Do you have any distractions in life? We do; we’re shamelessly distracted by anything Bright and Shiny.
Once upon a time, though, before the onslaught of mobile devices, television was a big distraction for many folks. And it’s still a hugely profitable business. According to Statista.com, worldwide television revenue was approximately $243 billion US in 2019.1
There was always the potential to make a lot of moola in the TV biz. Look at the mystery/thriller Murder by Television (1935 – 1935!), starring Bela Lugosi as man trying to coerce a stubborn inventor into selling a fantastic new technology: The ability to broadcast to the Entire Country without relay stations!
Lugosi is secretly hired by Continental Tele-Vising to persuade his daytime boss (Charles Hill Mailes) to sell the broadcasting technology. Mailes is also being courted by CMP Television Corporation, but he’s not anxious to sell to anybody, “not even for five million dollars!”
Lugosi and his CMP competitor (George Meeker) must outmaneuver each other to secure Mailes’s technology. Although Lugosi works for Mailes in a Day Job, Meeker is dating Mailes’s daughter (June Collyer), so it’s hard to say who has more influence with the reluctant inventor.
However, the technology is far more lucrative than Mailes realizes, and it soon becomes evident his life is in Danger.
During a live broadcast, Mailes collapses, which is initially dismissed as fainting “from over excitement.” Alas, Mailes is dead, and both Lugosi and Meeker become Prime Suspects.
Murder by Television is a movie of distractions. There’s the main Distraction, television, along with the usual distractions of a murder mystery. Clues that seem important turn out to be Red Herrings, and seemingly innocuous actions taken by characters are later seen to be Significant.
Other distractions include: Collyer’s attraction to Lugosi; Hattie McDaniel (who has cringing and outdated-stereotypical lines, but is so good you miss her when she’s not on screen); and a man who keeps sneaking into the inventor’s house, saying, “I have Business here!”
The film shows us how easy it is to be distracted by what we think we see. Scenes from earlier in the film are later re-enacted, but from the viewpoint of characters who were previously out of view. This shows us we don’t know as much as we like to believe.
The whole thing is, however, is a Mess.
The budget, according to IMDb was $35,0002 and looks it. Plus, because the movie has fallen into Public Domain Purgatory, available copies are poor quality.
It also seems like some scenes have been deleted, because, frankly, the movie makes little sense. There are some weird leaps in the storyline due to Missing Info that would help an audience member Keep Up.
Not that it matters, because – Spoiler! – the Big Clue is in the title of the film.
June Collyer is distracted by Lugosi in a tux, and who can blame her? Image: IMDb
Television was not an everyday household item in 1935 North America. Although the idea of television began in the 1800s, apparently, it wasn’t until 1927 that the first televised demonstration aired in London.3
The first television sets made for home use were sold in the United States in 1939. History.com says by the mid-1940s, the US had 23 television stations, and there were 1 million TV sets in American homes by 1949.4
For all its flaws, Murder by Television places us in an era when society was on the cusp of a world-changing medium. The film, curiously, says television would be beneficial to government and policing agencies by suggesting it could be used for surveillance.
Ultimately, we cannot, in Good Conscience, recommend this movie, unless you are a Bela Lugosi completist, or you have an interest in television history. The cast is excellent, but the story is too jumbled.
Murder by Television: starringBela Lugosi, June Collyer, Huntley Gordon. Directed by Clifford Sanforth. Written by Joseph O’Donnell. Cameo Pictures, 1935, B&W, 53 mins.
Agreed. Some really intersting ideas here, especially when scenes are repeated from with different points of view. Maybe someone will find the original cut someday…
Great post! I did look into TV history recently, very interesting. In the UK, very few homes had TVs even in the 50s, cinemas on the other hand were very numerous.
I still have my great-grandmother’s 1948 Admiral television (model 24A12 with bakelite finish). .And I thought THAT was old–didn’t know people were talking about tv in the mid-30s!
I hate it when public domain films are treated so shabbily, thrown onto cheap DVD collections without any care, often missing crucial minutes/scenes. In most cases, you probably don’t want to hold your breath waiting for a decent release. Murder by Television is interesting for that ’30s television (!) novelty, but I’ve seen other reviewers warn potential viewers off. A better choice perhaps is another, earlier Lugosi film that’s at least somewhat related — The Death Kiss (1932) is about a murder on a movie set (unfortunately, somewhat timely), and Lugosi plays a movie studio manager who is a red herring. It’s got a respectable 6.1 score on IMDb, and it too, is pretty easy to find.
