Reviews

OK, OK, everyone, save a few, think this movie is a real mish-mosh. The title is misleading, in that you would expect a Broadway type atmosphere to what you are going to see. Not so. You have to think of this effort as a Waldorf Salad. Loved the nuts, hated the raisins. The apples were OK, the dressing, an abomination. Vera Zorina delightful, Kenny Baker pathetic. Andrea Leeds certainly no actress, Menjou could sleep walk (and did) through his part. See what I mean? Pick yer spot. For instance, not many people understand or appreciate the Ritz Brothers today. Me, I think they were super talented, European night club trained comedians with a finely honed edge to their bits, especially the pussy cat number. Edgar Bergen's lips moved. So what? His timing and handling of his partner, Charlie, and his wit are superb. The American Ballet (and I'm no fan of the Ballet) were a treat for the eyes and they certainly knew their craft. There's just enough to make you appreciate it, not enough to make you fast forward. The same goes for the Opera segments, just enough. Forget the story. It's an insult to the intelligence of a 10 year old. A girl gets picked to become an adviser to a movie producer, after he overhears her comments on a movie in progress at a location near her home. Gee, just like real life! Did I enjoy it? Yeah, I guess. Would I buy it to watch again? Probably not.

For some reason, I didn't see this show until it went into reruns. Now, I have to scramble early in the morning to catch it. Ted Danson does a great job as the crotchety doctor, with a less than desirable practice in a less than desirable neighborhood. His crabbiness extends to just about everyone, from his able assistant, Margaret (Hattie Winston) to her not so able helper, Linda (Shawnee Smith), and to his patients. His bedside manner is atrocious (long before House came along). He has no patience with authority or poor service from anyone. Yet, he comes off as lovable. (His battle to stop smoking is extremely funny). This is a tribute to Danson and the writers. The ensemble cast is near perfect. Alex Dessert as the blind newsstand owner, Jake, and Saverio Guerra as Bob, the regular at the diner who has few redeeming qualities, grows on you. Great show, this one kinda sneaks up on you.

Here is a remake of "It Happened One Night", the Oscar winner for Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert. Now, it's OK to remake a bad movie; you just may improve it. But never try to improve on a great film! I've been a Jack Lemmon fan for many, many years and often wondered if he'd ever made any really bad films. This picture gave me the answer, although I can't say that Lemmon gives a bad performance. He's just not Clark Gable, and shouldn't have tried to be. Miss Allyson is Miss Allyson, no matter what role she plays, and just doesn't carry this one off. To make matters worse, they made a sort of musical out of it. The songs are not memorable, nor do they fit. Their presence is something like a bump in a carpet. They just shouldn't be there. Honestly, if you're a June Allyson fan, you may find this effort amusing, otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time.

There are some wonderful things about this movie. Marion Davies could act, given the right property; she is wonderful in comedic roles. William Haines could act, and you can see why he was one of the screen's most popular leading men. (Until a potential scandal forced him from the business).

The story is a bit trite, but handled so beautifully that you don't notice. King Vidor's direction is one of the principle reasons for this. The producer? The boy genius, Irving Thalberg.

It's about movie making, and you get to see the process as it was done in 1928, the cameras, sets, directors directing and actors emoting. You get to see (briefly) some of the major stars of the day; even Charlie Chaplin does a turn as himself, seeking an autograph. You also catch glimpses of Eleanor Boardman, Elinor Glyn, Claire Windsor, King Vidor, and many others who are otherwise just names and old photographs.

Please, even if you're not a fan of the silents, take the time to catch this film when you can. It's really a terrific trip back in time.

This is one of a total of three 'streamliners' made by Bendix and Sawyer, about two Brooklyn mugs who strike it rich by building a successful cab company in New York. Stream liners were short (50 - 60 minutes) and to the point. While funny, this movie belongs strictly to Bendix. He is as he is in most of his later movies; a lovable bumbler, getting himself in and out of improbable but sometimes hilarious situations. This one concerns mix-ups and misunderstandings among McGuerin (Bendix), his wife (Bradley), his partner (Sawyer) and his fiancé, and their secretary, deliciously played by Woodward. Only Bradley seems a little out of sync, stiff and uncomfortable with her role, but beautiful none the less. Even Max Baer, as a fitness trainer, does well with his role (catch the bit with him as he turns around a picture of Joe Louis to face the wall. He was one of Louis's boxing ring victims). Perhaps it's the length of the movie, or the bit of miscasting, but the film seems just a bit out of kilter. But not enough so as to make it less than enjoyable.

