Reviews & Ratings for
"Perry Mason" The Case of the Long-Legged Models (1958)

« Prev | 33 of 271 Episodes | Next »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 4 reviews in total 

12 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Guns for everybody!

7/10
Author: kfo9494 from United States
28 October 2011

In this episode, George Castle (Joe De Santis) plays a role where he is liken to a 1930's mobster. He is tough, rude and will do anything to advance his bank account even to the means of breaking the law. So when he is murdered I can bet that no tears were shed. I think justifiable homicide is more of a proper charge than murder.

Anyway this shady character is trying to shake down Stephanie Faulkner (Peggy McCay) by making her sell some Las Vegas property for far below value in order to pay for her dead father's debt. (Oh yes, He killed her father).

George Castle finally meets his end at a local motel just minutes before a visit by Stephanie. And for some silly reason, she just happens to have the murder weapon in her apartment when Lt Tragg makes his rounds.

She got the gun from a friend Michael Gavin Sr (Lyle Talbot) when he gave it to her for protection from Mr Castle. But there is a problem. Mr Gavin Sr owns three identical guns that he gives away like penny bubblegum. Thus Perry is left to defend Stephanie from the evidence presented by the district attorney's office.

While watching this episode you have to concentrate on the guns. At times it can be difficult but keep all eyes and ears open or you will not find the ball under the cup.

This episode needs more attention than most so it is not an easy watch. But if you 'hold-the-rope' till the end you will see one of the sweetest courtroom confessions in the entire 'Perry Mason' series. Not to mention the 'Harold and Maude' ending.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Dolls and Guns

9/10
Author: darbski from omaha, ne
24 May 2017

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

**SPOILERS** Possible, because two of the women who could be suspects were babes. Junior's wife, and Pop's secretary. Then, of course, the guns. The storytellers do a very good job of shuffling them around. When Perry finally straightens out the granny knot these weapons present, it becomes clear who did it.

Now, Perry's path must be obvious. Eva obviously (that's the way I'd argue it), killed Castle in self defense when she tried to get him to stop bullying her; he gets her off, and then, naturally, Paul starts dating her (kind of like usual). Reason: she's serious babe, the dead guy was a "rattfink", and that's good enough for all clear thinking guys like me.

Della is, as usual, the main babe. Now, occasionally, she has competition from other beautiful babes the studio send over (and they're all really good actresses), but so is she. In this case, according to IMDb, Alix Talton, who played Eva (bad girl) was a Miss Georgia, and it's obvious why.

When Tragg escorts her from the courtroom at the end of this case, although; she has not yet confessed to anything, been advised of her rights, been charged with anything. All she did at that time was say she was sorry to the defendant (miss church mouse of 1958), and wish that her luck had held out just once.

It shouldn't be hard to prove that Castle killed Stephanie's father, he was a really bad guy, and society was done a favor by Eva; I mean, she might have been naughty, but NOT really bad, you know? We, the jury, having taken the time to "understand" her, say she's okay in our book, and she should get a better job.

Disclaimer, here: the word "Rattfink" is actually, in this case, a compliment, compared to what he should have been called. The spelling attaches to the word "Raggmopp", a truly famous musical song, later again used in "Ruggratt". The character Rat Fink is a creation of Ed "Big Daddy" Roth, and everyone of us guys who were teenagers at that time know just what I'm referring to.

Was the above review useful to you?

Illogical, Immaterial, & Incompetent

1/10
Author: WYAdams
24 May 2017

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Warning, this review contains spoilers.

1) I'll call Michael Garvin Sr., Senior.

2) I'll call Michael Garvin Jr., Junior.

Now, the guns. Using Hamilton Burger's labels:

1) The "Junior Gun" gun is the gun owned by Junior.

2) The "Holster Gun" is the gun Senior carries in his holster.

3) The "Vault Gun" is the gun Senior keeps in his locked vault.

Perry takes a gun that has one shot fired from it from his client who will be accused of the murder. He takes her to the office of Junior. He asks to see the "Junior Gun" which he supposedly accidentally shoots, causing the bullet to hit the desk. He gives it back to Junior and has him give it to his client in exchange for the gun she has.

It all backfires because the "Junior Gun" his client has turns out to be the actual murder weapon.

This is where the whole plot is derailed. At the trial it comes out that the weapon his client had (the murder weapon) was the "Junior Gun" which she got from Junior the morning AFTER the murder. We know for a fact that it is the "Junior Gun", because Junior scratched his initials on it. Since she got the murder gun AFTER the murder, it is impossible for her to have committed the murder. No one, including Perry realizes this, so the trial continues.

To make the plot even more illogical, it turns out that the weapon that Perry's client had was the "Holster Gun" given to her by Senior. After giving away his "Holster Gun", Senior replaced it with his "Vault Gun." The night of the murder, he took a shower and changed his clothes taking about 30 minutes. During that time, his secretary, who has the combination, took the "Vault Gun", went to the nearby murder victim's house, shot him, returned, and replaced the gun. So the actual murder weapon was the "Vault Gun" which Senior now had in his holster.

If the vault gun was the murder weapon, which only Senior and his secretary had possession of on the night of the murder, then the "Junior Gun" could not have been the murder weapon as proved by the police lab.

I gave this episode, ONE STAR, rating it AWFUL, because of the sloppy illogical plot line.

1) The wrong weapon was proved to be the murder weapon.

2) The defendant did not have the murder weapon at the time of the murder, but the trial proceeded as if she did.

3) Since Senior had already given away his "Holster Gun" and replaced with his "Vault Gun" before the murder, it would not have been locked in the vault for the secretary to steal and use.

4) Perry had no reason to focus on the "Vault Gun" as the murder weapon.

5) The secretary's confession was illogical because the "Vault Gun" was not the murder gun according to the police lab.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Not one of the better mysteries

5/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
29 July 2014

An unusual opening for this Perry Mason where gambler/racketeer Joe DeSantis murders Russell Thorson. Raymond Burr's eventual client Peggy McCay suspects DeSantis of killing her father and when DeSantis winds up dead it's only natural that the police suspect McCay. They even find a gun in her possession. Plus the fact that DeSantis was squeezing Thorson pretty heavily for gambling losses in Las Vegas.

It's pretty obvious who murdered DeSantis as a motive is given with the character that's clear as a bell. The real trick here is that the weapon used was one of three identical revolvers that car dealer Lyle Talbot has in his possession. When we figure out who has the weapon and how one of them came to murder Thorson the mystery is solved.

But not one of the better mysteries.

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
External reviews Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history