Nice effects though.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

This has to be one of the worst films I have seen for a long time - lacking logic and continuity in the plot, and with a denouement that has a lot to do with the saving of a machine for posterity, but how the story got there is anyone's guess. Many scenes take place in blackness. There are a few well-staged fight sequences, but really nothing else to attract the attention.

I got this film in a 9 movies in one collection in a Wal-Mart bargain bin. The story is about a guy who creates "death-beam" like creation that could help Britian win wars (Sure would have been useful against Nazis). Anyway, the death-beam gets stolen and ... Thats the thing, I have no freaking idea whats going on. From what I can remember, people go into places and fight and talk and dance. This goes absolutely nowhere. Im stuck watching people mumble and fight. Seriously BORING.Well, I would have given this a one if it were not for the good fight scenes. They were impressive considering the film was made 70 years ago. In these scenes, people are punched and have chairs smashed against their backs. It almost reminded me of old James Bond fight scenes, just without the good camera shots. Still, they don't save the movie from being utter junk.Only watch this film if you are interested or just wanna waste some time.

Don't be misled by Scotland Yard in the title of this movie, the only mystery here is how this film could ever be made. It starts out reasonably well, with the surreptitious passing of a coin from one shady character to another with instructions about a secret meeting. Apparently, a gang led by The Scorpion is after a death ray device unveiled by inventor Jerry Sheehan (Ralph Byrd) and his fiancée Hope Mason (Joan Barclay). The death ray knocks out an abandoned ship at sea at a range of 190 miles, and it's awesome power is seen as a deterrent to war for the civilized nations of the world.With that interesting premise, the movie quickly spirals out of control and into a never never land highlighted by a lot of activity with no purpose. Good guys and bad guys spend a lot of time slinking down alley ways, up and down stairs, back and forth through underground passages and in and out of a French cabaret. Heroes and villains are often disclosed no more than ten feet away from each other, each oblivious as to the presence of their foes. The only redeeming feature worth noting in this entire debacle is the actual demonstration of the death ray gizmo in an inspired moment of 1930's technical wizardry; you can turn off the film right there.And what's with the goofy Black Scorpion? This notorious villain slinks around entirely hunched over in a comical crouching position, with a lobster claw hand across his masked face. A feared denizen of the London underworld he is not, I'm at a loss as to how he put together a band of criminals.So what does the title have to do with the picture? Sir James Blake (Herbert Rawlinson) is a retired detective of Scotland Yard, and Uncle Jimmy to Hope Mason and her young brother Bobby. Odd that his character's name is in the title, while Byrd's performance receives top billing. The most intriguing thing about the movie for me was seeing a very young Dickie Jones in the role of Bobby Mason. He would grow up to be the Range Rider's sidekick in the early 1950's TV Western; for my money the best stunt rider ever."Blake of Scotland Yard" receives at least one distinction from me, it's now in my Bottom Ten films of all time. Those who may be tempted to give it a try, I'll quote a character from the film - "I advise you not to follow".

confusing tiresome plot; exasperatingly inane action; tries to be cute by using current "in" references but ends up being oh so lame. The longer serialized version perhaps is a little better but I have not seen it. You keep asking yourself over and over again "Why did they do a stupid thing like that?" when you see 1)the heroine enter a dangerous scene pushing the youngster ahead of her or 2) they keep shooting guns and weapons out of each others' hands instead of actually shooting the attacker himself or 3) when one character hiding and spying tells(in a 90 decibel voice) his accomplice to talk more softly or they will be uncovered, 4) and so on ad nausea. Obviously meant for an uncritical 10-year-old audience.