Make no mistake, this one belongs to Charles Laughton. Bringing this role from the stage, his movements and facial expressions are over exaggerated and hammy by later standards. But he was a monumental talent.

The movie is a taut, well constructed murder mystery, with Laughton as a man who almost gets away with murder and an illicit affair. Almost. His wife (Dorothy Peterson, no mean actress in her own right) discovers both, and extracts her revenge in a marvelously twisted plot device, which almost, but not quite, pushes the boundaries of believability.

Veree Teasdale as the paramour who turns to blackmail is fine.

An early appearance by Ray Milland (billed as Raymond Milland) is credible, as the rich Australian nephew, who shows up at the wrong time (for him).

Have a watch.

Here is a movie musical what is a movie musical! Forget the story! It is slight at best, involving a he-man (Scott) inheriting a designing house in Paris. It comes complete with assistant (Dunne) and a phony countess (Rogers) and a band (complete with Astaire as leader) which has come to Paris with him. Why he is traveling with the band, or why Rogers is getting away with the phony royalty bit is never really explained. To be honest, the first half of the movie is totally missable and rather confusing. Scott as a love interest? Unable to see it. Dunne as a singer? Hard to take. Having said that, then, there is the dancing of Astaire and Rogers, unmatched by anyone before or since. No wonder tap and ballroom dancing has gone somewhat out of vogue. Once you see these two perform, everything and everyone else is a letdown. The music of Jerome Kern is some of the best ever put out for a movie. If you're under 35, you may never have had the opportunity to listen to "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes", "I Won't Dance" and the rest. Do yourself a favor - watch this movie just for the music and dancing. A wag once said that Fred Astaire looked so good in a tuxedo that he rented himself out to them. No one else looks so at ease in top hat and tails. The clothes are dated, maybe, but you get an idea of what real glamour can be. Yards and yards of exotic looking material draped over some delicious looking models, including a brief glimpse of the redoubtable Lucille Ball! Well worth the time it takes to watch!!

First, I avow that I am a Barbara Stanwyck fan. Secondly, I admit that I can tolerate Henry Fonda only in small doses. Together, they manage to make this film mediocre. The plot is predictable, and the dialog forgettable. Even the presence of Sam Levene, as the police lieutenant assigned to the 'case', is of little help in making this mish mosh work. He (Levene) played this same part many times in many movies during the thirties, and could have phoned this role in. In fact, I think he may have. The only bright spot, if there is one, would be Hattie McDaniel, as the maid of the rich, madcap (I hate that over used word!!) Miss Manton. Where Miss Manton obtained the money to live in the very lap of luxury is never explained. Alas, though, McDaniel is around for precious little of the footage. The rest of the supporting cast, as Miss Manton's débutante friends, are attractive, semi-talented and numerous. None of the names will ring any bells. Ah, but then again, maybe I'm just having a bad day...

The great thing about this movie is that you will, if you watch it, see some of the busiest and best character actors of the 1930's Hollywood strut their stuff. Aline McMahon, Hugh Herbert (in a less than sympathetic role, unusual for him), Guy Kibbee, Allan Jenkins and Frankie Darro. Pay no attention to the plot, it just gets in the way of some of the finest bits of scenery chewing ever put on film. Jenkins, especially, is as loud, as obnoxious, and as hammy as you'll ever see him. At no time does he speak at a decibel level less than ear splitting. (He's a communist, you see, at a time when they didn't cart you off to jail for it). Here is Aline McMahon, a really fine actress, emoting to such a degree that it makes you want to cringe. And Frankie Darro, prancing around, shadow boxing, wearing his hat brim turned up (this, apparently, was meant to make you look tough, much as turning the brim sideways does today). Frankie's problem was that he looked as though he might weigh 83 pounds, if he wore lead boots. No, the plot (disfunctional family learns it lesson, eventually, and learns to appreciate Mother) isn't important here. The opportunity to see these folks certainly is, though.

