Reviews

23 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Routine Republic programmer elevated by Denning and Long
11 August 2019
Richard Denning and Audrey Long are 2 of the most underrated actors and why neither became super famous is a mystery to me. Denning had a long career and his low-key but highly effective acting talents have elevated many a B film to watchability. Audrey Long was elegant, beautiful and talented and the chemistry between the 2 stars in this one is wonderful. The plot is nothing special but has a few twists and turns and bad girl Hillary Brooke is around to stir things up for a while. It builds to an edge of the seat climax which is great fun to watch and parts of it are even rather nasty for 1951. The ending has some wildly crazy implausibilities which include the fact that nobody ducks even where their car is being shot at right through the windshield and the police in dealing with a group of thugs and gangsters seem to be limited to one car and very few men (is the movie that low budget?) but never mind-- it's been so much to watch and this one is a real sleeper. Too bad they couldn't have come up with a better title. I had the pleasure of having dinner with the great director and editor Robert Wise and his charming wife some years ago when he was "only" 84 and I told him that I thought my favorite actress of all he directed in his many many films was Audrey Long and he looked really startled and said "but she was only some contract player". I was so disappointed to hear that because her work when seen now positively shines. She had a fabulous life and lifestyle, traveling all over the world as the 4th and enduring wife of Leslie Charteris who created The Saint and was an internationally known gourmet and high liver. She must have had a ball living that fine life but too bad she didn't get to be as famous as she deserves, along with so many of the fine fine actresses we get to watch in the old movies: Ann Dvorak, Irene Hervey, Joan Marsh, Joan Woodbury and Wanda McKay and so many more forgotten ladies but for us diehards. Watch this movie if you like good old fashioned adventure and crime films and I'll bet you will like it!!
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Surprisingly Atmospheric Enjoyable 1950s Horror Film
26 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I wasn't expecting too much from this 1950s horror film but the idea that Dr. Jekyll was an innocent victim of another man's scheming to get his money and estate and this other man happened to also be...wait for it...a werewolf was clever and unique. The film's plot however becomes obvious and most viewers will guess what's going on at the get-go. Arthur Shields, brother of Barry Fitzgerald, is annoying and cloying right from the outset as he portrays a man who claims to represent the late Dr. Jekyll's best interests but who is actually a rampaging fiend who seeks to trick Jekyll's daughter in the same way he tricked her father and obtained the vast Jekyll mansion and estate. Emphasis throughout is on atmosphere with fluid dissolves and what the Germans called stimmung or heavy atmosphere in the silent film days. The entire film appears to be seen through a haze and Gloria Talbot't's visions of herself as a werewolf are overlaid so as to make everything appear to have occurred in a nightmare. This is very effective and beautiful, especially the camera tilts that make her world seem to be slipping away from her. Some oddities do occur. John Agar wears a bizarre striped sports jacket in the latter part of the picture which seems incongruous. He is also slow to reason out what is going on around him even though the audience is way ahead of him. Arthur Shields, just like his brother, Barry Fitzgerald is incredibly irritating and annoying throughout with his unctuous comments all done in Irish brogue. It's almost like being tied down and forced to watch Going My Way again starring his brother. And the oddest thing is that Shields' real teeth are so bad that when he turns into a werewolf his teeth actually improve. I believe that's the only time that a werewolf's dental work got better during a transformation sequence in the history of the cinema. Gloria Talbott looks lovely and contributes a solid performance here. She was a queen of fifties horror but was versatile enough to play many roles. In fact she was omnipresent on early television and was also a star of many many western programs due to her athletic ability. John Agar was also a constant horror film star and also a frequent veteran of westerns, part of the John Wayne entourage, and he was Shirley Temple's ex-husband! Agar was never a very good actor and he doesn't contribute much to the success of this film but part of that is the script that makes him appear dull witted and his plan for surprising a werewolf with a big club is just plain stupid. All things considered this is a surprisingly entertaining film played partly as a mystery more than a shocker. The unnecessary comic monster intro and finale feel put in by the producer to goose up the film as does the scene where a half-naked extra girl is leered at by the werewolf, a scene thrown in to the coming attractions for this movie to make it seem more lurid than it actually was. None of that tampering was necessary. I liked the look of the film. Ulmer could create a mood in the old Germanic sense-- it resembled more Nosferatu (1922) and The Golem (1920) more than the rather flat clear look of most fifties films such as Creature From the Black Lagoon or The Hypnotic Eye. It's a throwback to a style that Ulmer was familiar with from his early days in the German silent cinema and this film should be remastered and presented on a large screen where its striking visual beauty could be better appreciated, especially since it was achieved with an amazingly limited budget.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Surprisingly inventive and clever forgotten film
10 October 2018
Nobody has reviewed this for IMDB so I thought I'd jump in since I tracked down a tattered print of this rare film with no credits on it, with Spanish subtitles and Spanish inserts replacing English letters and books that were shown within the film. The heavy-set veteran Edward Arnold carries off this film nicely as the attorney Frank Rodie. Don't read the plot summary because the film is full of cleverly plotted legal twists and turns that culminate in a bizarre (and not completely satisfying) finish. The film has some comedic sections too, most notably with Walter Catlett as an over-enthusiastic public relations expert and a very funny scene in which Franklin Pangborn is almost seduced by a strongly oversexed young lady. The scenes with Catlett and Pangborn feel extraneous to the picture which is really a drama about the bitter personal dramas that lead to Arnold becoming a famous divorce lawyer, who makes his living through staged framings of innocent people. The ever wicked Clarence Wilson is on hand as Mr. Keibel, an unscrupulous lawyer. Wilson, with his diminutive frame and bizarre looking head, graced dozens upon dozens of films as a nasty lawyer fond of foreclosing on widows and orphans. He is one of those great character actors of which few can recall the name but usually just say "oh that guy" when they see him. The film is really Edward Arnold's to showcase his considerable dramatic chops and his sly wickedness at seeking revenge for the deeply felt wrongs done to him by his