Movie Crazy.

Review #2024: Movie Crazy.

Cast: 

Harold Lloyd (Harold Hall / Trouble), Constance Cummings (Mary Sears), Kenneth Thomson (Vance), Louise Closser Hale (Mrs Kitterman), Spencer Charters (J.L. O'Brien), Robert McWade (Wesley Kitterman, Producer), Eddie Fetherston (Bill - assistant director), Sydney Jarvis (The Director), Harold Goodwin (Miller), Mary Doran (Margie), DeWitt Jennings (Mr Hall), and Lucy Beaumont (Mrs Hall) Directed by Clyde Bruckman (#908 - The General, #1304 - Welcome Danger, #1621 - Feet First) and Harold Lloyd.

Review: 

I will admit that there it has been slow road to cover the talkie era of Harold Lloyd, who certainly deserves to be remembered for his contributions to comedy. He made the transition to sound at the age of 36 after countless silent comedies two-fold: Speedy was initially released as a silent feature in April of 1928 before a version that added a few sound sequences came out in December. The following year saw the release of Welcome Danger. Movie Crazy is the third Lloyd talkie film of the seven he would do as star, most of them with him as producer. Clyde Bruckman was recruited to direct Lloyd once again, having directed him for three previous features (which involved the sound version of Speedy, Welcome Danger, and Feet First). He had gone from would-be sportswriter to intertitle writer to gag man for Buster Keaton and later director for various comedy production. However, Bruckman soon fell under the influence of what curtailed his career: alcoholism. As such, it fell to Lloyd to assist in the directing chair (which wasn't too odd, as he had co-directed a few of his own films, such as The Kid Brother, which had four directors), although he did not claim credit. The dialogue and screenplay was done by Vincent Lawrence while the story was done by Agnes Christine Johnston, John Grey, and Felix Adler. Lloyd and Ernie Bushmiller also contributed un-credited work on the script. After Bruckman was relegated to writing for comedy rather than directing it by 1935, he got into the habit of "re-utilizing" certain gags from his older productions for comedy short-subjects that he was doing at Columbia Pictures (such as for The Three Stooges), and one of them is the magician's-coat sequence in Movie Crazy. He would crib the scene for multiple productions and was sued by Lloyd each time for copyright, which Lloyd would win (one might wonder why Lloyd was so easy to sue, but imagine being put in a spot where your director and usual gag-assistant is too drunk to really direct and then he decides years later to crib a scene that originally had you as star). Bruckman committed suicide in 1955 at the age of 60.

Stop if you have heard this before: a well-meaning boy or fumbler type of character tries to make it good in a place that seems to be too much for one too oblivious to know how to play the game. Lloyd may have been the shrewdest in marketing himself for selective appearances in the early sound era, but that does not certainly mean that he fared the best among the silent-to-sound transitioners. The film has been labeled by some as one of Lloyd's best in the sound era, and I suppose we shall see if that is fully true at the end of the road, although truthfully, I am salivating at the prospect seeing Leo McCarey direct him in The Milky Way (1936), just two films after this one. Of course, when compared to Feet First and Welcome Danger, Movie Crazy is practically an ice-cold water bottle on a hot day, so take that for what it is worth with a 98-minute movie built on a handful of sight gags and the classic misunderstandings that I am sure you all know from certain comedies and so on and so forth (such as the aforementioned use of a magician's coat to wreak havoc for a dance). Anyway, let's get to the point: the movie is fine. It definitely seems a bit more reliant on visual gags to go along with the fact that the movie is basically two-fold: the fumbling young man that stumbles through the motions of trying to make something in Hollywood and the fumbling young man that stumbles through his feelings for two totally-not similar looking women. Honestly, I could really do with more stuff involving him bumbling as an "innocent" when it comes to the movie industry rather than when trying to not fumble between "romances", because if he wants me to believe in something for a guy that doesn't exactly have that much time to make me think he is still the picture of innocence (the man was near 40), I would rather have the first part, but I'm sure getting the girl is giving what people want, not more scenes involving him try to not cause the camera to explode when he forgets a line or makes for a terrible extra. Actually, Cummings does do a pretty good job in terms of being as an assertive contrast required to help set the tone of what goes on with a rough industry that demands everything everywhere all at once, and her treating Lloyd as a relief rather than a hinderance makes it a curious experience. Of course, she is also playing a character that Lloyd also falls for and go figure that she has a problem with him falling for the "Mexican character" that she is playing in makeup. Thomson is a decent foil to the proceedings in terms of being someone for Lloyd to counter against when it comes to the most interesting sequence: the fight scene at the end, one told with little dialogue that takes place on a dripping wet ship set that is executed quite well in execution and pacing. As a whole, whether serving as Lloyd's best sound film or not, it is a fairly decent comedy film from its time that will prove just how long he had a grip on an audience that needed a laugh and found him comforting to go along with.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Just Imagine.