This film is much better than what one might expect, given the studio that made it and the other films of this type put out at the time. Warner Baxter was a good actor, the supporting cast is able, and the writing is taut, uncomplicated and well-done. Direction, lighting and photography are professional. In short, there are few, if any, faults, and the film is well worth a watch. Leon Ames makes an early appearance in a somewhat far fetched sequence involving the rehabilitation of a hardened, bitter convict, but this is a minor, minor flaw in an otherwise very well constructed film. As another reviewer wrote, there are, thankfully, no dumb cops or simple minded assistants, just a well thought out plot and good acting.

Until Hollywood had the responsibility of World War II and the promoting of Patriotism, it seemed to be pre-occupied with convincing the poor and unemployed that they were actually happier than the rich. I'm not sure many really bought the premise, but take a real look back at the movies of the period, good as they were, and you'll see a recurring theme. This is another in the genre. Two young wealthy people, Joan Fontaine and Allan Lane, find love while pretending to be a maid and a milkman, respectively. The movie itself is only mildly entertaining. Joan Fontaine, while beautiful, is at the early stages of her career, and apparently just learning her craft. Allen Lane, on the other hand, had obviously not gone to any acting class, nor proved receptive to any coaching. Just brutally awful. I remember many a Saturday afternoon spent at the local Strand theater, watching Allen "Rocky" Lane do his turn as "Red Ryder", and thinking he was terrific. Of course, I was only 7 or 8 at the time. OK, OK, enough of the negative. Here, also, you will find Cecil Kelloway, Vicki Lester and Hedda Hopper, all of whom were good actors, and who provide some of the better moments of the film. But all in all, unless you're a die hard Joan Fontaine fan, don't waste your time.

Here is a film set entirely in or very near a 1930's train station. Thousands of people moving in and through, each with a story. You would have to be as old as I am to understand that train depots, especially in big cities, were nearly as big and even busier than the airports of today. The film has a dark and harsh quality, which in many ways, is typical of the period. Here is an out of work chorus girl (Joan Blondell) desperate to get $54.00 for a ticket to Salt Lake City, almost willing to prostitute herself to get it; here is a pair of hobos (Douglas Fairbanks Jr., and Guy Kibbee) willing to steal clothes and finding money therein. They run afoul of a counterfeiter, a sexual sadist and the law, and through a series of highly unlikely coincidences manage to keep the plot hopping. This film has some superb camera work, great editing, and some wonderfully underplayed acting, especially by Joan Blondell. It's no wonder she was such a workhorse for Warner's. She could pretty much do it all. It's well worth the hour or so spent watching.

Joe E. Brown plays a small town inventor and fireman, who creates a small bomb which puts out fires. The story involves his efforts to patent it; baseball provides the means by which he earns the money to do so. It is a typical Brown comedy - a fairly involved plot, romance in the form of Evelyn Knapp and plenty of action sequences, mainly involving fire. (The opening sequence contains a fire at the local Sauerkraut Factory, which indicates the elaborate production values contained in the film.) There are problems with the film, I think, displayed in the also typical Joe E. Brown swagger and bragadoccio, (which can be very annoying) and the character's involvement with con men and a femme fatale, who take him for a good deal of his savings. This twist is strangely unresolved at the film's end. And it is frustrating to the viewer in that one wonders how anyone could be so uncaring as to ignore the fact that he's supposed to pitch in the seventh game of the World Series. It's well worth watching, though, as a well produced film with some great sequences, not typical fare for 1932.

This film (and all the other Boston Blackie films) is significant to those of us in the plus 65 age group for more than one reason. It hearkens us back to Saturday afternoons during the '40's, when a dime or 15 cents gained us an afternoon's entertainment at the Strand. Here was Chester Morris on the big screen, and, as we munched popcorn and stared bug-eyed at our tough, clever hero, we knew that he was more likely to escape any predicament using his wits rather than his fists. We knew that the runt, bumbler though he may be, loyal to the core, would come through when needed. And we knew that Inspector Farraday would never seem to come to fully trust Blackie as we knew he should, and that he would have an assistant who was an even worse bumbler than the Runt. This was an hour and a half of pure escapism, even for an eight or nine year old. And today, for an almost seventy year old. Tacked to a cartoon, newsreel, a Three Stooges (I am one of the few die hard Shemp fans, but that's another story)and maybe an Abbott and Costello....just the place to make your troubles vanish, real or imagined. In short, this film is fun. It is not great drama, comedy, acting, writing, or plotting. Just fun.