golddigging and scheming wife, played by former silent film minor star Dorothy Revier. If you like old movies and well written dialogue and you can find a print of this that isn't kind of bad (the version I got hold of has several untranslated Spanish sections to read and I got through it by pausing the film and going to a dictionary), I'd call this one a worthwhile time spent. It's not a masterpiece or a superb lost gem but its plot, writing and acting are all solid and for a super low budget film it has some beautiful sets and costumes, as if everyone connected to the film was trying to make something memorable. And if you've never seen that powerful bear of an actor Edward Arnold at work, this one is a good place to start. His crisp and dominant speaking voice and his burly presence always tend to dominate any film he's in, be it comedy, tragedy or even blind detective films. He is one of our most unsung and unjustly forgotten actors and this film really should be restored if possible since it deserves your consideration. It is best enjoyed if you DON'T read anything about the plot and just let it unfold on you.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Prime Suspect (1982 TV Movie)
5/10
Great acting and muddy plotting
10 September 2018
Warning: Spoilers
MIKE FARRELL and TERI GARR are two fine actors who have a fine chemistry together and elevate this by the numbers wrong man child killer movie way above where it should be but there are serious plot and continuity problems that mar the film, as one reviewer has already noted, and the ending is nothing less than infuriating and actually mystifying. Here are some of the problems. Farrell buys girl scout cookies from a little girl who is soon abducted and murdered but...what happens to the cookies? Both boxes simply disappear from the story. A farmer who could give MIKE an alibi is suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia and yet is operating dangerous heavy machinery perfectly well. A scene clearly shows the murdered child getting into what appears to be Farrell's car and yet no explanation is given for this and the woman who remembers this fact suddenly never discloses what she just recalled to the cops. Virtually everyone around MIKE is hostile to him as the media attacks him as a serial child killer and yet once he makes up his mind to just return to work despite not knowing the final result of the search for the killer everyone seems to love him again. The scene where the real killer is found is inserted into the film AFTER the scene where MIKE returns happily to work amid supporting staff members... making no sense. I don't know what movie the other reviewers were watching but I prefer a movie of this very basic sort to make coherent sense. It is even more offensive that this was released in this slapdash manner because much of it is really well directed and builds up considerable frustration and tension as one watches. Mike Farrell and Teri Garr are two of the very finest actors of their era and in 2018 neither are remembered by that many young people for the fine entertainment they offered us back in the day. Teri Garr has suffered in recent years from a debilitating illness and it saddens me so much because her presence on a talk show such as David Letterman or in any sort of film was a guarantee of fun and quality. She brought a sincerity to every film role she ever played. To surround her with such unnecessary carelessness suggests that the film was undergoing script modifications as it was being shot and edited and that the creators and especially the producers didn't care enough about the result. My wife kept saying throughout the film "where are those girl scout cookies and what happened to them?" It's a fair question.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Bottom of the Barrel Musical With Some Charm
8 September 2018
It's hard to imagine a more threadbare musical than this one or one with a less satisfying, and more downright irritating ending. The other reviewer has described the plot in detail and it's basically a story about a dreadful vaudeville team of talentless losers played by Eddie Nugent and Evalyn Knapp. Since it is pre-code the chorus girls wear as little as possible and Miss Knapp is a tiny slip of a thing who wears skimpy outfits that don't do a thing for her. And Nugent plays a pompous and annoying ass. What makes this one hold interest is the fine acting of Evalyn Knapp as a strong independent woman who struggles to make ends meet in the very heart of the Great Depression. She was an actress called upon to deliver a solid performance when the shooting schedule was very short and can't allow for multiple takes and she delivers big time in this one even though her singing is dubbed and her dancing is gangly and atrocious. Of course impressario Alan Dinehart is swept off his feet by the mere sight of her but Miss Knapp is so diminutive and utterly devoid of dancing grace that one can hardly understand what is driving the rather ungainly Dinehart into these paroxysms since he is surrounded by fuller figured chorus girls who can actually dance. The ever reliable Mae Busch is on hand to throw out wisecracks and George Grandee, another veteran of the z film, is on hand to match Busch's banter and to play and sing a very nice piano selection. His second banana role here is much pleasanter to me than those sorts of roles played by Frank McHugh or Frank Jenks in many higher budget Warner Brothers films. Then there is also z film venus Gloria Shea who appeared in so many of these lower level films that she earned enough money in real life to put her brother through law school and he became that famous sports attorney and official for whom Shea Stadium was named, the home of the New York Mets baseball team. The several songs were not bad and one has a chance to see vaudevillian and actress Ada May who had a minor career in the footlights sing a tune and do one of her crazy legged eccentric dances. She is, well, just awful, yet managed to appear in 9 Broadway shows with featured roles in four or five. The best thing about this film is the snappy dialogue and the constant references to contemporary things such as the Volstead Act, Al Jolson being at odds with Lee and J. J. Shubert, Nugent working close to New York in vaudeville so he can be nearby when the Palace Theatre will call him for his bigtime shot, and the idea of the differently priced fleabag hotels vaudevillians could stay at which was a measure of their success. The "insider" nature of this script gives a vivid and dark portrait of life on the boards for the dregs of show business, those people who keep trying but will never really make it. The ending of this movie really angered me but it is always a joy to see Evalyn Knapp, even woefully miscast here, planting her feet and standing up to her men. I highly recommend Three of a Kind where she emotes with the crazy vaudeville veteran and genius Richard Carle in a low budget charmer. All in all, this one is above average while at the same time being below the level of a reasonably budgeted film. The sound recording appears to have been rather poor also and the dance numbers ragged although the director tries to manage a sort of Busby Berkeley overhead shot but can't get high enough and has no idea what to do with his dancers. Oh, well. It's goofy fun anyway.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Don't Be Tempted. Move On. There's Nothing Here to See.
