Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Marketic It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

gridoon2018 I searched for this film for one reason only: I really liked Mary Brian in the W. C. Fields film "The Man On The Flying Trapeze", and wanted to see more of her. She is sweet and beautiful but a little bland in this film; in fact, I would say that two other actresses, Yola d'Avril as a French girl who loves the hero but is not loved back and Astrid Allwyn as the killer's girlfriend, make more of an impression. Although it is made by Monogram studios, which have a reputation for cheapness, "Monte Carlo Nights" has higher-than-expected production values, including a horse steeplechase and a daring jump from a moving train. But the story is unlikely, short on mystery, and not very engaging. This is not a bad movie, but if you miss it, you won't be missing much. ** out of 4.

Steve Adams This movie is not that bad, a decent time waster if you don't mind watching old black and white movies. I think most of the negative comments are coming from people who just don't like old black and white movies or they are expecting them all to be as good as Hitchcock, to that reviewer I say you are right it's not as good as any Hitchcock film but it is still a decent enough way to spend a couple hours.It's a mystery film noir type movie where the main character is accused of murder but escapes and strives to hunt down the real killer on his own to get revenge but also obviously to prove that he is innocent of the crime he has been accused of. The actor playing the main character gives a good performance and so does the actress in the main female role.

ptb-8 Well! I like this film and here's why: it is very well made, it has two excellent good looking stars in beautiful Mary Bryant and handsome John Darrow, it is MODERN as a 1934 pic can be, it is actually interesting, a lot of care is evident s the casting and costumes... and the art direction, set design and budget is clearly on show on screen. Best of all for me is that it is a 1934 Monogram Picture and this little film company started in 1931 as a very low rung indie was really getting up into big theatrical bookings and excellent box office success. This is a good small film with very strong screen cred. It comes from a small pulp fiction dime novel whodunit by schlockmeister E Phillips Oppenheim who possible ground out dozens of mystery thrillers in the 20s. Like KING KELLY OF THE USA made the same year at Monogram, it is a calling card to big chain theaters: this little film company was striving to please; and this film does in the ways described above. And at 60 minutes or so, it would have been booked everywhere and very profitable.... as I said on the KELLY comments... no wonder big bad wolf Herbert J Yates was waiting to gobble them up into Republic Pictures the next year, as he did, until Monogram wriggled free in 1937 and rattled on until 1988 (as Allied Artists). This is antique talkie fun... and very well made.

boblipton A man found guilty of a murder he didn't commit, a daring escape by leaping off a train crossing a bridge, a shooting in a café and a scrap of paper that leads to a denouement in Monte Carlo --- these are the plot points that tell you you're watching a great Hitchcockian thriller. Only it isn't a Hitchcock picture, it's directed by William Nigh for Monogram and it is pretty poor -- especially as we've seen Hitchcock do it right, starting a year later with THE 39 STEPS. Really, the main reason to see this movie is to serve as counterpoint to Hitchcock.Even the sound system seems off. Everyone speaks their lines with great emphasis as if every article is of great importance. There are some good actors lurking here, including gorgeous Mary Bryan, Astrid Allwyn and George 'Gabby' Hayes, clean-shaven, hair neatly combed and his teeth in. But really, you'd do yourself a favor by giving this one a miss.