I must qualify my rating of this picture - I am a pure unadulterated Mary Astor fan, and I must ask myself, 'Would I have given this film the same rating if another actress were playing the part?' Honestly, no. I cannot say that the story isn't a bit trite. Here are two children, played by Edith Fellows and Jackie Moran, who, wishing to keep widowed and divorced parents to themselves, plot to thwart the blossoming romance between Mom (Mary Astor) and Dad (Melvyn Douglas). With predictable results. Douglas was a fine comedic actor, and his presence certainly helps lift the picture over some of the rough spots. The kids were pretty fair actors in their own right, and do not at all detract from what could have been a pretty dismal effort. In her biography, Ms. Astor confirmed that she rarely argued over the quality of a script. She went to work and did the best she could with the material given her. This is one she may have been better off choosing to be difficult about.

This is Norma Shearer's last silent. She plays "Dolly", a con artist who, predictably, falls for her victim (Johnny Mack Brown). It is a hackneyed plot, since done better by more than one film maker. The joy here, though, is simply a treat for the eyes. (There are those who claim she was't beautiful - They've got to be kidding) and there are those who claim she wasn't even a good actress. I'm afraid one could not use this film to prove otherwise. There is nothing remotely subtle about her mugging her way through the part. She learned to be a passable actress with time and the advent of sound, though. Johnny Mack Brown is more than adequate in the part of her "mark". He was a very good actor, and is rarely given his due. Lowell Sherman, as her nemesis, (a fop, bent on blackmail over Dolly's past) is a delight to watch, as he preens, leers and struts his way through the role. He is accompanied in his nefarious task by Gwen Lee, a capable character actress who never really got a shot at lead roles. Her height is in stark contrast to Shearer's small stature. This film is well worth watching, as the photography and processing produced a crisp, visual delight.

The story of a mild mannered milquetoast (today he'd be called a loser) played by Charles Butterworth, who gets mixed up with criminals, cops and a bank robbery. He predictably winds up a hero. But I believe the story here is secondary to the cast, which features Una Merkel (brightens up any film in which she appears), Nat Pendleton, who made a career of playing gangsters and dumb cops, Eugene Palette as a detective and Donald Meek, who for once played a role that wasn't particularly in keeping with his name. Butterworth underplayed a role that was meant to be underplayed, and did it beautifully. Call it a B picture, a bill filler or whatever, it was a pure pleasure watching some of the great character actors of the '30's carry a film in which the focus was not on a major star.

As I read other comments about this movie, I wonder if its the same movie I watched. Here is Francis Lederer, smarmy, simpering smile and all, as a prince working as a bell boy in a New York hotel. The movies of the 30's (which I love, for the most part) seem to be full of princes, kings, and assorted rich people masquerading as poor people. I'm sure it was a depression era thing, but the reasoning is beyond me.

Frances Dee is every bit as beautiful as purported. I'm sure she was a capable actress. She is barely believable, though, as a poor girl masquerading as wealthy, via a sudden windfall of 5000 dollars.

As for plot, you get the idea. Predictable to say the least.

This is not the movie to prove Dee's acting ability, though. Benita Hume, Lionel Stander and Alan Mowbry lend a modicum of acting talent to the proceedings, but not enough to save it from being a bad movie.

The reason for an Oscar nomination escapes me.

As stated before me, this is a story that's been done before, most notably "Sullivan's Travels", made a few years hence. A rich young man takes a bet that he can live on a working man's wages for a year, and ventures forth to prove it. The most notable difference here is Cary Grant in the lead, vs. Joel McCrea. Now, I have nothing against Mr. McCrea. But there is a reason why Cary Grant became a mega star, and Joel McCrea didn't. Comparison of these two films makes the differences quite clear. Grant had a glib, polished presence that somehow translated into believability for most of us, and it shows through, even in this early film. The story is predicable, but not so as to make you want to stop watching. Spend the time, and enjoy the performances of Grant and Mary Brian.

The songs in this film are classics. "Dream of You", "Lucky Star" are just two of the best every written. The choreography is what you learn to expect from the likes of Eleanor Powell, Buddy Ebsen and Nick Lang. And you get a rare chance to glimpse the talents of Vilma Ebsen, Buddy's sister. (One of the few negatives of the film is Vilma's lack of acting ability. But this is a very small distraction.)

Robert Taylor is his silky smooth self. Normally easy to dislike in other films, his character (the producer) comes off as likable and honest.