1 September 2018
This is a truly terrible movie that somehow took two people to direct. The acting by Paula Hill, Richard Travis and Jackie Coogan, among others, is not that bad but the "stars" are given nothing to work with. The plot is predictable and dull, the special effects virtually non-existent and the monsters barely glimpsed, and the dull middle of the film is photographed in semi-darkness that gives new meaning to the word tedium. In addition, there is little logic or reasoning for anything that occurs other than that there is a madman who is creating people who can perhaps become insects but who for some reason are beautiful women, Chinese and/or dwarves. Hard to figure how to write your way out of that situation and harder to figure how they wrote their way into it in the first place. Some may find this sort of film entertainingly inept but it is mostly dull, like getting a flat tire somewhere in the middle of the night and having to wait half the night to get it repaired and finally get home. It's that dull and tedious. Add to that a dreadful guitar and piano musical score that will make many turn the film off before the end. Frequently, the music and the odd inserts of dwarves smiling seem placed without consideration of how and where they should be used. The conclusion, which happens quickly after many boring passages, feels rushed and is only partly shown, ending in an explosion which seems to come out of nowhere. There is a seemingly endless narration by Lyle Talbot who seems to have a penchant for getting into the most obscure bottom of the barrel movies apparently due to the need for a paycheck. It's a bit of a shame that Allan Nixon and Paula Hill didn't get much to work with here. Their acting wasn't nearly as bad as the film that surrounded and indeed engulfed them. He became a pulp trash novel writer in real life and ended up getting married four times. She just never quite made it like so many starlets. Both were physically attractive and seemingly competent in developing a modicum of chemistry out of miserably written parts.One can see that they are giving the production everything they have in hopes that someone may recognize them and get them a decent script to work with. Jackie Coogan had been an adorable child whose family stole all of his earnings from him and frittered them away. He grew up to be much less adorable and employable but had to hustle work where he could to get by. To his credit, he was a competent actor who always tried to give his best and this holds true even in his role as the mad spider doctor in this ghastly effort. Don't be tempted however to invest the 69 minutes needed to get through this one. I did make it through and I still can't get that rolling guitar out of my brain. I love really awful films and can tolerate a good bit of Ed Wood but this is just too dull and mindless for me and I dare say perhaps for you too! If you do make it through all the way you may be seized with a loss of the will to live.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Dismal and Dull 1950s Sci Fi Giant Monster Movie
27 August 2018
Others have already written the plot of this one so I'll just make a few observations. Obviously this is a terrible movie which cost nothing to make and came from the infertile mind of Jack Gross who did so much to screw up Universal Pictures during his tenure there in the 1940s. Peopled with low cost mediocre character actors such as Jim Davis and Robert Griffin and padded out with seemingly endless trekking across the African jungle (a sure sign of an awful film), the viewer is mesmerized into sleep mode. It starts out as science fiction then turns quickly into a jungle movie set in western Africa. Things are talked about but never shown, as if they were in the script but costs were cut everywhere and the script couldn't be completely filmed. For example, a lion drinks from a poisoned water source and supposedly dies. Vladimir Sokoloff climbs a hill to see if the water source is safe for the natives to drink from and sees the dead lion as proof that the water source is unsafe...but we are just TOLD about this. There's not even a trace of lion pelt on view. There is stock footage of a volcanic eruption at the end but it doesn't really match the shot footage very well and is quite grainy. I was told that the end of the film was shot in color but when I first saw the movie in a theatre in 1956 it was all black and white and so is the print I viewed recently. My biggest objection to this film is that it had no reason to be made other than to make a quick buck and capitalize on the atomic radiation giant monster movies that came out in the wake of that unexpected hit Godzilla in 1953 and Them in 1955. If giant ants were boffo box office why not giant wasps...and the special effects are really poor in this film. Ray Harryhausen was apparently too expensive for this bunch and yet he had already made a really fun picture out of It Came From Beneath the Sea (1954) and also the Beast From 20,000 Fathoms.(1953). And this film suffers terribly from flat, predictable dialogue, wretched special effects, dull actors, a leading lady Barbara Turner who is incredibly bland and dull (where was Lori Nelson when you needed her?), disgraceful padded trekking scenes that seem interminable, a plot already trite by the time this was filmed, and completely flat direction without a trace of imagination. I love bad movies if they are truly bad in a unique way. Ed Wood's Plan 9 is wonderful and I can even go for Eegah the Caveman if I'm in the mood but there just isn't enough here to make it worth anyone's time unless you use it to get you to sleep at night. I must point out that NOTHING anyone does in this movie causes ANY result and if they had NOT gone out to try to save the world it wouldn't have made the slightest difference to the outcome. So a bunch of people lost their life in this one for no reason at all!!!!
