.

When Clitterhouse leaves, the man from the gang jumps out the window and gets caught by the police, headed up by Detective Lane (Donald Crisp).  Lane is tired of the rash of burglaries and wants the case solved but can’t make any headway.  He’s a friend of Clitterhouse and, naturally, doesn’t suspect him of the crimes even though Clitterhouse has committed each one of them, much to his nurse’s horror, who’s now in on it after seeing the doctor’s bag filled with jewels.  With Lane in the dark about the burglar’s real identity, Clitterhouse is free to question him about the crimes and even find out who the top fence is in the area so he knows where to take the jewels to cash them in.   Jo Keller (Claire Trevor) is the biggest fence but Clitterhouse thinks it’s “Joe” Keller until he meets her and the sparks don’t fly.   What flies is impatience and annoyance at this strange doctor asking too many questions.

Annoyance, that is, until Clitterhouse reveals the jewels and, in an unexpected visit from the police, successfully puts the cops in their place in front of the crooks which impresses the crooks to no end.   Well, impresses everyone except Rocks Valentine, who has his eye on Jo and doesn’t like this newcomer coming in and showing everyone up.

Amazing Dr Clitterhouse 02

Clitterhouse offers his services to the gang.  He will set up the robberies and plan them down to the last detail and only ask in return that he be allowed to medically monitor them after each heist.  He’s convinced the body emits clues to the criminal mind that come out through the stress of doing a job.

If you’ve followed the story up to now, you might have noticed that it’s a little on the goofy side.  And it is.  The thing about The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse that I like so much is that it doesn’t let the goofiness of the nutty professor type Clitterhouse get in the way its thriller and crime elements when it needs them most.  It even lets social commentary sneak in without coming off as self-righteous or maudlin.  In fact, it gets it right to it with a quick, clean on-point statement from Jo when Clitterhouse asks her if she ever feels bad because what she’s doing is wrong.  She responds,

“Wrong?  Let me ask you something.  Would you ask that same question of the stock promoter who robs widows and orphans?  Or one of them society mugs who owns a bunch of firetrap tenement houses where the rats and bugs eat you alive?  The kind of place I was born in?  No, the way I look at it professor; me, you, all of us here are more on the level than those guys.”

The thing is, of course, what she’s doing is wrong and just because she compares it to what other unsavory characters do doesn’t make it any less so.  What’s interesting, especially considering that this is well into the production code period, is that she is in no way contradicted nor punished at any point in the film.  When the movie ends she’s still a criminal and she’s still free.  And happy.

In fact, the whole movie runs afoul of the production code for most of its plot, up to and including a murder that no one really gets punished for and one person connected with it doesn’t even get arrested.   What’s most interesting is how quickly Clitterhouse’s sanity comes into question at the very end before ending on a joke after the jury foreman collapses in the courtroom (long story).

Anatole Litvak gets great performances from his actors and isn’t afraid to create some terrific crane shots for what is, essentially, a silly little trifle, except when it isn’t.  With names like Robinson, Bogart, Trevor and Crisp, it’s no surprise the performances are so good but there’s also a rapid fire delivery that seems to predate Howard Hawks by at least a couple of years.  And the dialogue being delivered so rapidly is perfectly written for each character, no great surprise as John Huston was one of the writers.  It was the first time he was connected to Humphrey Bogart on a film but there would be several more higher profile movies to come.

Amazing Dr Clitterhouse 03

I won’t lie: The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse isn’t a masterpiece of cinema nor is it the best movie of 1938 but it is, for me, one of the most enjoyable.  Coming in at under an hour and a half but packing in more story than most three hour movies, The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse is entertainment of the kind they made when they had a lot of different talent and wanted to make a little something for everyone.  There’s comedy, satire, drama, crime, violence and a missed opportunity at love as only thirties cinema could do it.  It also manages to let most of the criminals go free without so much as a slap on the wrist as well as actively encourage the audience to root for them, several years into the production code period.  As Dr. Clitterhouse says to the camera as the story closes, “Amazing.”