If you are an Una Merkel fan, as I am, she would be reason enough to spend the time watching this picture. She is her adorable self, as Taylor's secretary.

Powell shows up as an ex girl friend from Albany, with stars in her eyes, looking for a break in show business, only to be turned away by Taylor, who honestly believes Broadway is no place for this innocent. Eleanor has a tough time emoting with the veteran actors here, and her shallow acting talent can be a little grating at times. But her dancing and off beat beauty far over ride any real distractions.

Jack Benny has a chance to display an edgier side; one which we are not used to seeing from him, and it both surprising and gratifying to see how well he carried it off.

This is one of those films you can dust off and watch any time you're feeling the need for a shot of simpler, easier times.

The Blonde Bombshell, movie star played by Harlow becomes frustrated at some of the stunts pulled by her publicity man (Lee Tracy), who is trying to keep her name in the news, and to keep her single. This movie is the best example of why Jean Harlow was a mega star. The lady could act, holding her own with some of the best scene stealers in 1930's Hollywood, most notably, in this movie, Lee Tracy. Tracy left behind a body of film work that deserves more attention than it gets. Add to this, Una Merkel, Pat O'Brien (who has a surprisingly small part) Frank Morgan, and Franchot Tone, who is rarely brought to mind in a comedy role. The dialogue is fast, bright and very witty. The plot is, for the most part, plausible. It is a very funny satire of the workings of the Studio system of the early Hollywood years. As for the eye candy - if you've never watched Harlow flounce her way through a pre code movie.......

Considering the talent invested in this movie, and the fast paced, well developed story, this should have been a near classic. The story of two glib con men, who first invent a contest winner by photographic trickery, then find a maid who fits the description, is done well enough that you can buy the premise. Here are two problems: Pat O'Brien, who plays one of the con men, does what he always does in this type of role - talks with a machine gun like speed, making it all but impossible to understand him. Secondly, Marion Davies, the maid who is talked into portraying "Miss Dawn Glory", the contest winner, simply can't act. Granted, she was extremely attractive, bright, and possessed a presence all but impossible to ignore. But I have never seen any evidence that she had much talent for acting. The rest of the cast were close to being perfect for their roles, most notably Patsy Kelly and Dick Powell.

Eddie (Cantor) is escorted to the city limits of his home town of Rome (Oklahoma, I think) because of a run in with the city fathers who find his charitable, good nature a hindrance. He falls asleep and wakes up in ancient Rome. If you are a fan of ol' Banjo Eyes, this film is for you. It is pure Cantor, from start to finish, with all the attendant jokes, one liners, comebacks, eye rolling and pratfalls. If you are not a devotee, there is little to recommend this 1933 flicker. George S. Kaufman could have done better by the plot, although anything he might have written would have been over powered by Cantor. Busby Berkley and the Goldwyn Girls provide plenty of eye candy, and the music is among the best of the early musicals, especially "Build a little House" which opens and closes the film. Ruth Etting, although billed along with Gloria Stuart and Veree Teasdale, provides but one song, "No More Love". Teasdale and Stuart will remind you of just how glamorously beautiful the female stars molded by the studio system could be. To boot, they could act. The only actors who come close to matching the presence of Cantor are Edward Arnold, as the Emperor, and Alan Mowbray, as the Major Domo; both could be accomplished scene stealers. The chariot chase is spectacular, although marred by the then common practice of speeding up the action by adjusting the film speed. This is not among the best of the depression era comedies and musicals, but I can think of worse ways to spend 90 minutes.

This is the kind of fare that Hollywood felt America wanted to help it forget the Great Depression. It turns out that Hollywood was right. The storyline is actually trite, and presents Gene Raymond as a romantic lead. (Why is beyond me.) Dolores Del Rio is his opposite; a good actress who also happens to be absolutely gorgeous. As has been noted by everyone else, it is the debut of Fred and Ginger as partners and this alone would make it worth watching. But, in my opinion, it is the music and dancing that makes this film worth watching. The production numbers couldn't be duplicated today, because no one could be persuaded to rehearse as long and hard as it must have required. The "Carioca" number at the middle of the picture, and "Flying Down to Rio", near the end, are truly astounding 'eye candy'. All in all, the girls are beautiful, the dancing is expert, and the music is wonderful to listen to.