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Jungle Bride (1933)
6/10
Horribly made train wreck of a shipwreck movie still is fun entertainment
22 July 2018
This film is really quite terrible but somehow is fun almost because of it and because of the real chemistry between the two stars, both of whom are terrible in it but still you can't take your eyes off of them. The editing is dreadful. There is a huge amount of stock footage just as you would expect including chimps that have been brought in to do silly things and there is some human who keeps grunting in the background and trying to make you think it's the chimps doing it. Anita Page is a terrible actress but she gets little to work with here as some scenes finish off and you wonder what the point of them was. In any case she's a real bombshell and the pre-code side boob shot of the amply endowed Miss Page and her bare back and slit dress leg shot will no doubt be rhapsodized in some summary of pre-code babes. She delivers lines and emotes as if she is in a dreadful high school play and her close-ups play as if she's in a silent movie. But we love her anyway. Charles Starrett is perfectly cast as the brawny almost comic-book like superhero who makes everything work out and gets the girl as well. He sings the same song over and over-- a terrible song called Call of the Jungle-- and the mismatching of his alleged singing (it isn't he) and his not even close to approximation of a guitar player help to label this as a Z film and not even really a B. It's the bottom of the barrel. Starrett does actually sing for real as a drunk in the beginning of the film and the sound is completely different from the singing he allegedly does later in the film! And yet, bad as it all is, the shipwreck sequence still packs a wallop and there is some beautiful photography of the jungle hill on which Starrett pseudo-plays his guitar as Page is lured to make love with him. Their love scenes together seem pretty convincing too as if Anita really went for him. Starrett was always better than his B or Z film material, always giving his all and coming across as a solid leading man. Like John Wayne, his acting may not be the best but he has always a definite screen presence, part of which is due to his size and good looks mixed with an apparently amiable personality. All in all, this has to be a guilty pleasure film. It is dreadfully made and quite a few scenes seem to play out as if the director had no idea what they were supposed to accomplish and then we just go on to the next scene... and it took three guys to direct this film! I kept wondering how Page then at MGM and Starrett then at Paramount could have been loaned out and agreed to make a film with such wretched production values. It seems Trem Carr, the Monogram Pictures founder, had a big hand in this one but why wasn't it released by Monogram which he founded in 1931, two years before? Could it be that this was below the quality that Monogram would accept? Was it simply an independent effort that he helped to get into release? We may never know and the two stars seem at once trapped by their awful material here and at the same time they are trying to make something more of the mess than it should be. I had fun watching this and if you aren't too ashamed of yourself for wasting your time on this garbage you will too.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Mae Clarke Gives An Astonishly Powerful Performance
13 July 2018
This is the best of the filmed versions of this story. There isn't a lot of plot in this gritty, earthy early talkie but there is an astonishingly powerful tour de force performance by Mae Clarke. I had always admired her fragile beauty and strong second lead performances in many films over the years but I'd never seen this one in which she plays a prostitute or "party girl" as they used to call them in the early sound films, a girl who is forced into prostitution in London after her show closes and she cannot get decent work. There's a blitz going on and zeppelins are reigning bombs down onto London streets and people must take shelter underground. Life is extremely difficult but onto the scene comes American Douglass Montgomery whose family, wealthy as can be, live outside of London on a marvelous estate and his sister turns out to be none other than Bette Davis. Will the family accept her? Will she tell them she is a street walker? The drama unfolds and gradually grips you fully if you like pre-code movies. Montgomery and Clarke as the young lovers have a real chemistry between them. Clarke's performance totally inhabits her space as she handles objects, uses her entire body in her performance and shows a remarkable range of emotion that seems to ripple through her entire body. I had the feeling that the actress was almost possessed by the spirit of her character. At times quiet and introspective,she then her emotions rush to the forefront and in one near final scene she belts out her anguish with astonishing power and range that blew me away. I take this to be one of the great acting performances in the history of movies and it is absolutely THE most underappreciated Academy Award quality performance ever given. You may not agree but over the last 46 years I've been teaching film history at the university level and I'd stake my reputation that for its period of time there isn't anything quite like it. It is whole decades ahead of its time. You may marvel as I did at how modern her acting is and not stilted or theatrical as her contemporaries such as Bette Davis come across now. It is a performance that one would marvel at if given today. And yet her projection is also worthy of a great stage performance as well, for this is also after all basically a filmed play. James Whale is always a fascinating director. What he coaxed out of Mae Clarke in this film is something for the ages and any acting student can learn a lot about how to move about a room, use your hands, modulate your voice and use every part of your body to create a real character. It is all the more extraordinary that Whale did this in just a few weeks and with a shoestring budget. After the film I just sat for a while in rapt amazement, so grateful that this performance has been captured on film and I had the privilege to watch it. In a word, wow!.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sometimes the Good Kill (2017 TV Movie)
7/10
Solidly acted, Well directed Mystery Thriller
25 June 2018
If you are deeply religious person, and particularly a devout Christian, this film is sure to offend you.so there is no reason for you to watch it and there are literally tens of thousands of pro-church movies that one can watch in its place. This movie, while not ending up anti-faith, is basically a Murder She Wrote mystery set in a convent that is inhabited by remarkably petty and at times downright insane occupants. The clergy in this one is concerned about a nunnery that has few members, is literally falling apart and may end up getting sold by the church for money, leveled to the ground and replaced by profitable condos. The comments attacking this film and giving it its low rating are made by those, I think, who don't like its subject manner or its rather blasphemous approach and so give it an extremely low rating. The acting in my opinion at least was topnotch with special kudos to the beautiful Susie Abromeit who has to and does carry the film strongly. But it is also an ensemble acting endeavor and each of the players contributes in a major way. Comments by other viewers about the amateurish nature of the acting just don't fly with me (I'm a former professional actor who studies this craft professionally and I'm no genius but I think I can recognize quality efforts when I see them.) It is not a great film by any stretch but is a solid mystery watch for fans of the And Then There Were None Agatha Christie style mystery usually set in an old mansion but in this case, for whatever reason, set in a convent from hell. There was one scene in it that I won't give away but it made me jump straight up in the air. It's not a super violent film but the director builds the tension slowly and then all of a sudden lets you have it for a few seconds. I should add that this is an extraordinary example of what you can make with almost no budget at all!