23 Responses The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse
Posted By Jason : February 27, 2013 2:31 pm

The first time I watched this film, I really couldn’t make up my mind about what position to take. It certainly has elements of many different genres, but it doesn’t adhere to any of them with fidelity. At times it is hilarious, but I found other times where I was quite uncomfortable with some of the ethical violations (not to mention crime) committed by the eponymous character. Still an unusual piece atmospherically and in what they were able to get through the Hays Office.

Posted By Jason : February 27, 2013 2:31 pm

The first time I watched this film, I really couldn’t make up my mind about what position to take. It certainly has elements of many different genres, but it doesn’t adhere to any of them with fidelity. At times it is hilarious, but I found other times where I was quite uncomfortable with some of the ethical violations (not to mention crime) committed by the eponymous character. Still an unusual piece atmospherically and in what they were able to get through the Hays Office.

Posted By Qalice : February 27, 2013 4:28 pm

I caught this movie once as it was broadcast — missing the very beginning. After it ended, I just sat a moment. It’s not quite like any other movie I’ve seen, even though I’ve seen A LOT of Thirties movies. I recommend it for everything you’ve said. It’s brazenly odd; I can’t give it higher praise.

Posted By Qalice : February 27, 2013 4:28 pm

I caught this movie once as it was broadcast — missing the very beginning. After it ended, I just sat a moment. It’s not quite like any other movie I’ve seen, even though I’ve seen A LOT of Thirties movies. I recommend it for everything you’ve said. It’s brazenly odd; I can’t give it higher praise.

Posted By DevlinCarnate : February 27, 2013 5:48 pm

wow!…it’s been years since i’ve seen this,and it would make a great double bill with Brother Orchid…i hope TCM picks up the baton and programs both soon

Posted By DevlinCarnate : February 27, 2013 5:48 pm

wow!…it’s been years since i’ve seen this,and it would make a great double bill with Brother Orchid…i hope TCM picks up the baton and programs both soon

Posted By robbushblog : March 1, 2013 10:59 am

The title has always given me pause. I may have to check it out now.

Posted By robbushblog : March 1, 2013 10:59 am

The title has always given me pause. I may have to check it out now.

Posted By lishlovesmovies : March 2, 2013 4:16 pm

I enjoyed reading your review of this movie and agree with your sentiments. This movie was alot of fun to watch!

Posted By lishlovesmovies : March 2, 2013 4:16 pm

I enjoyed reading your review of this movie and agree with your sentiments. This movie was alot of fun to watch!

Posted By swac44 : March 3, 2013 12:21 pm

The title is the work of playwright Barre Lyndon (real name Alfred Edgar), who later contributed to the films They Came By Night and To Please a Lady.

Curioser and curiouser…

Posted By swac44 : March 3, 2013 12:21 pm

The title is the work of playwright Barre Lyndon (real name Alfred Edgar), who later contributed to the films They Came By Night and To Please a Lady.

Curioser and curiouser…

Posted By robbushblog : March 3, 2013 3:24 pm

Something tells me this Barre Lyndon was of a devious and somewhat one-track mind. I must watch these movies soon to observe any possible and obvious double entendres.

Posted By robbushblog : March 3, 2013 3:24 pm

Something tells me this Barre Lyndon was of a devious and somewhat one-track mind. I must watch these movies soon to observe any possible and obvious double entendres.

Posted By swac44 : March 3, 2013 4:51 pm

He also scripted the sound remake of Hitchcock’s The Lodger. (Lodger? I hardly know ‘er!)

Posted By swac44 : March 3, 2013 4:51 pm

He also scripted the sound remake of Hitchcock’s The Lodger. (Lodger? I hardly know ‘er!)

Posted By robbushblog : March 4, 2013 12:06 am

“Hitchcock”? ‘Nuff said.