Review #1334: Just Imagine.

Cast: 
El Brendel (Single O), Maureen O'Sullivan (LN-18), John Garrick (J-21), Marjorie White (D-6), Frank Albertson (RT-42), Hobart Bosworth (Z-4), Kenneth Thomson (MT-3), Mischa Auer (B-36), Ivan Linow (Loko/Boko), Joyzelle Joyner (Loo Loo and Boo Boo), and Wilfred Lucas (X-10) Directed by David Butler. 

Review: 

Sometimes you need to look to the future to find something to escape with. What better way to do so than a science fiction musical comedy? The writing work of this film comes from Buddy G. DeSylva, Lew Brown, and Ray Henderson, who were a well-regarded trio of songwriters. This is a film with plenty of production value and not much else. The Art Deco cityscape came from a former Army balloon hanger, wired with thousands of mini light-bulbs (some of the footage from this film would find itself re-used in future productions such as Flash Gordon) The art direction from Stephen Goosson and Ralph Hammeras even received an Academy Award nomination, while the electrical equipment from Kenneth Strickfaden would be seen again and again in film, most notably with Frankenstein the following year. It also happened to be one of the first major sound science fiction films ever made. It can't, however, be thought of as much of a standout in the same way that others before and after (like Metropolis and Things to Come, respectively) it would prove to be, and it would not be until the 1950s that studios would come to make major science fiction films again (it did not stop them from making them on the cheap or as film serials, however). It also happened to be one of the few films with El Brendel in a starring role. He had been a vaudeville comedian for over a decade prior to signing a contract with Famous Players Film Company in 1926. His shtick was a character with nonsensical dialogue through a dialect routine, which was usually Swedish (he did not have Swedish heritage, rather being born to Irish and German parents).

I should have known something would be amiss early with the way it goes from 1880 to 1930 to 1980 in its opening with a joke about speed. Or perhaps it is way it depicts its future (and treats it for the 109 minute run-time) that really should have made me roll my eyes. It is a hard thing to try and predict the future, one might say (try doing one for life in 2070, for example). What did they guess would happen? Pill form food and drinks (with Prohibition still around), vending machine babies, people with numbers for names and marriage tribunals. The last one seems more of a substitute for the cliche of "disapproving father doesn't want daughter to marry someone beneath her" than anything, particularly since the lady doesn't get a choice in the matter. But hey, everyone gets a happy ending, so what does it matter to think about changing the status quo like those other future challenging films (never let it be said that I don't prefer some sort of rebellious action in films). With stiff leads in tow, one is doomed with a mediocre piece of entertainment that never leaps in the air to soar because it spends too much time on the ground. Brendel does technically provide laughs, but one can find his act to be tiresome if wanting to find something more interesting than him talking about "the good old days" when he was around in 1930 or being silly. O'Sullivan and Garrick don't help matters, one already finds the whole affair silly and hamhanded to begin with, and they barely have any chemistry to go with it. White and Albertson seem more at home with this, with "Never Swat a Fly" being at least tolerable to sit through as a song. This is barely a musical anyway, since the songs seem more forced-in than anything, and none of the songs are really that interesting to hear anyway. If the film didn't find time to spend on Mars, one would almost desire to become an antique like this movie perpetuates itself to be. With the metallic print and big shoulder design (combined with evil twins), who can not resist giggling a bit? It seems better to giggle at it than to actually laugh with it, honestly. By the time the film creaks to its predictable outcome, one will find themselves a bit impressed at the film decoration rather than the human elements. It wasn't a success with audiences (thereby keeping Brendel in supporting roles), and it has not received a proper release on home video (I found a copy on the Internet that occasionally showed a Fox Movie Channel imprint). It is a strange curiosity - an antique that tries to present the future. Whether that works or not to your sensibilities is up to you, but I find that it hasn't quite worked out so well for itself 90 years later.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Broadway Melody.