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Night World (1932)
7/10
Lew Ayres and Mae Clarke Shine
18 June 2018
I had never seen this film and Lew Ayres was a friend of mine years ago and came to lecture to my film class at the University of Arizona ca. 1975. He was a deeply religious man, a conscientious objector during World War II and ambulance driver and former husband of Ginger Rogers and Lola Lane of the fabulous Lane Sisters. He said that the breakup of the marriage with Ginger was his fault because she got more famous than he and he couldn't deal with it. He was a thoughtful, intelligent and decent guy and very gentle in real life but he caught fire on screen or in live performance. When he WAS acting, he was all show business and you needed to get out of the way of him because of the intensity of what he was doing. Then when he was done and the public spotlight would go away, he'd return to being the great guy he was. I liked him enormously and he had just finished directing his religious film Altars of the World about his trips all over the world to study various religions and their belief in a guiding spirit. I'm not a religious guy but he believed in treating everyone with the spirit that he had found and that feeling just made him nice to be around. This movie features also a winning performance from Mae Clarke who shows that she can actually dance pretty well. She was a natural actress, not a raving beauty, but someone who radiated attractiveness from deep within and it spilled out onto the screen. She should have been much more famous. Pity she's known for getting that grapefruit shoved in her face by Cagney because here she delivers a solid and winning performance. George Raft appears briefly and does that gangster coin flipping stuff that he would do so much in his forties movies. Clarence Muse is absolutely wonderful as the black doorman of Happy's Club and projects a terrific emotional range, conveying a good bit of what it must have really been like to be black back then in a white man's world.. The screenplay is solid and there's a Busby Berkeley dance number. It's small scale and lacks the wonder of his work at Warner Brothers or the amazing color kaleidoscope he did at Fox in The Gang's All Here in 1943--don't miss that one!! But it's still a fun interlude to see Busby in his early period a little bit post Whoopee and Palmy Days. There's also Boris Karloff, fresh from his triumph as the Frankenstein monster the year before and one of the characters actually makes an inside joke in the film, referring to Frankenstein. Karloff's British accent doesn't quite fit well with the thug part he has to play but he's still pretty effective and Hedda Hopper, later to be a feared gossip columnist who wrote Under Hedda's Hat in syndication everywhere, does a terrific turn as Lew Ayres' murderous mother. All in all it is a night club Grand Hotel with the various problems of many characters, good and bad people, interweaving nicely and very well written. It's a short film so you needn't invest much time but it moves along swiftly and ends with a running gag about Schenectady, New York. I give it seven stars and especially enjoyed seeing Lew Ayres who, if one takes the drinking part away in the film, was essentially playing the man he really was, a highly decent guy who had an up and down career but a career that spanned more than 65 years in the movies and tv and near the end of his life he was playing the older crush of a young Mary Tyler Moore on her tv show and being convincing about it. The man was really special from top to bottom.
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Alice White shines amid roaring twenties fun
17 June 2018
This is a small film and isn't really about much more than a bunch of spoiled rich kids finding out that there is more to life than just being minor league juvenile delinquents. But there are a number of things that make this charming and fun and it's under an hour long so there's not much to lose. First of all, as many have said, Alice White is such a quintessential flapper that it's no wonder she didn't last beyond the Clara Bow years. Her New Joisey oops Jersey accent is a hoot and different from that of the great prima donna actresses of the era. There is a sequence early in the film where she bats her eyes at Paul Page while riding in a car and she more than bats them. Her eyes are so enormous and dominant that they practically do cartwheels flirting with him. In short, as a male, I find her irresistibly cute and delightful and her firm, clear delivery of lines (essential in early talkies for theaters with not so great sound systems) stands out with the sharpness of a female Eddie Cantor. Watch also for the barely seen singing group at the big party where microphones are not yet de rigeur and the ensemble sings through megaphones! The flapper clothes are all wonderful and so are the beautiful cars so if you like period fun this is a delight. Myrna Loy is still in her bad girl period here and makes a nasty femme fatale. Paul Page is a Frederic March clone as a leading man and shows naturalness and real talent. Too bad his career simply faded away after 1934. There's nothing super spectacular here but either you find Alice White doing her naughty flirting is as they used to say "the bee's knees" or you don't. It's easy to underestimate the way she uses her eyes, her body language and her desire to get the most out of every scrap of dialogue she gets. I'm so sorry she had such a fall from grace and a difficult later life but she has become a cult figure for movie buffs who love the early talkies.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Low Budget British Acting Tour De Force
4 February 2018
This rather hard to find little British film has few reviews on IMDB and a low rating: 4.9 at the time of this writing, which is pretty awful. While low budget and much of it set in darkness somehwat due to the less than perfect print I had of it, I nonetheless found it to be a wonderful acting tour de force between Donald Houston and Bill Kerr, the latter having been totally unknown to me.

What I particularly liked about this film was its ability to avoid the cliche and to take choices that I never expected. The plot twists are not able to be foreseen except that the movie is book-ended by the prisoner Houston waiting to be executed and speaking with a priest played by Liam Gaffney. As we move along we are expecting the movie and its lead characters to be somehow vindicated or excused or heroic and we are kept up in the air throughout until we, the viewing jury, must make our final assessment as to what has transpired and determine if the planned execution is justified. And we are left to wonder about Helen Bradley (Kathleen Byron) and what blame she bears for what has happened to her husband (Donald Houston).

The movie has that grim post World War II sense of grime and desperation that I as an American often get from British films of the period. It is like a British street gang movie of misguided youth but set on the sea. The writer and director are interested also in what causes the characters to behave the way they do and how difficult it is to survive in bad times and how we are all just one misfortune away from turning into someone we hardly recognize.

John Bradley as played by Houston is an individual down on his luck but who is a take-charge guy and natural leader. Does he deserve what seems about to happen to him at the end or is he not really guilty, partially guilty or a victim of bad lawyering, bleak godless destiny and/or a bad partner. Did the court really understand the man and judge him fairly? Would every viewer feel the same way about him?

I found the film thoroughly engaging, dark in its overall message, and so well played. The chemistry between the two male leads was palpable and was enhanced by the claustrophobic boat and the half-glimpsed violence encountered on the never really seen French coastline. One cannot help thinking that the author of this strange little film had a bleak vision of the world we live in and one other reviewer of the film on imdb suggests this in his tribute to his father, the author of the story.

The film also made me want to see more work by Donald Houston.

