Supernatural (1933).

Review #2292: Supernatural.

Cast: 

Carole Lombard (Roma Courtney), Alan Dinehart (Paul Bavian), Vivienne Osborne (Ruth Rogen), Randolph Scott (Grant Wilson), H. B. Warner (Dr. Carl Houston), Beryl Mercer (Madam Gourjan), William Farnum (Nick "Nicky" Hammond), and Willard Robertson (Prison Warden) Directed by Victor Halperin (#274 - White Zombie)

Review: 

"I don't believe in fear, violence, and horror, so why traffic in them?"

Be honest: how many of you can name a horror film in the 1930s that wasn't made by Universal? Sure, there are a handful, such as Victor Halperin's attempts at horror filmmaking in the 1930s, starting with 1932's White Zombie, the cheapie movie that actually used Universal sets. It was Victor Halperin's ninth film as a feature director, having started in 1924 with a variety of dramas and some crime movies, with most of them being collaboration with his brother Edward. The result of the low-budget venture with Bela Lugosi scored him a deal with Paramount Pictures. The result was his second horror film here, as written by Brian Marlow and Harvey Thew as based on a story by Zombie writer Garnett Weston. Halperin directed just two further horror films with Revolt of the Zombies (1936) and Torture Ship (1939) before retiring in 1942; he died in 1983 and judging from the quote, wasn't exactly big on making horror movies (the irony is that they probably are the only reason anyone remembers Halperin).

Most films don't start with title cards of prominent names of Mohammed, Confucius, and Matthew 10:1, but here we are with a clunky suspense movie. It should be noted that Lombard absolutely did not want to do the film, apparently having a low view of horror. This is a movie involving theories about people's strong will even in death and body possession (with thicker makeup!) at the near end of a movie that isn't even 70 minutes long. The movie tries to present a female killer (strangles three men), body possession, fake mediums, spirits around the people, and oh my goodness, pick one idea! This is bottom-of-the-barrel mediocrity, one that only seems to fit the bill of being watched when you wonder just what else there can be for really old movies and "horror" when the word seemed to mean "oh, that one shot sure looked scary" more than anything. Lombard may have been a "swell" actress for timing, but she can only go so far for a movie that has her play puppet for a chunk of its time. Scott actually was a leading man in a variety of genres (including Murders in the Zoo that same year for horror), but one would be forgiven for just associating him as a Western guy, which is basically a way of saying his performance here inspires no notes of positivity. Osbourne is meant to inspire a bit of curiosity (playing the soon-to-be-dead killer) and the third word of that sentence is making a great deal of lifting. Dinehart at least as some huckster spirit in him, when compared to the astonishingly vacant Warner for a movie that begs to have something actually happen. This isn't a plea for a body-count (1 depicted is a count, I suppose?), this is just me stating that having a re-incarnated killer only really works when you have a whole film to make me care. Here, you have a film that only start to try and get interesting in the last 20 minutes, which manages to letdown the last remaining vestiges of hope for something less hammy. As a whole, the one-trick-pony status of Halperin and company in middle-of-the-road curiosity may not have been the biggest success at the time, but you can interpret for yourself what the fuss was about when it comes to the occasional scare (spiritual or not) that could occur for 1930s audiences.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Big News (1929).

Review #1882: Big News.

Cast: 

Robert Armstrong (Steve Banks), Carole Lombard (Margaret Banks), Louis Payne (Hensel), Wade Boteler (O'Neill), Charles Sellon (Addison), Sam Hardy (Reno), Tom Kennedy (Ryan), Warner Richmond (District Attorney Phelps), and Helen Ainsworth (Vera, society editor) Directed by Gregory La Cava (#1787 - My Man Godfrey)

Review: 

Remember the good ol' days of directors being tasked to make movies on the quick and low that had a semblance of a plot to go with sound? Well, okay, maybe you are quite familiar with films of the late 1920s that saw plenty of filmmakers try to mold themselves away from the silent era with new output of sound and all the challenges that came with doing so. Gregory La Cava was at least familiar with making a number of films with romantic or comedic interludes before this one, cultivating himself with two-reel comedies before moving into features in the 1920s. and this one that was spearheaded by Pathé Exchange, Inc (the American subsidiary of Pathe-turned independent spinoff that did a number of movies from the 1910s until 1930). The film was based on the play For Two Cents by George S. Brooks, while the adaptation was done by Walter DeLeon, Jack Jungmeyer and Frank Reicher. Strangely enough, the film has a sound gimmick within its plot, because the climax involves a Dictaphone record. Well, that, and a reporter who has to fight alcoholism and a crime ring that wants to frame him for murder...of the boss that just fired him (yea, okay). The film features Carole Lombard, billed as Carol Lombard for the second-to-last time in her career, with this being one of three sound films in 1929. Of course, the real fresh face is Robert Armstrong, who actually had studied law at the University of Washington before becoming an actor while nearing the age of thirty in 1919 and a film actor in 1927. 

