My Little Chickadee.

Review #2530: My Little Chickadee.

Cast: 

Mae West (Flower Belle Lee), W. C. Fields (Cuthbert J. Twillie), Joseph Calleia (Jeff Badger/Masked Bandit), Dick Foran (Wayne Carter), Margaret Hamilton (Mrs. Gideon), Donald Meek (Amos Budge), Ruth Donnelly (Aunt Lou), Willard Robertson (Uncle John), Fuzzy Knight (Cousin Zeb), George Moran (Milton), Anne Nagel (Miss Foster), and William B. Davidson (Sheriff) Directed by Edward F. Cline (#877 - Three Ages, #1354 - The Bank Dick, #2483 - You Can't Cheat an Honest Man)

Review: 

What better way to go through another W. C. Fields movie than one with a bit of a twist? Apparently, one impetus for the film was the relative popularity of 1939's Destry Rides Again, otherwise known as the Western comedy with Marlene Dietrich and James Stewart that happened to deal with a new sheriff in town. Obviously why not go to the wheelbarrow and pair Fields, who had been in the moderately interesting You Can't Cheat an Honest Man the previous year...with West, who was looking for a comeback after her association with Paramount Pictures ended (you might remember that her sexually suggestive humor was made harder with growing censorship) with Every Day's a Holiday (1937). West claimed in later times that she wrote the majority of the film, while Fields was behind the bar scene and select parts of the dialogue, as one does when favoring ad-libbing. Used to being the big stars, they did not warm up to each other and West apparently never wanted to talk to or talk about Fields again. Naturally, there were still lines cut from the final release due, to, well, censors (hey, if you think people sound weird about sex or people, consider the dorks of yesteryear). This was the third of five movies that Fields made with Cline, with the others being Million Dollar Legs (1932), the aforementioned Honest Man, The Bank Dick (made and released the same year), and Never Give a Sucker an Even Break (1941). The movie was a fairly decent hit with audiences. As for West, her next film came with The Heat's On (1943) for Columbia Pictures, which went so well that she promptly didn't make a film again until Myra Breckinridge (1970), instead focusing her time with nightclubs, stage shows, and Broadway revivals* for years on end. 

It is the type of movie that looks great.... on paper. It merrily moves along for 84 minutes with a few good jokes and some interesting ideas of playing around with the Western with a goofy sheriff stumbling onto the scene. And then you realize, good god, this really did need just one big star and not two. Either focus on the zippy charm of West (remember that she was in her late forties doing this film and be astonished) or go along with the flim-flam world of Fields and his type of lines, because it basically feels like an episodic movie in search of more. You get your moments in the bar and with Fields yammering the huckster line, don't get that twisted. The sequence where West holds her own during a Native American attack* (done right before the "marriage" scene) certainly gives off more of an impression than most of what Fields does here, where he isn't even present during a schooling sequence involving shaping the lads up (that goes to West, as one does). Even the love triangle between West, Calleia, and Foran doesn't have the tinge of fire that you might hope for in generating anything other than a casual laugh in the circumstances that West glides along to (i.e. not caring about what one might think and moving to the beat of her own drum). At least folks like Hamilton feel right at home in busybody silliness. By the time the movie lumbers to its conclusion, you almost wish the movie had actually started right where it ended in seeing what life might be for West in the "maybe I'll choose today or tomorrow" phase with men and a town like this. As a whole, even a movie that probably does not live up to all of the potential that you would think would come from such a neat pair up is still a good enough movie to go along with, regardless of how many films you've circled around with Fields or West.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*And then there was Sextette (1978), the one loosely based on her own play that saw West, now in her eighties, play a sex symbol with an ensemble cast. She died in 1980 at the age of 87.

*The tiniest bit of gripes not exactly related to the movie. I never understood the discourse about how to refer to Native Americans past, say, the year 1980. What the hell is the argument to call them Indians when there are people from India? I know about the "Indigenous" word but, you know, no.

Dr. Cyclops.

Review #2452: Dr. Cyclops.

Cast: 

Albert Dekker (Dr. Alexander Thorkel), Thomas Coley (Bill Stockton), Janice Logan (Dr. Mary Robinson), Charles Halton (Dr. Rupert Bulfinch), Victor Kilian (Steve Baker), Frank Yaconelli (Pedro Caroz), Paul Fix (Dr. Mendoza), and Frank Reicher (Professor Kendall) Directed by Ernest B. Schoedsack (#283 - King Kong, #604 - Mighty Joe Young, #709 - The Most Dangerous Game, #914 - Son of Kong, #2057 - Blind Adventure)

Review: 

Okay, here's a semi-interesting thing about the movie: it was made in three-strip Technicolor that was apparently a first for the horror movie. The movie was apparently planned out on blueprints before shooting when it comes to certain sequences (you may wonder what the title refers to: late in the movie, the group takes the doctor's glasses and smash one of the lenses, which therefore means he can see from one eye, get it?). The movie was written by Tom Kilpatrick and an uncredited Malcolm Stuart Boylan (a screenwriter that apparently was the co-founder of the U.S. Coast Guard Auxillary)* This was the penultimate movie for Schoedsack as a director, who had a mix of noted work such as say, co-directing The Most Dangerous Game (1932) and King Kong (1933) to go along with stuff such as Outlaws of the Orient (1937). The last movie he did was nine years later with Mighty Joe Young [1949], as his vision became diminished in later years when testing equipment in World War II.

I really wish I could get into this, because there are some interesting things to look at and the movie has one useful performance. But it isn't that much more than schlock when you really get down to looking at it beyond the projection effects, particularly since most of the characters are really, really, not that interesting. You would think a movie that starts with a flourish of color to go with showing the initial weirdness of our title character...and that's really it. To put it mildly, Dekker is the only one who bothers to try for the movie because he has one interest in mind: shrinking stuff. But beyond the coke-bottle glasses and the bald head that reminds one of perhaps a mole-man, he only makes the movie semi-watchable because you would rather the film just be about his mayhem. Instead, he kind of takes a backseat once he shrinks folks down (the setup is ridiculous too: he summons a bunch of people to prove his stuff works, tells them to immediately leave and then gets mad - what did he think was going to happen?). No I'm not kidding, he has a sleeping habit that the shrunken folks take advantage of up to a point, with them at one point sneaking away to mess around with the new room they've discovered along with looking at books (the funny thing is his shrinking thing kind of stinks anyway, since they are only temporarily shrunk down to 12 inches). A good chunk of what people like about the movie relies on either the effects or Dekker, because the other people are really plain, with Logan being the only one that makes an attempt at something beyond stock. Dekker only has mild intensity and I really think the visual (bald, glasses) is more interesting than the actual character: it begs for something really bitter and spiteful when you're talking about someone who likes to deal in shrinkage. The effects are pretty fine quality (albeit one that makes sure to not go in close-up and makes sure to try and blend as much as possible with say, a killer cat) but again, the tension isn't really there to accompany the wonder you want to have in a sci-fi horror movie. The movie doesn't even give the villain a grisly death: they just cut a rope and boom, he falls into a pit (call me sick, but I thought they were going to try and find a way to get the shrinking machine onto his sorry self or their initial plan: wait until he was asleep to blow his face off with a gun). As it stands, it never really gets to its full potential and is therefore just a mild curiosity that looks a bit interesting but can't make it all fit together.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