All in all, this is not for someone looking for a light bubbly fun film or even a carefree murder mystery like The Thin Man. But if you enjoy superior acting on a budget and you want to become a judge and jury evaluating what has gone on, this one is certainly worth at least a look.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Earnest, surprisingly well played drama
30 January 2018
Anne Nagel and Warren Hull are two forgotten and underrated actors who have a chance to shine in this surprisingly engaging and well-acted melodrama. The plot has several twists and turns which make the proceedings play like that old soap opera The Doctors and the coincidences are a bit too preposterous to be very likely but nonetheless the storyline is played in earnest by the cast even though the budget is virtually non-existent and a major auto accident is barely glimpsed or even staged. Warren Hull became famous not as an actor but rather as a host of a maudlin television program of the early 1950s called Strike It Rich in which contestants answered quiz questions to make money to get themselves out of horrible real-life situations. It was a combination reality and quiz show, unique to television and when things seemed most dire a "Heartline" appeared to throw money to the truly destitute and save the day. Few people who watched that show knew of Warren Hull's career in z movies and it really is a wonder why this handsome and intelligent, broad-shouldered competent actor never got further than he did. The same might be said of Anne Nagel who gives a rock solid performance here. All in all it is a very good night-time time-filler for those who like old z films that solidly filled the second feature slots of long ago. Most surprising here is that the secondary characters are also well played and gripping. Definitely worth a look.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Social Error (1935)
5/10
Chance to see David Sharpe the ubiquitous stunt man
15 January 2018
I cannot say that this is a good film. It isn't. But it has some points of interest to engage the lover of old films. First of all there is a chance to see David Sharpe, the Crown Prince of Daredevils, as a leading man. He is alleged to have appeared as story writer, assistant director, stunt man, extra, and actor in more than 3000 movies,and may hold the record for most film associations. During the film David, who plays a young scamp always in trouble at his school, engages in tap dancing, does an amazing front flip landing on his feet (he was a nation collegiate tumbling champion), does building climbing at the drop of a hat, engages in plate spinning on his hands, and performs plate juggling. One can see why he was always in demand, doubling actors such as Alan Ladd and Tony Curtis (who was the principal speaker at this funeral). Also during this time the love of David's life was pert, cute Gertrude Messinger (starlet of many westerns) and their kitchen scene together is charming and almost seems like a home movie as they seem much in love. The marriage in real life didn't last long but David, 31 years later, married the widow of Gertrude Messenger's brother (!), who was also named Messenger. The film uses a mistaken identity plot and deals with a jewel theft (why are those jewels left lying around like that?) and is passably coherent if ultra cheap The plot is basically an excuse for David to behave like a human fly around various buildings and a flagpole. The idea for this must have come from the successful series of human fly poverty row films starring Richard Talmadge, the German stunt man and daredevil who preceded David's foray into action stardom. The human fly building climbing scenes seem almost lifted from Talmadge films. Another note of interest is the use of an African-American man as a kind of sidekick to David Sharpe, the first time I have seen this done in a film. An actor named Snowflake (really Fred Toones) plays the part of right-hand man and friend to David and this idea may have been the inspiration for the Monogram series with Frankie Darro and his black friend and cohort Mantan Moreland. Indeed David Sharpe bears an absolutely uncanny resemblance to Frankie Darro and both were stunt men. The team of Darro and Moreland, however, is infinitely superior to the Sharpe and Snowflake team and the moronic behavior of the dim-witted Snowflake character is, in these modern times, even more unendurable than those awful performances by Willie Best (aka Sleep 'n' Eat). Darro and Moreland were more of a real team and more equal, even if elements of racism persisted with them, but Snowflake is just hopeless, talentless and off-putting. In any case this movie holds a bit of interest for film fans and even has a few scenes that intrigue and amuse. I wish there had been more romantic scenes with Gertrude and David but this is a threadbare sub poverty row action film of the Richard Talmadge school. Maybe it is worth a look if you are a true lover of the old and forgotten. How sad that this energetic individual David Sharpe should contract Lou Gehrig's disease and spend his last days totally incapacitated.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Isabel Jewell Forever!
15 January 2018
Among the ultra low budget movies that one can turn up on the Internet, here is a wonderful little gem of a film which highlights the all too rarely seen romantic comedy talents of the delightful Isabel Jewell, one of my favorite scene stealing actresses. A tiny slip of a thing, she gives one of her most winning performances here and has a nice chemistry, in my opinion, with Buster Crabbe who was rather a natural if not spectacularly dramatic actor. In addition, one has a chance to see what an early drive-in hamburger joint was like long before MacDonald's existed, complete with carhops. Among the other attractions Sally Blane, beautiful sister of Loretta, has a turn as the "other" girl, a spoiled rich kid. She seems a bit miscast as Sally was normally leading lady material and was so lovely that it was hard to hate her. Fuzzy Knight is there for the comedy but it's a little too repetitive and not really very funny. For me the relationship of Isabel and Buster is the whole show here and a handsome and fun couple they make. I so wish that Isabel would have been given more opportunities to portray a wide range of romantic leads. She had a lot of power and emotion to deliver and joins some of my favorite unsung actresses who totally delivered the goods every chance they got. I refer to the likes of Joan Marsh, Irene Hervey, Marian Nixon, Gloria Jean and Susan Miller. In any case this film is well worth a look if you like old fashioned romantic comedies.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Amazing, unique movie from poverty row
12 January 2018