What is this thing you call “television”? It’s interesting that the use of TV for surveillance came to fruition. I watch a lot of British detective shows and many culprits have been captured thanks to clues provided by closed circuit television (CCTV as the cops say).
I kept thinking as I read this, “Well, they tried”–it looks like it might flirt with So Bad It’s Good territory. Your post was a lot of fun, though. Thanks again for joining the blogathon. It’s a pleasure, as always!
Yeah, it’s too bad it didn’t live up to its potential. The missing scenes don’t help much, either. But a restored version, with all the missing bits, might be worthwhile.
Silver Screenings 
I’m taking your advise and steering clear of this one, but I sure enjoyed reading about it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It just seems like scenes have been deleted for whatever reason. I would love to see the original release.
LikeLike
I am keen to see Bela Lugosi after seeing Ed Wood but maybe not this one then… It does sound like a good cast though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A terrific cast here, but not even they can save this movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do hate a film like that, watched one like that recently and was mentally shouting at the telly for them to get out of there!
LikeLiked by 1 person
What a pity, such a great potential just wasted! Could have been a masterpiece… shame.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. Some really intersting ideas here, especially when scenes are repeated from with different points of view. Maybe someone will find the original cut someday…
LikeLike
If this movie and I should happen to cross paths I know this Bela fan will be distracted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bela is quite a dish in this one. He makes it almost worth watching.
LikeLike
Hi, Ruth. I didn’t know that there were TV broadcasts in the 1930s. I always thought that it all began in the 40s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Crazy, isn’t it? I was really surprised to learn that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sounds like a wonderful addition to the Saturday Matinee! 🙂 Jumbled and incoherent. My favorite kind of bad film! 🙂
I also thought TV didn’t exist before the 40s. Shows how much I know. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
That film TOTALLY deserves the Saturday Matinee treatment!
LikeLike
Great post! I did look into TV history recently, very interesting. In the UK, very few homes had TVs even in the 50s, cinemas on the other hand were very numerous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The UK had the right idea. Cinemas are always way more fun.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suppose TV ultimately was responsible for the decline of cinemas, in much the same way as car ownership resulted in the decline of public transport.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, I’ve never heard of this one before. Thanks for spotlighting it. Will have to check it out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have a look…but don’t expect too much, even with this fab cast.
LikeLike
I still have my great-grandmother’s 1948 Admiral television (model 24A12 with bakelite finish). .And I thought THAT was old–didn’t know people were talking about tv in the mid-30s!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Whoa! A 1948 Admiral? Nice!! How big is the screen?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s so tiny!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hate it when public domain films are treated so shabbily, thrown onto cheap DVD collections without any care, often missing crucial minutes/scenes. In most cases, you probably don’t want to hold your breath waiting for a decent release. Murder by Television is interesting for that ’30s television (!) novelty, but I’ve seen other reviewers warn potential viewers off. A better choice perhaps is another, earlier Lugosi film that’s at least somewhat related — The Death Kiss (1932) is about a murder on a movie set (unfortunately, somewhat timely), and Lugosi plays a movie studio manager who is a red herring. It’s got a respectable 6.1 score on IMDb, and it too, is pretty easy to find.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Death Kiss sounds interesting, and I see there’s a half-decent copy on YouTube. (Who doesn’t love a movie about the movies?) Thanks!
LikeLike
Wow, Ruth, this one sounds like quite the movie! Such an interesting premise. Love all the history you included as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d love to see the original, un-tinkered with release.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What is this thing you call “television”? It’s interesting that the use of TV for surveillance came to fruition. I watch a lot of British detective shows and many culprits have been captured thanks to clues provided by closed circuit television (CCTV as the cops say).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah, yes, the ol’ CCTV. Those crooks don’t have a chance!
I thought it interesting the 1935 film would talk about television’s potential for surveillance.
LikeLike
I kept thinking as I read this, “Well, they tried”–it looks like it might flirt with So Bad It’s Good territory. Your post was a lot of fun, though. Thanks again for joining the blogathon. It’s a pleasure, as always!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You make a good point. If only a person could see the original release – sigh. Thanks for hosting this blogathon. It was a lot of fun!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re very welcome–glad you had a good time! 🙂
LikeLike
I’m already jumbled enough, thanks. But this was a fun read, as always. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha! Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great post 👍
LikeLike
Interesting analysis! I’m a big Lugosi fan, but haven’t seen this one yet (sad to hear that it isn’t all that good).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, it’s too bad it didn’t live up to its potential. The missing scenes don’t help much, either. But a restored version, with all the missing bits, might be worthwhile.
LikeLiked by 1 person