XoWizIama Excellent adaptation.

Ceticultsot Beautiful, moving film.

BallWubba Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

blanche-2 It should come as no surprise that Erle Stanley Gardner, the author of the Perry Mason series, hated the way his hero was portrayed in the movies. Consider this: When he saw Raymond Burr walk in to audition for the part of Hamilton Burger, he told the casting people, "That's Perry Mason." One can just imagine, then, how fond he was of Warren William, Donald Woods and Ricardo Cortez.It's not so much the actors, of course, as the emphasis of the films -Warren William, whom I like a lot more than one of the posters on this site, always had a little too much fun, and his character was loosely modeled on Nick in "The Thin Man." Woods was very lawyer-like but lacked spark; Cortez had spark but was more on the smooth, streetwise side than the actual Perry of the books, who was a very intense young man, given to big speeches.In this film, Perry is asked to act as attorney for a caretaker's cat named Clicker who isn't black. That's because the title was decided upon after the film was made. The actual Gardner story is "The Case of the Caretaker's Cat," but black cats were hot in movie titles in the '30s. Peter Laxter's will states that the caretaker has his job for life, but one of the heirs wants the cat gone and is threatening to poison it. Laxter has died in a fire, but Perry soon surmises that he was murdered first and has the body exhumed. He also learns that Laxter cashed out a million dollars worth of stock and that a famous set of diamonds are missing. Two more murders follow. Clicker unknowingly provides an important clue to whodunit. The last few minutes of the film are done in flashback so that we can see how Perry put it all together.Not bad, but none of these men will ever be Perry Mason after Burr did the role so long on television. It's best to just look at these films as mystery stories and ignore the old, unattractive Paul Drake and the pronunciation of Hamilton Burger as Hamilton Berjer (in the Woods version). And that's the way Erle Stanley Gardner would have wanted it.

Bucs1960 For those of you who were convinced that Raymond Burr was the consummate Perry Mason, please take a gander at Ricardo Cortez in that role. You might be surprised at your reaction. This certainly doesn't mean that Burr was not great in the television series......it just gives us a different take on the character. Cortez, who is wonderful in most of his roles, truly shines as an urbane sophisticated Mason in a typical Erle Stanley Gardner tale of murder and mayhem. The Della Street (June Travis) and Paul Drake (Gary Owen) roles are very different from those portrayed on television and could have been fleshed out just a bit more, but I'm not complaining. It's Cortez, with those bedroom eyes and dark good looks who steals the show. I have seen the other Mason films with Warren William in the lead role and in my opinion it's no contest.The story line gets a little convoluted at one point but it all works itself out in the capable hands of our hero. It's unfortunate that this was the only outing as Perry Mason for Cortez but it is worth the watch. Catch it on TCM which may be the only place where is will be shown. You'll like it!!!!

Ripshin Personally, I am not fond of this film, although Cortez is fine as Mason. The 1930s hosted a brief Warner Brothers series, with three different men in the lead. This is the only movie I have seen from the period.The plot is convoluted, with a few too many characters. I am assuming that all were in the original story - I would love to see the Burr television take that was apparently shot over twenty years later. Speaking of which, I am one of those who grew up on Burr's Mason, so it is strange to experience another actor in the role. This film wastes Della and Drake, in my opinion.Harry Davenport provides his usual supporting role professionalism, albeit in a B movie a few notches below what he was probably accustomed to.Definitely worth a viewing.

mrsastor Because no actor has ever been more closely associated with his character than Raymond Burr as Perry Mason, modern audiences are often unaware that Earl Stanley Gardner's books and character predate the television series by over twenty years.It is unfortunate indeed that the actor most commonly associated with the role of Perry Mason in the 1930's is Warren William, not at all attractive and with an annoying tendency to play Mr. Mason as a less-than-scrupulous drunken buffoon of whom one marvels he was even able to find his way out of a gin joint, let alone find a murderer. With each successive Perry Mason film, Mr. William's portrayal grew more drunken and buffoonish, probably an attempt to cop the fantastically popular Thin Man of the day.Sorry folks, but Ricardo Cortez IS Perry Mason. In the only Mason film to cast Cortez in the lead role, Mr. Cortez ruins the role for all others and particularly blows Mr. Warren out of the water. Cortez is everything Mason is supposed to be; beautiful, rich and elegant, sophisticated and brilliant. No drunken buffoon here.As for the story, I remain clueless why the American version of this film was re-titled "The Case of the Black Cat". The book, and the episode of the television series some 25 year later, were named "The Case of the CARETAKER'S Cat", and even the cat that appears in the 1936 movie is not black. Aside from this peculiarity, this is a great story and well worth the watch. Easily the best of the Perry Mason movies produced during this time period, it compares favorably to the Philo Vance and Thin Man serials of its era.