I saw that nobody had offered comments on this short feature which is so seldom shown anywhere, so I thought I'd leap into the breach, trying not to give away spoilers which will kill the enjoyment of it. Give it a little while to get going and you'll be treated to something unusual, something unlike anything I've ever seen before from this time. This is because there is a gimmick, a reason behind the making of this film, which becomes evident about two thirds of the way in and is worth the wait. Patience will also reward those who are interested in movies that depict what the future world will become. It regales us with such subjects as the homemaker's role in the future as modern science improves her lot (!). There are also wild remote controlled or sort of controlled airplanes and even people in 1940 routinely watching television variety programming and even INFOMERCIALS. One is also treated to that perpetually smiling poverty row Jean Harlow known as Joan Marsh whose superior acting talent and passable singing have graced a number of 1930s films. She is always a joy to watch and one of those actresses who always enhances anything she is in. Not quite a glamour gal and this is near the end of her career, she is nonetheless a fine actress who can really handle a line or an emotion. John "Dusty" King is the poverty row Bruce Bennett and who provides a pretty flat portrayal of an airplane engineer who is in love with songbird Marsh. But then John King was dull and flat in everything he was ever in (usually westerns). I don't want to tell you more about what goes on as I think you should be careful to NOT read spoilers on this one but just let it unfold gradually until you begin to realize what is really going on. If you like 1930s low budget quasi-musicals (am I the only one?) and films that are unique in a slightly bizarre way and/or if you are a Joan Marsh fan as I am, this one is a real sleeper and it will sneak up on you and then hit you over the head with what it is really up to. HIGHLY recommended for old movie fans who should have lots of fun.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Poverty Row Surprise and Delight
29 December 2017
For those of us who peruse the Internet for free movies here is what I thought was a real public domain delight. Yes it is ultra low-budget but it is surprisingly full of wonderful things. Grace Hayes, the mother of that fast-talking ubiquitous comedy actor Peter Lind Hayes and mother in law of Mary Healy (does anyone remember their big hit Crazy Mixed-Up Song?), actually dominates the film with a performance as a former diva who is eager for a comeback and forced to marry into a family of commoners who are up against the dark side of the Great Depression (it was filmed in 1933, a rock bottom period for America). For some unknown reason record plugger and highly influential entertainment spotter Frank Richardson hears her perform and thinks she's fabulous and brings her and her entire new family out to Manhattan where she achieves her comeback in grand style and where she can become even more of a personal horror than ever! Others have described the plot so I won't rehash that here, but I would call attention to the fact that this film has the greatest musical score in a movie musical that you've never heard of! Each song is a real gem and deserves to be considered for the Great American Songbook of classic hits. Look Up Not down was my favorite but later in the film Grace Hayes belts out some more winners one after another in Mae West style! Her blues readings really steal the show! Behind her in her final number one gets the chance to see chorus girls dancing with fans and giving us a taste of what Fanchon and Marco, those famous choreographers and movie prologue stagers, could put together on a low budget. Prologues were mini-vaudeville shows which toured around the country, usually in major cities, preceding the movie with a live packaged show that might be purchased by theater chains. The score is composed by Albert Von Tilzer, I discovered, whose glory days were a bit behind him (he had composed Take Me Out to the Ball Game, among many other hits mainly in the 1910s, and was the brother of famed composer Harry Von Tilzer of the Von Tilzer sheet music publishing empire). I particularly liked the beautiful Joan Marsh who got to sing a peppy version of Look Up Not Down early on and who showed a fine flare for ensemble comedy. In her final sequence she is almost wearing a stunning dress that seems about ready to fall to the ground, reminding us that this is from the end of the pre-code period. When Grace Hayes ducks out on rehearsal to visit with an old friend/nemesis from the stage, the sparks really fly and the ensuing catfight between two aging battle-axes of the theater is a hoot. Frank Albertson is fine as the young man and potential love interest for Joan Marsh. He was known for playing what were then called juveniles and he was largely unable to make the transition to leading man roles, hence his appearance in lower level films and his subsequent smaller character parts. He died of a heart attack at just 56 while the lovely Joan Marsh just faded away from minor films into marriage to a semi-successful screenwriter. She ended her long life managing a stationery shop and it's a shame she's not better remembered except as a late night goddess to those of us who love Joan Woodbury, Gale Storm, Wanda McKay, Irene Hervey and the others who worked for little money on Poverty Row films and still manage to bring us a great big helping of late-night joy.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fear No More (1961)
7/10
A Mala Powers tour de force
25 December 2017
Sometimes one runs across an Academy Award level performance in a B film and the performance doesn't get the attention it should have. Mala Powers was a remarkably talented actress who rarely got to show off what she was capable of doing, being used largely as decoration in things like fifties horror movies because, alas, she was quite attractive and in those days of Piper Laurie, Lori Nelson, et cetera, young attractive ladies were often cast in slop. But in this highly watchable effort Mala Powers gives what amounts to a complete acting class as she pours her heart into this stunning performance which has to be watched several times to be fully appreciated. Ms. Powers taught the Michael Chekhov school or style of acting professionally for many years but she could certainly show her students this work as evidence that she knew what she was talking about. In this acting theory, the Chekhov-influenced actor attempts to indicate through gestures a reflection of the interior or psychic anguish that is being felt. Movements and gestures must be true and effective and lively but not forced and inappropriate or unnecessarily exaggerated. If you just take isolated scenes and you know the plot, you can watch her emotional display and her gesturing and how organic and integrated they are. There are no false moves, no exaggerated gestures and no grandstanding. Ably supported by Jacques Bergerac as a troubled man who seems to find highly troubled women to court without even trying, Mala Powers keeps us wondering about her sanity until the rather feeble and highly implausible ending moments but it's well worth a watch for people who like to curl up and watch a pretty good mystery thriller with one performance that goes way beyond what one would expect and which shows the post-Slanislavski school (Slanikovsky was Chekhov's teacher) in all its raging glory. It's a must-see for serious acting students. I hope this review does not sound too artsy for the viewer-- it's one of the gutsiest performances in a film that I've seen!