Review #1330: The Broadway Melody.

Cast: 
Anita Page (Queenie Mahoney), Bessie Love (Harriet "Hank" Mahoney), Charles King (Eddie Kearns), Jed Prouty (Uncle Jed), Kenneth Thomson (Jacques Warriner), Edward Dillon (Stage Manager), Mary Doran (Flo), and Eddie Kane (Zanfield) Directed by Harry Beaumont

Review: 
It can be an interesting experience looking at an old film musical and think about the effort that it must have taken to make it come out to the screen, particularly when it comes to talking about the beginning of the sound era along with the studio of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. The company had begun in 1924 as a merger of three studios: Metro Pictures Corporation, Goldwyn Pictures, and Louis B. Mayer Pictures, since Marcus Loew desired better quality for films to distribute with Loew's Theatres along with find someone to run operations in Hollywood, which is where Mayer comes into the picture, alongside with Irving Thalberg (whose first notable film as a producer was The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923), which he did at 24) as production head. The studio became prolific very quickly, releasing major films such as Ben-Hur (1925), with a desire to tap into a need from the audience for stars and stories to go alongside them (whether through adapting works or big spectacle). Interestingly enough, MGM could have had a different fate before the decade would pass. William Fox from Fox Film Corporation had desired to expand his grip, seizing an opportunity to buy the holdings of MGM upon the death of Loew in 1927. Strong connections from Mayer, combined with an severe automobile accident involving Fox in late 1929 and the Wall Street crash ended any possibility of a possible merger. In any case, it should only figure that MGM's first full-talkie film would be a musical - what better way to attract appeal than with singing, talking, and dancing in one film. The original version of the film even had a Technicolor sequence included (which is now lost to time).

With all that in mind, one can then note how the film hasn't quite aged as well as others of its decade. It was a big hit with audiences and Academy voters for its day, but to me it is a bit of a clunker. Not every great film gets to have awards or initial recognition, but they manage to find a way to having staying power and interest after several decades. This is one of those cases where one can acknowledge some of the triumphs it must have had nine decades ago while still seeing it as a pretty mediocre experience. Beyond the clunkiness of the dialogue and okay direction is a movie that can do a bunch of singing and dancing but can't really sell its characters as anything other than cliches. Is it really a cliche if its the 1920s? If it seems like a cliche and looks like one, by golly it must be a cliche. Nobody seems to have chemistry with anybody, and the conclusion of its love triangle (or perhaps square since it really involves four people) seems awkwardly silly (getting punched out by a rich jerk when trying to help the younger sister of the girl you were involved with and then getting with said younger sister? ...sure, why not). The singing (aided through the music of Nacio Herb Brown and lyrics by Arthur Freed, both key MGM music figures) is fair, in the sense that one isn't checking their watch as much when compared to seeing a barely moving camera with mild actors trying to warm up pale characters on screen. Page and Love come out decently enough, in that they seem fitting to see perform on a screen moreso than when trying to be on-screen sisters. King may have been a vaudeville and Broadway actor, but that doesn't mean he brings the screen presence needed to really drive himself forward in interest. In other words, I don't really find myself gravitating attention to him in interest when on screen. Technically Prouty attracts attention, in that one can't really forget a stutterer - he isn't exactly funny, but then again the film's best hope is trying to not be unintentionally funny to pick at with its characters, so there's that. Look, this is a film that comes and goes at 100 minutes without too much trouble in delivering a fair bit of sound without devolving itself too much into noise for the sake of it. It has that kind of dated quality like The Jazz Singer had, but that film managed to pass off better with its sentiment and charm than this does. There exist three further Broadway Melody films (1936, 1938, 1940), in the sense that they aren't necessarily sequels but rather share a basic premise involving putting on a show, and there was even a remake with Two Girls on Broadway (1940). Whatever one prefers when it comes to a musical, there exist plenty to choose from, whether in starting with the 1920s or later. This isn't a bad one to go with as a companion to early talkie musicals, even if it isn't necessarily a great one to cherish as much as others could.

Next Time - Coquette, with Mary Pickford. Also, an announcement.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.