*Wikipedia once claimed it was based on the story "Dr. Cyclops" by Henry Kuttner, a prolific writer of stories in his day (such as "The Twonky" and "Vintage Season", which were also turned into movies). But hey.

The Great McGinty.

Review #2381: The Great McGinty.

Cast: 

Brian Donlevy (Daniel McGinty), Muriel Angelus (Catherine McGinty), Akim Tamiroff (The Boss), Allyn Joslyn (George), William Demarest (Skeeters), Louis Jean Heydt (Thompson; "Tommy"), Harry Rosenthal (Louie), Arthur Hoyt (Mayor Wilfred T. Tillinghast), and Libby Taylor (Bessy) Written and Directed by Preston Sturges (#188 - Sullivan's Travels, #431 - The Palm Beach Story).

Review: 

"It's taken me eight years to reach what I wanted. But now, if I don't run out of ideas – and I won't – we'll have some fun. There are some wonderful pictures to be made, and God willing, I will make some of them."

Call it spring cleaning, call it overdue, it does seem right to return to the beginning of a worthwhile career with Preston Sturges as a director. Born in Chicago to parents that divorced when he was young, he actually served as a lieutenant in the United States Army Air Service in the late 1910s but did not see action in World War I. He had become a published writer when his essay about humor was printed when in camp, but he became an actual playwright later, after, well, a litany of stuff done that ranged from developing a kiss-proof lipstick to stage manager. The Guinea Pig, premiering in January 1929, came on a suggestion. Sturges apparently was spurred to come up with a play because a woman he was dating apparently was trying to write her own play. She wasn't actually writing a play, but Sturges and his efforts paid off with a small run on Broadway. He did a few plays but soon went to doing scripts-for-hire. Among the first scripts Sturges contributed as a writer-for-hire in Hollywood was the dialogue for The Big Pond in 1930. Probably his most noted script of the time came with The Power and the Glory (1933), a movie that happened to involve a recollection of the life of a now-dead tycoon by the people that knew him. So, how did Sturges become a director? Well, he had a script that seemed interesting to Paramount Pictures, and he sold it to them for apparently $10 with the stipulation that he direct it. The script originally was written in 1933 with Spencer Tracy in mind, but it had been unsuccessfully shopped around (even the Saturday Evening Post rejected it); apparently, Sturges was inspired by the tenure of William Sulzer as Governor in New York, where he was elected in 1912 as a Tammany Hall machine guy before he decided to pursue reform and was soon impeached and removed in nine months. The movie was shot in roughly a month, and the result was that Sturges won the first ever Academy Award for Best Writing (Original Screenplay) for his work here. Sturges would have a busy next couple of years, with this film being followed months later with Christmas in July. While his career would peak in 1944 because of quibbles with producers, Sturges ultimately directed twelve movies prior to his death in 1959 at the age of 60, such as The Lady Eve (1941), The Palm Beach Story (1942), and Hail the Conquering Hero (1944). Donlevy and Tamiroff would reprise their roles for The Miracle of Morgan's Creek (1942). 

Sure, of course this is the kind of movie that starts with a text screen: "This is the story of two men who met in a banana republic. One of them was honest all his life except one crazy minute. The other was dishonest all his life except one crazy minute. They both had to get out of the country." What you get is a recollection of grafting and the mockery that comes in seeing waste and corruption on display for the public that reminds you that the past wasn't merely just "the good ol' days" for everyone. Granted, we don't go around giving money to the bread-liner who votes, but who is going to say that people are more aware of their local politicians playing the grift game? But then again, how many honest people do you see in public anyway? In that regard, Donlevy makes for a quality lead performance, one that can be smooth in his ways of words that can bully/sweet talk plenty of people in the film because of how he makes it sound. In other words, when you get the chance at a hustle, you might as well jump at it in full force. Of course, it just so happens he does fall for Angelus because, well, there is a certain type of interest that she generates in her casual nature of normalcy even when playing a part in the initial scam of a happy family. Tamiroff* happens to make for quite the booming figure of the man behind the strings, a baron of his surroundings with plenty of timing to match in what you might call good ol' boy bluster. The 83 minutes passes through with ease and a worthy sense of biting wit for the ridiculousness that comes through in politics and people in general with what they believe is worthy for the people to see from the public and the real price of truth and power. The movie chuckles along with itself in the manner of someone who knows a cynical ditty and is all the more ready to make a yarn about it, and this is a worthwhile debut for Sturges and company, managing to be a funny film of grifts and grafts gone by the wayside of influence that is a neat gem for those to encounter all these years later.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars. 

*Orson Welles once called him "the greatest of all screen actors."

The Invisible Man Returns.

Review #2279: The Invisible Man Returns.

Cast: 

Cedric Hardwicke (Richard Cobb), Vincent Price (Geoffrey Radcliffe), Nan Grey (Helen Manson), John Sutton (Dr. Frank Griffin), Cecil Kellaway (Inspector Sampson), Alan Napier (Willie Spears), Forrester Harvey (Ben Jenkins), and Paul England (Detective) Directed by Joe May.

Review: 

You have to be a bit bold to flat out call your movie a sequel to H. G. Wells' The Invisible Man, particularly since well, Wells didn't do a follow-up work to his famous 1897 novel. The 1933 adaptation by Universal (as directed by James Whale) even matched the book in killing off its lead character. But here we are because Universal Pictures loved the idea of doing follow-ups to their horror films and had a hit with Son of Frankenstein (1939). Universal apparently had an interesting time to pick a director and an actor for the title role (thinking of Rowland V. Lee to direct) but eventually settled with May to direct and picked Vincent Price (having originally thought about casting someone familiar like Boris Karloff at first before going for "young and good-looking upcomer"). This was released at the tail end of May's career as a director (having emigrated from Austria to America in the 1930s) as he directed just four further films prior to his death in 1954 at the age of 73. Four writers were utilized for this film: Lester K. Cole and Curt Siodmak wrote the screenplay while May, Siodmak, and Cedric Belfrage wrote the story. The movie apparently was shot over the course of a month in late 1939. The effects were credited to John P. Fulton, Bernard B. Brown and William Hedgcock, which apparently dealt with shooting in black velvet. The next two films dealing with invisible people from Universal were not exactly horror films, but Siodmak wrote both of them (with May being there as well for one of them) with the sci-fi comedy The Invisible Woman (1940) and the action/spy film Invisible Agent (1942). Jon Hall served as the new title character for that film and The Invisible Man's Revenge (1944).

Admittedly, the sequel does have one neat card to play: it isn't merely just doing the last film again, particularly since it seems hard to top Claude Rains and his performance from a few years ago. For one, it is more of a gradual unravelling as one might see from a procedural, complete with a somewhat low-key lead presence (note that "Sir" Hardwicke actually isn't in the film for very long). The justification for how one gets to see a new invisible man is pretty interesting: when framed for murder and on the door for execution, friends resort to helping a guy turn loose and invisible. It has a "fine" pace at 81 minutes that is more interesting when trying to play for effects rather than play itself in showing the locale that is, well, not nearly as effective in relief that one already saw years prior. It probably is more interesting to wonder just what one would end up doing in terms of stability when it comes to the idea of invisibility, and like before it presents someone who gets wrapped up a bit in chaos but otherwise had a genuine idea in mind in going with the whole thing. This was the fourth feature film for Price, who actually would go through a variety of supporting roles (with some top billing) in noirs and period films before getting latched onto as a horror guy by the 1950s. He does just fine for a role that is all about the voice over all, which he plays with concern rather than ham, which probably makes sense. Hardwicke gives the worried elegance of someone doing a job quick and easy while Grey and Sutton at least fill out the movie in casual interest (i.e. a bit of science-babble and babble about their friend). Kellaway isn't even forced to play skeptic to what's going around him, he just plays it straight. As such, it may be a hokey sequel not quite up to the original stuff, but it at least has some commitment to doing drama with some quality effects and useful enough pacing to keep one invested to the bitter end. It's a familiar comfort, go figure.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Mark of Zorro (1940).

Review #1869: The Mark of Zorro.

Cast: 

Tyrone Power (Don Diego Vega/Zorro), Linda Darnell (Lolita Quintero), Basil Rathbone (Captain Esteban Pasquale), Gale Sondergaard (Inez Quintero), Eugene Pallette (Friar Felipe), J. Edward Bromberg (Don Luis Quintero), Montagu Love (Don Alejandro Vega), Janet Beecher (Senora Isabella Vega), George Regas (Sergeant Gonzales), Chris-Pin Martin (Turnkey), and Robert Lowery (Rodrigo) Directed by Rouben Mamoulian (#773 - Applause)

Review: 

Zorro, if you remember correctly, originally appeared in serialized form in 1919 from author Johnston McCulley, which went under the title as "The Curse of Capistrano" (it has since been published as The Mark of Zorro). As such, the first film adaptation came with The Mark of Zorro (1920), with Douglas Fairbanks as the adventurous one-man force that served as a co-writer, producer, and star. 20th Century Fox had the rights to do a remake when they bought them from Fairbanks, although it did not stop other stories to be adapted involving the character as created by McCulley, such as Republic Pictures making The Bold Caballero (1936). Of course, Tyrone Power is an ideal matinee idol to take the helm as the title lead. The Cincinnati native was an actor as was the case with his Irish great-grandfather (the original Tyrone Power), his grandmother (Ethel Lavenu), and his father (Tyrone Sr.). He appeared in films starting in 1932, but it was his appearance in his fifth with Lloyd's of London (1936) that made him into a screen presence worth seeing on the screen over and over, and he was only 22. At the helm of director was a solid successor from Fred Niblo in Rouben Mamoulian. He had emigrated from the Russian Empire to England before to direct plays before moving to the States to teach and direct opera/theatre. He would direct a variety of productions even after entering film such as Oklahoma! and Carousel. His first film was Applause (1929), an early sound feature, but his best-known feature is probably Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931). He would direct films on a regular basis from 1929 to 1942 (with two more films afterwards) that did a variety of genres (noir, musicals, adventure) while also serving as a founding father for the Directors Guild of America; he died at the age of 90 in 1987. Six years before his death, Zorro, the Gay Blade (1981) was dedicated to him as a tribute to the classic adventure portrayed in this film. 

The screenplay was done by John Taintor Foote while the story was done by Garrett Fort and Bess Meredyth. One other key tribute came with the world of comic books, as it is one of the parts of the original origin-story of Batman (whose parents were killed after a screening of the movie); Zorro in general proved an inspiration to the concept of Batman as devised by Bob Kane and Bill Finger, since both characters are folks presenting themselves as rich playboys while secretly fighting crime in a dark costume. Coincidentally, this film has a member of the cast in Robert Lowery, who would become the second actor to play the character of Batman in a film serial later in the 1940s. This film and The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) share two actors basically playing the same type of character with Rathbone and Pallette. It might not be as great as the original feature in terms of outright professionalism and newness (i.e. not being the first great Zorro adventure), but it does make for a solid adventure film with enough reason to exist with a capable lead and all-around charm to make it just as interesting for the curious moviegoer to view hand in hand with past and future Zorro movies. Mamoulian achieves a film with plenty of fluid engagement and rhythm that achieves plenty in 94 minutes. The balance of narrative and action is done to where one isn't aching to see too much of one over the other, moving along with smiles rather than gloom. Power plays the double act required in the title lead with worthy screen presence, dashing in the moments needed for his public face but also riveting when it comes to being the man in black with an accompanying tight drawl. He might be young, but he has the presence of an old soul that probably would've fit well in a variety of action eras (sure, Zorro should probably be played by someone of a different ethnicity when it comes to helping people living in California before it became a state, but one must pick their battles when it comes to older films). Darnell and Power have semi-decent chemistry together despite the age difference (ten years between the 26-year old Power and, well...) with at least some sort of general innocence to make things look semi-solid (Sondergaard does seem more intrigued to be in the same room with Power at times though). Pallette is the ideal pairing with Power in heroic accomplice for all of his drawing power in voice qualities and timing. Bromberg makes for a decent stooge pretender, although Rathbone is the key other highlight, one with dignified ruthlessness that simmers well against Power in the ways expected to help make its ultimate endpoint quite worth it (of course, he was quite good with fencing to where he did not need to have a double). Fred Cavens helped choregraph the fencing sequence while his son Albert served as a stunt double for Power in shots from behind, which means one isn't watching sequences of folks jumping around while trying to fence (not that there's anything wrong with that, since it is execution that matters more than anything). The funny thing is that it isn't the final part of the film, since there's still a bit of time left to wrap things up, which works out just fine, bookending itself in throwing a sword into the air with winking convenience. As a whole, it runs at a slick rate that will dazzle all whoever heard of the term "matinee" and lined up to see it with rapt attention, packed with energy that has not dulled over the prevailing eight decades since release that shows how one can re-adapt prior material and make it seem fresh and worthy of viewing for audiences that other films wish they could do so well.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Sanshiro Sugata.

Rebecca (1940).

Review #1828: Rebecca. 

Cast: 
Joan Fontaine (The second Mrs. de Winter), Laurence Olivier (George Fortescue Maximilian "Maxim" de Winter), Judith Anderson (Mrs. Danvers), George Sanders (Jack Favell), Reginald Denny (Frank Crawley), Gladys Cooper (Beatrice Lacy), C. Aubrey Smith (Colonel Julyan), Nigel Bruce (Major Giles Lacy), Florence Bates (Mrs. Edythe Van Hopper), Edward Fielding (Frith), Melville Cooper (Coroner at trial), Leo G. Carroll (Dr. Baker), and Leonard Carey (Ben) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, #964 - The Ring (1927), #965 - Downhill, #970 - Mr. and Mrs. Smith, #977 - Frenzy, and #1343 - The 39 Steps, and #1739 - The Birds)

Review:

It does become interesting to consider just how many movies one can see of the late Alfred Hitchcock, particularly since his line of work has taken up nine percent of all films I've ever seen, which is a weird way of saying seventeen films. Of course, the real story is the fact that this was not only the 26th feature film directed by Hitchcock, it was his first directed in Hollywood. Hitchcock was forty years old when he decided to move to Hollywood, having believed that he reached his peak in his native Britain, and it was the efforts of producer David O. Selznick that led to him moving; the two signed a seven-year contract; Hitchcock would end up producing more films by himself than with Selznick, and they would have their disagreements in terms of personality and professionalism when it came to this film, to where they only worked on one other film together in Spellbound a couple of years later, most notably because Hitchcock liked to film a controlled cut without too much extra footage. As such, this is an adaptation of the novel of the same name that had been written by Daphne du Maurier, and it was Hitchcock who had adapted her previous book Jamaica Inn in 1939. Incidentally, the book had been adapted on radio by Orson Welles in 1938, and a stage adaptation had been done by Du Maurier in 1939. Selznick aimed to be quite faithful to the book, as much as one can do with the Production Code, which had one particular rule about spouse death. Hitchcock was a busy man, since this was also the year of release for Foreign Correspondent, which like this film would be nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture (other films nominated were films such as The Grapes of Wrath, The Great Dictator, and The Philadelphia Story). As it happened, Rebecca would win the award, making it the only Hitchcock film to ever win the honor; Selznick, as the recipient of the award, became the first back-to-back winner for a producer. As such, the screenplay was done by Robert E. Sherwood and Joan Harrison, while the adaptation was done by Philip MacDonald and Michael Hogan. 

Several actors were considered for the main roles, such as Ronald Colman, William Powell, Olivia de Havilland, Loretta Young, among others. Sometimes one needs a Gothic vision to really see the talents of Hitchcock come alive, if only because one wants to see just where the rabbit hole goes in mystery and tortured romance, where the unsaid is more biting than the action. 130 minutes never felt so magnificent when it comes to how Hitchcock has handled the macabre with the terror that comes from memories of a deceased wife that haunts both an estate and the husband himself (incidentally, one never sees the title character nor knows the name of the one of the main characters) that creates such diverting paranoia without becoming a costume show; George Barnes and his cinematography help in that regard to make a stirring film look as alive as it does, and it probably isn't surprising that Barnes won an Academy Award for his work. Of course, the cast is just as effective as the crew. Olivier portrays the vulnerability required with such brooding patience that makes for quite a volatile and curious interaction with Fontaine, one ripped by the past that holds him down further than anything else could, which means one is watching a gripping performance that isn't just a show for Olivier (a talented actor already noted for his performance in Wuthering Heights the year before). Fontaine (the younger sister of actress Olivia de Havilland) had a few key roles in films before this film, most notably Gunga Din (1939), but this was the film that made her a key star (Fontaine however did not care for her typecasting for just melodramatic roles, which would include films done by Selznick like Jane Eyre (1943) and even another du Maurier adaptation in Frenchman's Creek the next year). It doesn't take much to see why she became a star, because her performance is quite excellent, one with the exact type of withering vulnerability required in showing doubt that doesn't become overshadowed by the other members of the cast, and the growing confidence by the second half only helps to make a well-rounded performance of curiosity. Anderson (considered one of the great stage actors of her time) makes a compelling adversarial presence, one who lurks around Fontaine that practically glides from scene to scene (complete with a lack of blinking) that makes the final result all the more haunting. Sanders, when he does show up, makes a perfect cad to view against the others, and the rest of the cast keeps the proceedings dignified and well invested. As a whole, the movie is a classic worth viewing among all the other Hitchcock classics for what is seen and what isn't seen in this Gothic mystery that has the highlights from its director and producer in Selznick without becoming consumed by itself. One can debate just where the film rests among the classics, but one knows by the time the film ends that it is up there in the margins somewhere for what it ends up doing with a master at work.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Mummy's Hand.

Review #1735: The Mummy's Hand.

Cast: 

Dick Foran (Steve Banning), Peggy Moran (Marta Solvani), Wallace Ford (Babe Jenson), Eduardo Ciannelli (the High Priest), George Zucco (Professor / Andoheb), Cecil Kellaway (Tim "The Great Solvani" Sullivan), Charles Trowbridge (Dr. Petrie), Tom Tyler (Kharis), and Sig Arno (The Beggar) Directed by Christy Cabanne.

Review: 

Believe it or not, the Univeral line of horror movies was not a constant cycle that just churned out interesting monster after monster; sure, Universal opened the door with The Phantom of the Opera (1925), but it was Dracula (1931) that set the stage for a craze of films in the next five years that generally adapted literary material such as the works of Edgar Allan Poe or H.G. Wells. The Mummy (1932), however, was instead inspired by the public interest in Egyptian tombs and curses. By 1936, the cycle of these films would take a pause because of the power struggle that came about over ownership of Universal Pictures, which struggled with financial overruns with the Laemmle family in charge. Until the fall of 1938, there were no plans for future films...until Universal heard about the positivity coming from the Regina-Wilshire Theatre in Beverly Hills, which showed a double feature of Dracula and Frankenstein and attracted crowds, including Bela Lugosi being used to promote it; they would make their own prints to show around (while having Lugosi do a wide tour) and soon found themselves in a decision to return into the world of horror. As such, Son of Frankenstein (1939) started a new cycle of horror films from the company, which would include old and new monsters with features such as The Invisible Man Returns (1940), The Wolf Man (1941), and others. However, with the Mummy series, a re-imagining would be done for the four feature films done in the 1940s (each with the title of "The Mummy's [blank]" with this one, Tomb, Ghost, and Curse). The 1931 film featured a mummy by name of Ardeth Bay / Imhotep, while this one features a mummy named Kharis, which would be the name for each of the subsequent films (this does not include the Abbott and Costello crossover film, which spelled it as Klaris). The story was done by Griffin Jay, who also did the screenplay with Maxwell Shane; the film was made on a modest budget of $84,000 while having a bit of footage re-used from the original feature (because why re-stage something you already shot in a time where you couldn't just watch the other film on a whim?) and sets re-used from Green Hell (released the same year, incidentally directed by James Whale). At the helm of director was Cabanne, a stage/film actor-turned-director that would turn out films at a proficient rate from the 1910s all the way until his last film in 1948, with a good deal of them being Westerns. Oddly enough, it was a guy known for Westerns that would play the title character for this film with Tom Tyler. One can imagine why anybody would only want to do one feature where cotton is glued to the face for wrinkles (I imagine it took less than eight hours to get the job done this time around).

This, along with a handful of the horror films of its era, belong to the B-movie classification, ones that could be slickly made and shown out to fill the billing for whatever theatres needed in the era of the 1940s, for better or worse (Frankenstein would turn into a monster mash with varying results, for example). One could probably do better with 67 minutes than to watch a curiously average affair that this film proves to be, one that has a bit more of the Mummy than the original but without as much interest in actually doing anything useful besides attempts at building a quartet that go about as well as riding a bike blindfolded. Technically, the only interesting presence is Zucco, who certainly had a knack for playing the heavy (whether suave or mad), although Tyler and a frame-by-frame blackening out of his eyes is a close second (incidentally, Lon Chaney Jr would play the title character in the next three films, while Zucco would appear in two of them). The effects are fairly decent here too for the character, so there is that to consider. To add one more Western connection, Foran was actually known for his performances in Western musicals and supporting roles. For such a wooden time, he is probably the better of the main four, if only because he fits the requirements of a calm middle man with the bare minimum (the same could be applied to Moran, but playing the one in distress on a slab doesn't help). Nay, the flaws rests with the attempts at making comic relief with Ford and Kellaway. Sure, each actor had a handful of films to show their stuff as character presences, but they seem wasted here because the comic stuff just isn't that interesting. With such a short time to spare (particularly after spending the first few minutes with Zucco in relaying the plot), one doesn't have much patience with goofy things that revolve from trying to trick a magician in a bar to talking about a trick with a pebble. Besides, the mummy doesn't exactly have as much threatening power if all it does is being used as a tool to kill everybody but the main group (involving extinct leaves being turned into tana liquid). The climax is especially annoying in this regard, since Zucco and Ford get to engage in a short gunfight where they somehow shoot at each other but only one manages to hit anything (and if you remember correctly with Zucco, this means nobody really shot the other!) while the mummy stumbles around with a tied up person (brought in by Zucco because he wants to be immortal with her because...guarding the mummy isn't enough?). Honestly, besides torching the mummy, the quarter getting spoils of the tomb they eventually found is probably the most insulting thing, because we are here for the tiniest bit of horror, not fortune. As a whole, the film served as a quick way of getting folks back in the seats for a mummy after eight years of seclusion, and while I can't say I liked the film, it might prove a curiosity for anyone wanting quickly-done horror or for folks already interested in just where Universal liked to go with their monsters.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.

The Philadelphia Story.

Review #1355: The Philadelphia Story.

Cast: 
Cary Grant (C.K. Dexter Haven), Katharine Hepburn (Tracy Samantha Lord), James Stewart (Macaulay "Mike" Connor), Ruth Hussey (Elizabeth Imbrie), John Howard (George Kittredge), Roland Young (William Q. Tracy), John Halliday (Seth Lord), Mary Nash (Margaret Lord), Virginia Weidler (Dinah Lord), and Henry Daniell (Sidney Kidd) Directed by George Cukor (#479 - Travels with My Aunt and #974 - A Star is Born)

Review: 
There are films that are born to be classics. This is one of those movies, pure and simple. Who better to headline this film than three prime stars of Hollywood's Golden Age: Grant, Hepburn, and Stewart. Each had their own way of finding success, which they would utilize for several decades, with a combined five Academy Awards on 18 nominations between them, with the latter two receiving the most benefit from the film in their own ways. had found herself drawn to acting while in college, with her debut in theater occurring in 1928. She spent four years with mostly small roles, but she was noticed in The Warrior's Husband by a scout that led to subsequent screen-testing for RKO for A Bill of Divorcement (1932). Director George Cukor was impressed, and the two would become friends that would do ten films together. She proved a success with the film, and she subsequently won an Academy Award for her third film in Morning Glory (1933). However, her career soon went through a series of setbacks in terms of audience appeal (both in film and theater) that would enclose the rest of the decade, which led her to be dubbed "Box office poison" in one film journal. There were a few moderate successes among slight flops, with a good deal of those films now being held in better respect, such as Mary of Scotland (1936) and Bringing Up Baby (1938). In 1939, she starred in the comic play The Philadelphia Story by Philip Barry. Inspired by the antics of socialite Helen Hope Montgomery Scott, Barry wrote the play directly for Hepburn, who took on the lead role alongside funding it, which ran for over a year to success. When it came to film rights, Hepburn was given the films rights as a gift by Howard Hughes, which she soon sold to Metro Goldwyn Mayer for the chance to star and choose her own team to direct, write and star. This led to the hiring of Cukor, Donald Ogden Stewart (with un-credited help for the award winning work by Waldo Salt), and the aforementioned two sides of the dynamic triangle for the film in Grant and Stewart, who had just found success in leading roles through You Can't Take It With You (1938) and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939).

It is easy to see why this proved to be Hepburn's resurgent comeback. Beyond the fact that she has two dynamic leads to go alongside a game script, she proves her ground with allure, where one sees her vulnerability alongside a good sense of humor that has tremendous chemistry with the other leads. Grant does just as well, having a good sense of timing and debonair nature. Stewart provides some offbeat everyman charm that generates the kind of warmth one would expect from him while delivering a few laughs in one notable scene where he is carrying Hepburn home after a midnight dip, while singing bits of "Somewhere over the Rainbow". Hussey and Howard also prove to be quite interesting in comparison to the others, both lending their own kind of depth (whether fawning or cynical, respectively) that keep them from being just in the background. Young, Nash, and Weidler also keep the support moving with their contribution to the depth the film has in compelling entertainment. The film is generally listed under the genre of romantic comedy with the subgenre of "comedy of remarriage", in which a couple divorces and flirts with others before remarrying (in a time where affairs were not allowed by the Production Code). It has plenty of passion along with moments of amusement, starting right from the opening scene, with an friendly exchange of broken golf clubs and a shove to the ground from the newly divorced leads. Cukor is certainly the right director for this kind of material, one that is smart with where it wants go in romance and amusement, keeping a steady pace of 112 minutes with plenty of heart that makes it a seminal picture of its genre and for the decade as a whole. It is a tremendous achievement for its iconic stars and its director that is definitely worth a look anytime.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Bank Dick.

Review #1354: The Bank Dick.

Cast: 
W.C. Fields (Egbert Sousé), Cora Witherspoon (Agatha Sousé), Una Merkel (Myrtle Sousé), Evelyn Del Rio (Elsie Mae Adele Brunch Sousé), Jessie Ralph (Mrs. Hermisillo Brunch), Grady Sutton (Og Oggilby), Franklin Pangborn (J. Pinkerton Snoopington), Shemp Howard (Joe Guelpe), Dick Purcell (Mackley Q. Greene), Russell Hicks (J. Frothingham Waterbury), Pierre Watkin (Mr. Skinner), and Jack Norton (A. Pismo Clam) Directed by Edward F. Cline (#877 - Three Ages)

Review: 
"You've heard the old legend that it's the little put-upon guy who gets the laughs, but I'm the most belligerent guy on the screen. I'm going to kill everybody. But, at the same time, I'm afraid of everybody—just a great big frightened bully"

Comedians can come in all shapes and sizes. They can deliver laughs on screen through sight gags, verbal puns, or through their comic persona. One can see many kinds of personas play out in film if they watch enough of them, and W. C. Fields is one that isn't easily forgotten. he was characterized for his misanthropic persona alongside a distinct hard-drinking drawl, with his strong presence often being identified with Fields (particularly his supposed hatred of dogs and kids). Fields' first talent was in juggling, entering vaudeville in 1898. He made his Broadway debut seven years later before appearing in the Ziegfeld Follies revue in 1915 to entertain the audience with a billiards skit. That year, he made his appearance in film for the first time with Pool Sharks, a short film. Not until 1924 did he return to film (due to stage-work), and he worked with various directors over the following decade ranging from D. W. Griffith (Sally of the Sawdust, That Royle Girl) to A. Edward Sutherland (It's the Old Army Game and five others). Health troubles led to his career slowing down in his final years, where he starred in just five films from 1938 to 1941, while making appearances in four other films in the following three years (along with continued radio appearances) before his death in 1946. at the age of 66. In any case, this was his penultimate starring role, for which he also contributed the story (under the pun name of Mahatma Kane Jeeves), while Richard A. Carroll helped with dialogue. Cline, who also began his career in vaudeville along with being one of the Keystone Kops, served as director, his fourth of five collaborations with Fields (the first was Million Dollar Legs in 1932). He believed in just letting Fields run with whatever he wanted to do, while editing out any undesired ad-libs (which tended to crack up the crew, including Cline at times).

Fields seems right at home with this film, a drunken crank who still manages to generate amusement alongside sympathy that makes for a entertaining sit at 72 minutes. He has a confidence to him in delivering zippy lines (whether when seeming drunk or not) and interacting with the others, whether that means pretending to be a film director or nearly throwing a urn at his daughter. He is exactly the kind of person we love to see be on screen with his flaws because they are the flaws we can see in ourselves. He may mistreat a kid or a mess with a comic foil, but we find ourselves laughing all the same. The film definitely has an episodic feel to it, particularly whether when seeing him as a director or in the saloon or the bank, but it never loses momentum at any rate. The rest of the cast keep up as useful foils, particularly with Sutton, Pangborn, and Howard. They have different manners of interacting against Fields (whether friendly or not), and they keep up with his antics just fine. The film builds itself up to a frantic chase sequence (complete with a re-used gag from one of Cline's earlier works) that makes for silly charm. One will have a fun time with this feature, a stand-out that represents Fields at the top of his game in making one laugh with entertainment. There should be no doubts about watching this to alleviate their curiosity, that much is for sure.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

His Girl Friday.

Review #1352: His Girl Friday.

Cast: 
Cary Grant (Walter Burns), Rosalind Russell (Hildy Johnson), Ralph Bellamy (Bruce Baldwin), Gene Lockhart (Sheriff Hartwell), Porter Hall (Murphy), Ernest Truex (Bensinger), Cliff Edwards (Endicott), Clarence Kolb (the Mayor), Roscoe Karns (McCue), Frank Jenks (Wilson), Regis Toomey (Sanders), Abner Biberman (Louie), Frank Orth (Duffy), and John Qualen (Earl Williams) Directed by Howard Hawks (#951 - The Big Sleep)

Review: 
Everybody needs a remake now and then. Or, at the very least, an adaptation of material that strives to improve what had been done before without seeming like a complete cash-grab or unnecessary. In other words, it makes sense to have someone like Howard Hawks at the helm of directing an adaptation of The Front Page, which had been adapted nine years prior. It was a chance meeting with cinematographer and future director Victor Fleming (while racing on vacation) that helped him get his first film job in 1917, serving as a prop boy for In Again, Out Again. After serving in World War I (serving in the US Army Air Service), he returned to Hollywood. Over the next few years, he gradually moved from producer on short films to production editing before his eventual directorial debut with The Road to Glory (1926) for Fox Film. He worked with that studio for three years with marginal success, but over the next four decades he worked as an independent producer-director, with The Dawn Patrol (1930) helping in his transition from silent to sound. He directed in various genres, ranging from romance to comedy to westerns to noir to action. Although he received just one nomination for Best Director, he received an Academy Honorary Award in 1974, three years before his death at 81. Hawks aspired to make a fast-paced adaptation, utilizing multiple microphones (which needed to be turned on and off by the sound technician for scenes, which could be done as much as 35 times) and even using a sound mixer to try and speed up the dialogue to be faster than The Front Page. Hawks encouraged his actors to be spontaneous, with improvisation in the lines serving to help in having the film run a few days over schedule. The main difference between the two films is the character of Hildy being played by a woman, with Hawks being inspired by the actor auditions (or more specifically, someone reading lines belonging to a character) and how his female secretary was saying the lines. Charles Lederer (co-writer of the previous adaptation) was brought in to write this film, which would keep some of the dialogue from before. In any case, this is a wonderful movie, having plenty of charming moments within a quick 92 minute pace that lives to its potential through a solid duo in Grant and Russell. Whether bantering with each other or with others, each does their part in generating amusement while following most of the beats from before without seeming old-hat or too familiar. Grant can be quite conniving with charm, and Russell (who was quite talented in both comedic and dramatic roles) holds up with her own energy, with her even hiring an ad-writer to give her more clever lines, which only Grant seemed to notice. Bellamy holds up just as well with being the straight man to these quirky folks, while Lockhart and Kolb make for a crooked pair of chuckles. The others provide a chuckle or two, with nobody seeming too out-of-place in the long run. It's a charming movie, one that runs fast to please and joke around with through some clever work by Hawks and his cast that makes this a worthy comedy to sit through (perhaps more than once). After all, the film lapsed into the public domain, so one can view it any-time they please without trouble, so there really is no reason to avoid this movie and have your curiosity rewarded. A solid remake that improves on the original - no question there.

Next Review: Sonic the Hedgehog.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Great Dictator.

Review #1054: The Great Dictator.

Cast: 
Charlie Chaplin (Adenoid Hynkel - Dictator of Tomania / A Jewish Barber), Paulette Goddard (Hannah), Jack Oakie (Napaloni - Dictator of Bacteria), Henry Daniell (Garbitsch), Reginald Gardiner (Schultz), Billy Gilbert (Herring), Maurice Moscovitch (Mr. Jaeckel), Grace Hayle (Madame Napaloni), Carter DeHaven (Bacterian Ambassador), Emma Dunn (Mrs. Jaeckel), Bernard Gorcey (Mr. Mann), Paul Weigel (Mr. Agar), and Chester Conklin (Barber's Customer) Directed by Charlie Chaplin (#353 - Monsieur Verdoux, #599 - The Kid, #600 - City Lights, #759 - The Gold Rush, #775 - Shoulder Arms, #820 - Modern Times, #923 - The Pilgrim, #1025 - The Circus, and #1041 - A Woman of Paris)

Review: 
The Great Dictator was Charlie Chaplin's first true sound film, along with his first without his character of "The Tramp", which he had utilized for his silent films. In any case, the film was released a year after the beginning of World War II, with Chaplin playing a parody of Adolf Hitler and Oakie playing a parody of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, although it was noted by Chaplin in later years that had he knew about the horrors of the concentration camps, he wouldn't have made the film. The film manages to be brilliant in utilizing comedy, satire and drama without having either of its elements being lost in excess, being a funny but also brave movie that holds its principles together by finding a balance in its two environments, with credit going to Chaplin and his script. Chaplin also does a tremendous job in both of his roles, having a fine distinct nature that works well within the mistaken identity parts later on, with the dictator parts having numerous highlights with all of the gestures and posturing that definitely strikes a chord. The parts with the barber might remind you a bit of the Tramp, although he plays it more of a outsider type that certainly fits. Goddard does a fine job in her parts on screen, having fine chemistry with Chaplin at points. Oakie does a stand-out job, having the correct amount of bombast and stature that makes for amusing rapport with Chaplin when they are both on screen together, particularly one scene involving chairs. Daniell and Gardiner also do fine jobs in their parts, distinct in their roles within the dictatorship that leave room for amusement. The rest of the actors do fair jobs in their roles. There are numerous great sequences and gags involving both slapstick and language, with one of my favorites being the ballet with a globe, which is helped by the music by Meredith Willson and Charlie Chaplin, fairly brilliant in its own right that has a fine timing to them that helps contributes to the flow of the film effectively for several scenes. The cinematography by Karl Struss and Roland Totheroh (a regular for some of Chaplin's films) is acceptable for the movie and its look.

The film does run finely at 124 minutes, never feeling too long. I will state that the climax of the film feels a bit sudden, particularly since it ends with a speech, which is an inspiring piece at least, so I can't blame Chaplin for wanting to incorporate it in a film he had all control over. Since that serves as the last point for the film, it is strange to wonder what would've happened after that point in the film, although apparently a folk dance sequence was apparently going to serve as the finale, and there were also plans to include shots of people from all over the world that would accept the message of peace, but these were abandoned after a bit of shooting from Chaplin. In any case, the movie isn't ruined by the last part, so take his words for what you will. The film was nominated for five Academy Awards (Outstanding Production (now known as Best Picture), Best Actor, Writing (Original Screenplay), Best Supporting Actor (Oakie), & Best Music (Original Score), although it fell short each time. It has since been selected by the Library of Congress for preservation in the National Film Registry, and it is easy to see why. This is a brilliantly made movie that serves as a fine piece of entertainment for all ages that belongs with the rest of Chaplin's classics for a look.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Shop Around the Corner.

Review #1026: The Shop Around the Corner.

Cast: 
Margaret Sullavan (Klara Novak), James Stewart (Alfred Kralik), Frank Morgan (Hugo Matuschek), Joseph Schildkraut (Ferencz Vadas), Sara Haden (Flora Kaczek), Felix Bressart (Pirovitch), William Tracy (Pepi Katona), Inez Courtney (Ilona Novotny), and Charles Halton (Detective) Directed by Ernst Lubitsch.

Review: 
Honestly, I did not expect to watch this film before I saw it, although I will admit that it has lingered on my mind for quite a while. I especially did not expect to do it after doing a film that took elements (along with the play I will mention later on in this review), which was You've Got Mail (#1020), reviewed by me just eleven days ago. That movie was okay, not being anything too special but also not too cynical. Viewers of both films will notice the scenes that share some (but not too much) similarity with each other, although the structure and characters both differ. As mentioned before, The Shop Around the Corner is based off the play Parfumerie by Miklós László, a Hungarian play that premiered at the Pest Theatre in Budapest in 1937. I had forgotten to mention that the film was later turned into a musical named In the Good Old Summertime (released in 1949), which featured Judy Garland and Van Johnson. In fact the play was adapted into a musical itself in 1963 with She Loves Me, so clearly there has been quite a bit of ground covered with this material.

In any case, this is a fine fun time, and it is the work of Sullavan and Stewart that make all of that possible, as they just have an interesting amount of scenes with each other that gives the movie charm. Stewart always seems to leave a fine impression of sincerity and no-nonsense that certainly resonates well even today, and that reflects especially well in a movie in which he bickers with Sullavan's character. She also does a fine job at making her character credible along with one that we can also root for without any doubt. The heart of the film is in the characters that are showcased to us, and the fact that they become people we care about in some way, such as Schildkraut and his kindly nature that zings well with Stewart and Morgan at times. Speaking of which, Morgan also does a tremendous job in the film as well, balancing the line between insecure and bossy in the best way possible, never becoming one that we can't find interesting to watch. The rest of the cast also do fine, with Schildkraut and Tracy standing out due to how they play their roles neatly. The film goes along the lines you might expect, but it's the way that it uses charm along with some enjoyable atmosphere that makes it a clear winner. It doesn't smother you with sentimentality, but it also doesn't skimp on being romantic along with amusing, being smart with what it wants in its 99 minute run-time. It's a movie that is inclusive in its fun, not sealing itself for only a select few. It's an easy pick to recommend, particularly if one is in the spirit for things such as this.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Ghost Breakers.

Review #650: The Ghost Breakers.

Cast
Bob Hope (Larry Lawrence), Paulette Goddard (Mary Carter), Richard Carlson (Geoff Montgomery), Paul Lukas (Parada), Willie Best (Alex), Pedro de Cordoba (Havez), Virginia Brissac (Mother Zombie), Noble Johnson (The Zombie), and Anthony Quinn (Ramon Mederes/Francisco Mederes) Directed by George Marshall.

Review
The Ghost Breakers isn't exactly a horror film, it's a comedy-horror mix, but it fits into the context of this month, and I get to rectify a long running mistake: Not reviewing a film with Bob Hope in the main cast. It's weird how it took almost four years to do this given Hope had a long running career with over 50 films in a span of 40 years not counting cameo roles. But anyway, this is a movie that even has zombies in it, and guys who play dual roles, this could very well have been a drama, though the movie had been made two times before in the silent era, so who knows? The actors are pretty good conveying spooks and decent enough comedic timing, Hope is probably the best  part of the movie, right next to the cinematography by Charles B. Lang, along with some really fine camera shots that make the movie at least have some chilliness to it. The movie is short at about 83 minutes, but it moves at a good pace and it manages to not overstay or under stay its welcome. Goddard does a pretty good job being the lead next to Hope, she even gets in a few fun lines, and her and Hope share a good rapport in this film, which is a plus. The movie is enjoyable enough and sweet enough to work as a film to watch if it's on or a rental, especially for this month.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Devil Bat.

Review #533: The Devil Bat.

Cast
Bela Lugosi (Paul Carruthers), Suzanne Kaaren (Mary Heath), Dave O'Brien (Johnny Layden), Guy Usher (Henry Morton), Yolande Donlan (Maxine), Donald Kerr (One-Shot McGuire), Edward Mortimer (Martin Heath), Gene O'Donnell (Don Morton), Alan Baldwin (Tommy Heath), and John Ellis (Roy Heath) Directed by Jean Yarbrough.

Review
The Devil Bat isn't much to marvel at, but it entertains cheaply and effectively, getting the job done, I suppose. Lugosi is the villain once again, and while it may feel familiar at this point, he certainly seems to be enjoy the role, and I like his performance, over-the-top, yet satisfying. The rest of the cast do an alright job, they work well with Lugosi at times. The direction is decent, given that this is a film about a killer bat that kills people who are sprayed with a "special scent", so as long as the movie doesn't veer off the sane rails, it works. And yes, this is another film available due to it falling into the public domain. A fun fact is that this was released by Producers Releasing Corporation, a small, but busy studio that made films fast and cheap, and they seemed to put care into this film, with satisfactory horror that's enough to entertain for a hour and such. Lugosi does a fine job and is one of the reasons to watch this film, along with the mild, but decent scares. For our next film on Bela Lugosi Week, it's another from the 1940s...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Thief of Bagdad (1940).

Review #400: The Thief of Bagdad.

Cast
Conrad Veidt (Jaffar), Sabu (Abu), June Duprez (The Princess), John Justin (Ahmad), Rex Ingram (Genie), Miles Malleson (Sultan of Basra), Morton Selten (The Old King), Mary Morris (Halima), Bruce Winston (The Merchant), and Hay Petrie (The Astrologer) Directed by Michael Powell, Ludwig Berger, and Tim Whelan.

Review
The Thief of Bagdad is a remake of the 1924 version (reviewed previously - #399), and in some ways the two films are alike, but in other ways they are different, and that is a good thing. The two films differ in sound, in color, and other various things (such as the Prince and the Thief being different characters rather than one) but they both seem to carry the magic of fun, as a tale as old as time. Conrad Veidt is a brilliant villain, who I've covered before in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (#261) and Casablanca (#125), and he works well. Sabu is a fine actor, not annoying or dull, more an actor in development as he already was acting at 13, but he would sadly die at the age of 39. A good actor nonetheless. Duprez and Justin are fine romantic leads, not too bad or too cliche. The supporting actors (like Rex Ingram) are decent, and they do add to the film's depth. This is a film with many ambitions and many ideas. The effects are great because they are groundbreaking for the time, a blue screen (also known as green screen), developed by Larry Butler which gives the film a new level of spectacle, much like how the 1924 version did with its own effects. This film has good ideas which also inspired Aladdin (#156) as I mentioned before. This is a delight for both children and adults, as it manages to have a good heart and a well enough attempt at entertainment. A treasure trove for everyone. I'd like to say it has been a fine thing to review for 400 films, and I am sure there is more to come for me and you. Thanks to everyone who has been reading, and I hope you keep reading as I hope I watching films.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.