Posted By robbushblog : March 4, 2013 12:06 am

“Hitchcock”? ‘Nuff said.

Posted By Commander Adams : March 6, 2013 5:17 pm

At the risk of getting permanently banned…the title of this film is RIPE for a porno parody, and as it happens, that what Humphrey Bogart, who hated the film, insisted on calling it by.

Posted By Commander Adams : March 6, 2013 5:17 pm

At the risk of getting permanently banned…the title of this film is RIPE for a porno parody, and as it happens, that what Humphrey Bogart, who hated the film, insisted on calling it by.

Posted By Benzadmiral : April 1, 2013 4:14 pm

Robinson was an all-around actor’s actor, wasn’t he? From gangster to milquetoast husband to criminology professor to gangster again, and in costume dramas and SF, he always delivered.

Posted By Benzadmiral : April 1, 2013 4:14 pm

Robinson was an all-around actor’s actor, wasn’t he? From gangster to milquetoast husband to criminology professor to gangster again, and in costume dramas and SF, he always delivered.

Posted By Scott Levine : December 2, 2013 2:49 pm

Can anyone identify the soprano singing “Una voce poco fa” and “The Last Rose of Summer” at the beginning of the movie?

Leave a Reply

Current day month ye@r *

MovieMorlocks.com is the official blog for TCM. No topic is too obscure or niche to be excluded from our film discussions. And we welcome your comments on our blogs and bloggers.
See more: facebook.com/tcmtv
See more: twitter.com/tcm
3-D  Action Films  Actors  Actors' Endorsements  Actresses  animal stars  Animation  Anime  Anthology Films  Art in Movies  Autobiography  Avant-Garde  Aviation  Awards  B-movies  Beer in Film  Behind the Scenes  Best of the Year lists  Biography  Biopics  Blu-Ray  Books on Film  Boxing films  British Cinema  Canadian Cinema  Character Actors  Chicago Film History  Cinematography  Classic Films  College Life on Film  Comedy  Comic Book Movies  Crime  Czech Film  Dance on Film  Digital Cinema  Directors  Disaster Films  Documentary  Drama  DVD  Early Talkies  Editing  Educational Films  European Influence on American Cinema  Experimental  Exploitation  Fairy Tales on Film  Faith or Christian-based Films  Family Films  Film Composers  Film Criticism  film festivals  Film History in Florida  Film Noir  Film Scholars  Film titles  Filmmaking Techniques  Films of the 1980s  Food in Film  Foreign Film  French Film  Gangster films  Genre  Genre spoofs  HD & Blu-Ray  Holiday Movies  Hollywood history  Hollywood lifestyles  Horror  Horror Movies  Icons  independent film  Italian Film  Japanese Film  Korean Film  Literary Adaptations  Martial Arts  Melodramas  Method Acting  Mexican Cinema  Moguls  Monster Movies  Movie Books  Movie Costumes  movie flops  Movie locations  Movie lovers  Movie Reviewers  Movie settings  Movie Stars  Movies about movies  Music in Film  Musicals  Outdoor Cinema  Paranoid Thrillers  Parenting on film  Pirate movies  Polish film industry  political thrillers  Politics in Film  Pornography  Pre-Code  Producers  Race in American Film  Remakes  Revenge  Road Movies  Romance  Romantic Comedies  Satire  Scandals  Science Fiction  Screenwriters  Semi-documentaries  Serials  Short Films  Silent Film  silent films  Social Problem Film  Sports  Sports on Film  Stereotypes  Straight-to-DVD  Studio Politics  Stunts and stuntmen  Suspense thriller  TCM Classic Film Festival  TCM Underground  Television  The British in Hollywood  The Germans in Hollywood  The Hungarians in Hollywood  The Irish in Hollywood  Theaters  Thriller  Trains in movies  Underground Cinema  VOD  War film  Westerns  Women in the Film Industry  Women's Weepies