17 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Goofy and highly watchable old-time fun
24 December 2017
An awful lot of people don't like this film but it has some wonderful things in it and some off the wall things too. Robert Shayne plays the mad scientist with the ever-adoring fiancee in a truly over the top fashion. In one sequence while he is ranting about being left alone (a sequence straight out of the original Frankenstein), she tousles his hair so that it goes in all directions at once and seems a total send-up of the would-be dramatic moment at hand. In addition, every time the scene shifts to the mountains and countryside an incredibly lush theme is played that seems like something out of an old Lowell Thomas documentary travelogue! In the beginning of the film there is an inexplicably jazzy score playing while a man is attacked in his car by a sabre-toothed tiger. At times we glimpse the tiger who has ordinary teeth and yet when we see it in extreme close-up after being killed or in a kind of freeze frame as it attacks a car it has its sabre teeth. In another sequence we are to believe that an ordinary cat can be turned into a sabre-toothed tiger through use of a regressive serum that takes it back to its ancestors-- at least I think that's what's going on! Despite all of these oddities the film has a clear narrative and is lively enough to hold one's interest, if just in watching out for the next oddity. One is left wondering why the neanderthal man's teeth are so bad for example when in fact ancient peoples had fine teeth when we find them usually because of their ability to chew and tear with them and keep them well honed. But this fellow seems to have set on by demented dentists. Then there is the whole theory of regression into our ancestors using an argument that brain SIZE is what is most significant, not considering that development of smaller, more effective portions of the brain might evolve over time. Instead, we get here an anti-evolution theory that is so bad it is scoffed at even by the semi-literate faculty in this film. And then Mr. Shayne tells us that in "regressing" to the neanderthal state he will be going back "one million years" when in fact neanderthalers flourished 100,000 years ago, not a million, and it is never explained why he is regressing to the neanderthal state and not some other pathway of human evolution. I had a lot of fun attempting to find what I thought were staggering gaps in the overall presentation of this film BUT I enjoyed the various goofy characters, the narrative clarity and the ability of director Dupont to keep the low-budget proceedings moving about briskly. I think if you are not too demanding, have a puff of anthropology in your background and enjoy movies made solely to entertain you'll enjoy this one. By the way, the movie was HEAVILY influenced by the Bridey Murphy phase the whole country was going through at the time this movie was made!!! An American housewife named Virginia Tighe, through hypnosis, claimed to have regressed to becoming a 19th century woman named Bridey Murphy. The whole country was taken up with the belief that we could all regress to earlier lives...and that formed the inspiration for the screenplay and the outrageous theories presented in this film.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Amsterdamned (1988)
8/10
Surprise from Holland
24 August 2016
This movie was a big surprise to me. I expected only some possibly passable time-waster that might be a giallo or a secret agent film. And with subtitles in English it barely seemed worth my time. But this film is a remarkable chase film with stunts worthy of a bigger budget film. The boat chase is truly remarkable and one wonders how the director, writer, producer, music composer Dick Maas was able to accomplish all this working outside of Hollywood. The film screens like a giallo and secret agent mixture with a touch of horror thrown in at the end. The shock scenes are effectively produced for maximum effect and the story line, while fairly simple, adds up nicely at the end. The atmospheric scenes in the sewers of Amsterdam are extremely well handled. The film is long but doesn't feel so because it is so well paced. The leading lady, who looks like Senta Berger's twin sister, and the leading man, although unknown to film audiences over here do a creditable job. The film has a great deal of energy and is a real edge of your seat thriller. Hats off to the creator of this. I am going now to find out what else of his I might be able to see.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Evelyn Dall Steals the Show in This Charming British Musical- Even for Americans
10 August 2016
If you are American as I am you may not care much for British musicals but this is one to try. It stars Arthur Askey, a diminutive Britisher who can sing a bit, dance a bit, play the piano and make lots of humorous quips. I know little about him but found him genial enough and rather amusing. The stronger reason to watch this film is EVELYN DALL. She was actually an American in real life who emigrated to England because her American career was going nowhere and a popular British bandleader named Ambrose saw her in a traveling American show in England and offered her the female singing job in his band. She stayed in England for the war years and became known as the "Bronx Bombshell" for her performances in skimpy costuming and her lovely features. She became enormously popular there as a vivacious singer and comedienne and this film shows you why. She seems willing to try anything-- check out her hilarious jitterbug dance near the film's end as well as her impression of Groucho Marx. Her acting is exemplary as she listens and reacts so convincingly to the other principals. There is also a sense of genuine friendship and respect among the principals of this film that is contagious. Their scenes are well rehearsed and their personal chemistry, especially that of Arthur and Evelyn is palpable. In his autobiography Arthur Askey expressed his great fondness for her. So for you Americans here is a British World War II musical to try and perhaps Evelyn's most fun film. I will likely rank this higher than you might but I still think it's a charming, cute wartime effort that you are likely to enjoy.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Rare Chance to See 3 Great Forgotten Stars Performing
29 July 2016
The surviving versions available for this movie appear truncated, perhaps for TV viewing or including as a shorter second feature. However, there is enough of it left to piece together the film. There are 3 reasons to watch this movie. First, Irene Hervey,mother of Jack Jones and wife of singer Allen, is always a first-rate actress. What she does here with fairly ordinary material is remarkable and her radiant beauty leaves one to wonder why with all her talent she wasn't a bigger star. Charles Starrett is more famous for holding the record for most movies in a western series ever made, as he portrayed the Durango Kid. Once the pride of Dartmouth College, he was handsome, muscular and a perfect Dudley Do-Right of a leading man as the legendary hunter Orion come to life. The scenes with Starrett and Hervey are cute and charming. Finally, there is one of the greatest of the vaudeville stars ever-- Irene Franklin. Chances to see Irene doing her stuff as one of the very very first female stand-up comediennes ever (ages before Joan Rivers was credited with pioneering this). We catch a glimpse of what she used to do in the 1910s here singing a bit of her early mega-hit Redhead, doing a bit of a dance and singing an absurd and funny (stop the film and listen to the lyrics carefully) about a cowboy who had a chest that was hairy but all he could think of was the prairie. For those who like to spend their nights watching the old stars and vaudeville and screen veterans, this one is a real charmer. Also watch out for scene-stealing Ferdinand Gottschalk playing the fussbudget floor manager where Irene works. And there's silent film star H. B. Warner as Charles Starrett's kindly father caught between the world of high society morality and his own kinder nature. And there's also a small role for Chicago's Queen of Radio of the 1930s Bernadene Hayes. Although micro-budgeted, this film has a lot more fun and humorous situations in it than many a high budget screwball comedy from the golden era. For those of us who like our films old, funny and rather gentle, this is a real find.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed