recommended

A Masterpiece!

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

After a couple of seasons of the Perry Mason TV series (1950s-1960s), viewers were waiting and watching for the episode in which Mason would finally marry his secretary, Della Street. But the wait continued through more than two dozen TV movies in the 1980s and early 1990s. And Raymond Burr and Barbara Hale never did tie the knot. Actually, that was true to the Mason story as written by Erle Stanley Gardner in some 82 novels. Gardner wrote his novels up until his death in 1970, two of which were published after his death. And, while his readers knew that the criminal lawyer and his trusted right-hand woman would never marry, there was that hope among viewers that somehow the union would be made in one of the last films. The reason for that hope sprang, no doubt to some extent, from the earliest Perry Mason movies. Way back in 1936, Perry and Della did marry, and it was in this, the fourth film which was made in 1936. Warren William and Claire Dodd had the roles in a script that was built around the couple's marriage. Gardner may not have liked the way his hero was portrayed in the early films, but William made an excellent Mason who was more sleuth and detective than lawyer. And the Warner Brothers team that wrote the marriage into this film made it work well. The mystery of the book is still in "The Case of the Velvet Claws." But here it is cleverly developed around Perry and Della's marriage. And the marriage, honeymoon night with many interruptions, and periodic reunions of the newlyweds add wonderful humor to the story. This is a very enjoyable film, start to finish. I especially enjoyed how Perry handles a double-cross. Not just once, but twice. I think others will too. The only sad thing about this film was that it was to the be the last with Warren William in the lead role.

I saw this together with another Perry Mason film from the very same year. They could not be more different.The other film leveraged the detective genre and the Gardner formula. It used the twists, the detective and the trial as intended.This one is more of a Thin Man clone: banter, silliness. It has Perry as simply a detective. There is a twist, and it could have been very effective. (The person accused and protected by Mason believes she is the killer and tries to frame Mason.) But it gets lost in the attempt at entertainment of a different kind. I think what happened is that Warner decided to change their approach after this and get back to what makes Perry work.On the relationship with the audience, there is an implied link when Perry addresses a jury; that link has him directly speaking to us. In this one, that is gone and the relationship with the viewer is established in a more theatrical way: they act silly and we are supposed to giggle.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

After the disgraceful silliness of THE CASE OF THE LUCKY LEGS, Warren William's Perry Mason seems back on firm ground in a film that takes itself much more serious without forgetting to include healthy doses of character humor. What sets this one apart from the others is Perry & Della getting MARRIED (a development completely forgotten in the follow-up that starred Ricardo Cortez) and Perry being the #1 murder suspect, having been to see the victim moments before he was bumped-- a situation he has all too often had to get his clients out of-- including the woman's husband in this case. She had threatened both Perry and her husband with a gun, and would only NOT be a suspect to anyone watching this because it would just be "too obvious"!! Of WW's 3 Dellas, my favorite, Claire Dodd returns after having been absent from the previous installment. All 3 Dellas in the first 4 pictures have something to recommend them, I just happen to think Dodd is the most attractive (though Genevieve Tobin's was without a doubt the FUNNIEST). Sadly, Allan Jenkins, who played in cop in ...THE HOWLING DOG and "Spudsy" Drake in eps. 2 & 3, is replaced here by Eddie Acuff, who just doesn't seem to "work". Very oddly, Olin Howard returns as Coroner Wilber Strong from ...THE CURIOUS BRIDE, after having played a different doctor in the previous film! (Did anyone at Warner Brothers care about "continuity" in this series??) The standard routine of set-up, murder, investigation and courtroom expose so far is limited to ...THE HOWLING DOG. In WW's other 3 films, he solves the murders at a dinner party, in his office during a medical check-up, and at the hang-out of the killer before moving on to the street in front of a hotel. The only time we see the inside of a courtroom in this film is when Perry & Della get hitched-- and when she tries to have it annulled. CRAZY!! The other point of interest for me was actress Carol Hughes (my favorite "Dale Arden" from 1940's FLASH GORDON CONQUERS THE UNIVERSE) who is almost completely unrecognizable in here due to bright blonde hair and a southern accent.I love Warren William's Perry Mason-- I DO! And I wish he'd done a lot more of these. But I also wish he'd done more like the 1st one, where at least, despite the huge differences, I could actually recognize the format and the character of the "real" Perry Mason, instead of this rambling comedic chaos WB kept foisting on audiences!

Case of the Velvet Claws, The (1936) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Fourth film in Warner's Perry Mason series once again features Warren William as the lawyer. This time out Perry is about to go on his honeymoon when a woman kidnaps him at gunpoint and asks for him to blackmail a newspaper so that her name won't be brought up in a love affair which will ruin a big politician. The bribe doesn't work but soon the woman's husband ends up dead and Mason is the suspect. This is a pretty good film that's nothing special but it makes for a quick 63-minutes worth of entertainment. The best thing the film has going for it is the performance of William who also picks up after the previous film. He's full of charm and anger this time out and those are two things William can do with ease. Sadly Allen Jenkins isn't in this one. He's replaced with a new assistant played by Eddie Acuff and he's comedy just doesn't work. The case itself is pretty good as is the ending.