Of all Republic's directors, John H. Auer was the most consistently stylish and imaginative. This is a good but by no means outstanding example of his work, exemplified by arresting camera movements (the swift tracking shots through the jungle after the rescue), sharp cutting, long takes, deep focus compositions and fast-paced dialogue. Where Auer fails in this film is with his cast. Admittedly Vera Ralston gives one of her best portrayals in a dramatic film. In addition, she is lovingly photographed and stunningly costumed. Certainly, she looks the part! Less at home is George Brent. He looks far too old for a romantic lead. He is often seen from unflattering camera angles, the photographer taking few pains to disguise his double chin, receding hair-line and wrinkled neck. What is worse, Mr Brent's awkwardness in the role increases as the film progresses. In the climactic scenes, his performance is totally unconvincing. He even handles the off-screen narration with a lack of assurance that detracts from the effectiveness of the fade-out. True, the script is at its weakest in the final scenes — some might even describe it as absurd — and Auer has a habit of intercutting two tracking shots of people coming together, an otherwise fine idea which he turns into a distraction by filming the shots in the studio in front of an obvious process screen!Brian Aherne is almost as uncomfortable in his role as Mr Brent. He too is reasonably convincing in his earlier scenes and an almost total failure later on. Despite his billing, his part is very small. This and the unsuitability of the role doubtless influenced his decision to leave Hollywood. He did not return for five years.This was one of Constance Bennett's last films (her fourth last actually). She too is unflatteringly photographed and though she is in the film quite a bit her part is unglamorous. Aside from Miss Ralston, Fortunio Bonanova has the film's most dramatic piece. He handles it with some skill, the episode with the wounded panther owing as much to his chillingly delivered commentary as it does to Auer's sharp cutting and deft camera (and Miss Ralston's hair- raising screams)!A long-time associate of Republic boss Herbert J. Yates (who financed Auer's "The Crime of Dr Crespi" back in 1935), Auer was associate producer on all his latter-day Republic assignments and his influence might justly be said to pervade every aspect of his films. He contributed to the script, closely supervised the art direction (his films usually have considerable location footage, but this one is an exception — aside from a few small shots, chiefly at the climax, it was lensed entirely in the studio, making use of stock material for the establishing shots of the jungle in the pre- credits sequence, the brief flashes of Rio, the races, etc.). On his thirties' films Auer usually had the services of Republic's ace cinematographer Jack Marta, but here he has Reggie Lanning, never a first-class photographer, whose indifferent day-for-night shooting in the car chase sequence and failure to dim his lighting on players who are heavily made up, destroys much of the film's illusion.Auer was more fortunate on other aspects of the film. The editing especially, where the thrilling sequence prior to the headhunters' attack is built up by increasing the tempo of the cutting; and also the rapid montage of Rio stock footage turned over like the pages in a book. Another editing highlight is at the very end when the whole film is reprized in less than 30 seconds!Taking a cue from RKO producer Val Lewton, the headhunters are never actually shown. Rather we sense their presence through Auer's expert handling of atmosphere and his brilliant use of sound effects — the drums rising to a crescendo, and then the stillness.In the Lydeckers, Republic had the best special effects men in the business. There are two superlative examples of their work in this film: the plane crash which is utterly convincing thanks to their meticulous attention to the smallest details (notice the light moving down the length of the model plane, a realistic touch which ties in with the cut to the full-scale studio mock-up as Brent opens the door); and Judy's car hurtling over the cliff with its brilliant use of a subjective camera.Production values are always high in Vera Ralston's vehicles (after all, she was the boss' wife!). The sets are many and varied, large and lavishly appointed, and there is no stinting on dress extras.

Like many, I have been seeking out the films of Vera Hruba Ralston for years. Other than the few films she did with John Wayne, they've been rather obscure, and you had to really search the schedules of the late, late show to find them. I managed to find a few here and there, but even the major classic movie channels have skipped over them. "Angel on the Amazon" is the one I've seeked out the most, first because of its Maria Montez like title, second because of veteran stars George Brent and Constance Bennett, matinée idols in the early 1930's, but basically reduced to B films by the early 1940's. They are still striking to look at, and when compared to the dull Ms. Ralston, they are Lunt and Fontanne.This starts off with pure adventure and great promise as explorer Brent and doctor Bennett head into the jungle and end up crashing, rescued from headhunters by Ralston who disappears as fast as she arrives. Brent and Bennett end up in Rio del Janeiro, ironically running into her, and coming across secrets so shocking that you won't believe it...that is if you're not the most gullible person on the planet. The fact that the leads play it so completely serious makes it almost funny, especially as the second half overloads itself with flashbacks.I wish this had been made in color; it seems to cry out for it with the exotic settings. There's a lot of continuity issues as well, with time periods in the flashbacks seemingly set in the present day. By being in the past yet seemingly living in modern times, this makes you wonder if they didn't even bother hiring a continuity director. I've mentioned in my reviews of Ralston's films that she's more just boring than awful, and with Brent, Bennett and fellow veteran Brian Aherne surrounding her, that is much more obvious. Still, this is a fascinating failure, and one that even with its many flaws, it's totally irresistible.

This odd, hard-to-see romantic fantasy (I finally tracked it down in a poor TV dupe from a trader) is a curio at best, without the atmosphere, charm or casting to pull off the very silly concept it plays with a very straight face. Vera Ralston plays the mysterious jungle-dwelling woman who bewitches Brian Aherne when his plane accidentally crash-lands in the area. Flashbacks eventually reveal the cause of her skittishness as a sort of supernatural curse that has already caused tragedy. Everyone seems to be punching the clock here, including the director. The big problem, of course, is Ralston: As usual, she's asked to play a character whose charms fascinate everyone, and as usual those charms seem very elusive to the viewer. The Republic Studio executive who married and tirelessly promoted her as a star despite the public's complete lack of enthusiasm must truly loved her to be so blind. She's not the worst actress ever to grace the screen, but she is wooden and not as attractive as the film insists she is. Constance Bennett has a humiliating role that is perhaps a typical 1948 notion of a "sympathetic" part for an actress of a certain age who's no longer a star: She's a professional woman whom Aherne treats as a best friend, though of course she's hopelessly in love with him. He's completely oblivious to that, natch, because he's so besotted with the younger, beautiful Ralston—something that seems particularly humiliating here because frankly the latter isn't all that beautiful. (She's more the kind of woman one might call "handsome," in that she has good features but little humor or vivacity to light them up.) The bones of the story might have been ideal for more florid, "exotic" treatment, like a Maria Montez vehicle. But the execution is surprisingly talky and flat, too pedestrian even to have much camp value. Too bad, because its mix of romantic sentimentality and kitsch fantasy should have made for something more memorable than this fairly dull "B" (though by Republic standards it was probably close to an "A").

Genre films of the late 40's are particularly interesting to me. Many of them have strong elements of film noir (i.e. snappy dialogue, moody settings, diabolical villains, etc.) and they often had offbeat plot lines."Angel on the Amazon" is quite entertaining with a competent cast, jungle thrills, love triangles, and a haunted femme fatale. One surprisingly intense flashback scene was that of a panther that was stalking sleeping members of a safari (complete with well staged high angle shots).I recommend that any fan of vintage genre films to seek out this B+ film title out.