Somehow, this just didn't become one of those sound movies that people really remember. Maybe it was just too low budget to really dazzle audiences curious for hearing people talk, or maybe it just was something else (for curiosity, I looked up any contemporary review I could see of this film, and the only one called it a movie that "will make money wherever it is shown" - this was released only a month before the Wall Street crash, incidentally). When it comes to newspaper wisecrackers, The Front Page (released two years later as an adaptation of a Broadway play) probably ends up being one of the first ones you would mention among the early sound features, mostly because of its own snappy dialogue and eclectic timing. Of course, both movies were made before the rigid enforcement of the Production Code, so there's that to consider. Big News is merely just a thing that exists in mediocrity, not exactly writing the wheel on camera movement or snappy newspeak, but it can work out for those who want to spend 75 minutes on something that moves in a straight line. Sure, there are a few moments where it explores the trouble of trying to let go a good bottle, but you probably know where it will go in setting the steps to inevitably laying off the stuff (because hey, this was the 1920s), for better or worse. Armstrong in that sense makes a quality lead to follow, one who can play things with wryness that doesn't aim for straight pity, earning stripes of charm gradually over time for general interest. The newspaper scenes are breezy and worthy in what you might see from banter that doesn't plod too much, and Lombard shows withering devotion that has the bare promise of having screen presence with better material. Hardy plays the heavy with relatively no trouble, while Kennedy and Ainsworth make goofy support. As a whole, the movie looks exactly what you'd see from something with two sets and a climax that is not nearly as built together as it thinks it is (with a haphazard setup that is solved haphazardly) in a confusing muddle of a movie. Watching the movie seems like watching rainwater slowly move down gutters - it might seem nice for a while, but you won't really remember much of it when it passes by. It just doesn't do enough to win out in the end, but at least the main folks got to do more promising things.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

My Man Godfrey.

Review #1787: My Man Godfrey.

Cast: 

William Powell (Godfrey), Carole Lombard (Irene Bullock), Alice Brady (Angelica Bullock), Gail Patrick (Cornelia Bullock), Jean Dixon (Molly), Eugene Pallette (Alexander Bullock), Alan Mowbray (Tommy Gray), Mischa Auer (Carlo), and Pat Flaherty (Mike Flaherty) Directed by Gregory La Cava.

Review: 

Admittedly, this film had been on the waitlist for quite a bit of time. The 1930s were an interesting time to see sound comedies make their way to the big screen with various stars and directors adapting (or not) to growing demands set by an audience that had plenty of interest in having a good time at the theater (of course, there was still room for a few little timely references of the day, but you get the idea). At any rate, it is also a decade that deserves far more coverage besides the usual classics; of course, this film is in of itself considered a worthy classic, considering that it features William Powell and Carole Lombard at their pinnacle in stature to go with a seasoned director with Gregory La Cava (he had agreed to do the film with Powell...and Constance Bennett). Born in 1892, the Pennsylvania native had started his adulthood in animation studios beginning in 1913; in 1922, he moved to Hollywood to do features (specifically comedies, shorts and features). By the time La Cava directed his final film in 1948, he had done over a hundred directorial efforts (with over thirty features), and he had seen five of his films receive notice with Academy Award nominations (with this being one of them); he died at the age of 59 in 1952.

The film is adapted from the 1935 novel 1101 Park Avenue by Eric Hatch. Hatch and Morrie Ryskind wrote the screenplay while Zoë Akins and Robert Presnell Sr served as contributors. As a screwball comedy, it proves quite efficient in its 94-minute run-time with a biting edge and energy from its main actors that makes for a fairly dignified time (perhaps it shouldn't be surprised that a remake would follow in 1957 alongside a Broadway production in 1985). There have been quite a few butler movies over the years, and this one does well with examining its quirky characters and situations without turning into outright farce. It is Powell that draws the most curiosity, in part because of how he manages to handle the screwball aspects with apparent clarity that has good timing and dignity. Of course, Lombard (cast at the request of Powell, who were actually married for a time) is right there to match against him with plenty of grace and charm that draws in her share of laughs, which is generally spent with Powell for interesting moments that all start with trying to one-up a scavenger hunter. Patrick makes a worthy snob to the antics, adept in bite that matches against the two leads well enough. Brady, a veteran actress of the silent and sound eras (who had taken a ten-year break from films to do stage in 1923), makes for a quirky figure among the others, doting but offbeat in all the right ways. Pallette was a noted character presence for hundreds of films in three decades, and he certainly engages well as the straight man to everybody with that distinct voice and timing. The sequence in the first half where Powell is subjected to questions as the "forgotten man" that are closed with him making fun of then is probably the most interesting moment of the film in bite, although there are quite a few more things one could highlight (such as the first scene with him with Pallette and the others together). It has a capable energy to its screwy elements that for the most part sticks the landing by the time it reaches the inevitable closing. The weird status in the public domain (where the film copyright accidentally was left to lapse but the book copyright did not) might make it a useful curiosity to seek out as well, and one will surely be rewarded by what they see here. La Cava and company made a fine film with enough amusement that serves well for itself 85 years later.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Henry V (1944).

To Be or Not to Be (1942).

Review #1358: To Be or Not to Be.

Cast: 
Carole Lombard (Maria Tura), Jack Benny (Joseph Tura), Robert Stack (Lt. Stanislav Sobinski), Felix Bressart (Greenberg), Lionel Atwill (Rawich), Stanley Ridges (Professor Alexander Siletsky), Sig Ruman (Col. Ehrhardt), Tom Dugan (Bronski), and Charles Halton (Dobosh) Directed and Produced by Ernst Lubitsch (#1026 - The Shop Around the Corner)

Review: 
Satire can be a curious thing. If you do it right, one will appreciate the humor and irony for years on end, regardless of how much time has passed (such as Gulliver's Travels). One would expect a war satire to come from brilliant directors (such as Charlie Chaplin with The Great Dictator the previous year), so it only makes sense for Ernst Lubitsch to make one as well. The German-born director had started as an actor in 1913. Although he appeared in roughly 30 films over the next seven years, he gradually shifted his attention to directing, making his debut with Shoe Palace Pinkus (1916). He made numerous movies in his native Germany with actors such as Pola Negri before leaving to Hollywood for good in 1922. He made films in numerous genres, ranging from comedy to bio-dramas to musicals, and he received an Honorary Academy Award in 1946, one year before his death from a heart attack. The story was done by Melchior Lengyel (who had co-written Ninotchka) while the screenplay was done by Edwin Justus Mayer (with un-credited work done by Lubitsch). Naturally, one would expect a star or two to headline the film, and one can't go wrong with Lombard and Benny. Lombard had started her career in 1921 (with a main debut in Marriage in Transit in 1925),  having small roles in films for Fox Film and Mack Sennett's short films before reaching her first high point with Twentieth Century (1934). It was the first of numerous screwball comedies that she became known for over the next few years. Tragically, this was to be her last film. She was killed in a plane crash after a war bond rally on January 16, 1942 (roughly a month before the film's release). Benny came into this film because Lubitsch wrote the film directly for him. He had originally done vaudeville for his violin playing before eventually deciding to do comedy with his act. In 1929, he had signed a contract with Metro Goldwyn Mayer and had his debut with The Hollywood Revue of 1929. While he made numerous appearances in film over the next few years, he became more well-known for his radio program, which ran from 1932 to 1955. 

The film is a wonderful one, dark and witty with its pursuit of making ridicule of a serious situation like the Nazis, in a time where World War II was in its third year and America had just entered the fight. There was a mixed reception among audiences and critics of the time, where even Benny's father initially was disgusted with the sight of his son in a Nazi uniform before being convinced otherwise (where he promptly saw it again and again). It is a keen movie with plenty of sharp observations and facial situations that rewards the viewer time and time again. The movie has a tremendous sense of timing, balancing comedy and drama with such deftness, which is helped with a prime screwball pairing through Lombard and Benny, who are both inspiring to watch either together or with others. The film doesn't repeat itself with tiring gags, knowing when to do something without needing to be prodded into it, where one could make a comedy-less version of the same basic story without finding trouble. Stack (who was reportedly terrified going into this role) does just fine with keeping up with Lombard and Benny with careful demeanor. The other actors pull off an inspired front in retaining interest, with Ruman doing the most well with bombast. It certainly is a timeless one to last among other comedies, and it even inspired a remake in 1983. The film moves with a dashing pace of 99 minutes, never seeming to wear itself out at any time with making a capable dark comedy that also serves as a romance and thriller with plenty to make light of with daring ambition and an especially capable director and stars at hand to make things shine in the dark. One can't go wrong with a Lubitsch picture, and this is no exception.

Next Review: The Invisible Man (2020).

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941).

Review #970: Mr. & Mrs. Smith.

Cast: 
Carole Lombard (Ann Krausheimer Smith), Robert Montgomery (David Smith), Gene Raymond (Jefferson Custer), Jack Carson (Chuck Benson), Philip Merivale (Ashley Custer), Lucile Watson (Mrs. Custer), William Tracy (Sammy), Charles Halton (Harry Deever), Esther Dale (Mrs. Krausheimer), Emma Dunn (Martha), Betty Compson (Gertie), and Patricia Farr (Gloria) 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), and #965 - Downhill)

Review: 
This is the only screwball comedy that Alfred Hitchcock ever directed in his career, and while it may not be up to par with some of the films previously covered on here, this is at least serviceable entertainment, even if built on flimsy ground. It has a dry and sometimes offbeat feel that definitely could rankle a viewer if they don't have enough patience - or not in the right mood, anyway. Lombard and Montgomery are fairly decent together, though admittedly they work better in the first half of the movie, with the climax being the weakest part of the film due to feeling clunky; the Florida Club sequence is a fine highlight to showcase with the two (along with Carson). They have fine timing together, though Lombard is the more interesting one to follow. This was the last film released during Carole Lombard's lifetime, as she died the following year in a plane crash prior to her last film appearance in To Be or Not to Be (1942). Raymond is decent (such as the sequence at the World's Fair), and Carson is fairly charming as well. The circumstances that set up the plot are a bit offbeat, but fairly fitting for the time and kind of comedy the film is going for. The movie lasts 94 minutes, which is fairly acceptable and the movie has a fine enough pace that doesn't seem to drag too much. Without trying to give too much away, the climax is where the movie nearly pulls itself out of the seams, in part because of how the main characters get back together; it just feels a bit clumsy and not very justified. Regardless of how the movie ends, this is an adequate (if not okay) movie that benefits best from trying to make laughs that just happens to have been shot by Alfred Hitchcock.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Nothing Sacred.

Review #866: Nothing Sacred.

Cast:
Carole Lombard (Hazel Flagg), Fredric March (Wally Cook), Charles Winninger (Dr. Enoch Downer), Walter Connolly (Oliver Stone), Sig Ruman (Dr. Emil Eggelhoffer), Frank Fay (Master of Ceremonies), Troy Brown (Ernest Walker), Maxie Rosenbloom (Max Levinsky), and Margaret Hamilton (Warsaw, Vermont Drugstore Lady) Directed by William A. Wellman (#349 - Wings and #494 - The Public Enemy)

Review:
In a time like this, Nothing Sacred manages to find its place in being relevant to the point where it is timeless, in part due to a neat simple story and some fun screwball comedy within its satire elements. This film is readily easy to find, due to it being in the public domain after its copyright registration wasn't renewed in 1965, so you can find it on the Internet (or other alternative manners) without problem. It should be noted that this was the first screwball comedy in color, along with Lombard's only film in Technicolor, and it certainly stands out. This was also a film that used effects such as rear screen projection (most notably during the scene where the characters arrive in New York via plane). Lombard and March certainly have a decent chemistry together, especially when they argue, which culminates with a "boxing" scene at the end. Lombard has a welcoming presence, being one easy to root for, certainly fitting the part with enough grace and charm to fit such a fun role, which she often called one of her favorites. Connelly certainly stands out as the exasperated newspaper head; one of my favorite parts is when he tells March's character some news with a cracked voice, obviously trying to hide exasperation, which is amusing. As one would expect there is enough fine little lines, with a fine balance of timing. The rest of the cast is also pretty good, even if the film is really all about Lombard and March, who seem to have a really good time. The satire excels in that it doesn't choke the fun of the film nor does it seem artificial. It's not a film that will make you deeply about journalism and the "big story", but it is a movie that would inspire at least one conversation, and I suppose that is all that counts.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.