The Walking Dead (1936).

Review #2267: The Walking Dead.

Cast: 

Boris Karloff (John Elman), Ricardo Cortez (Nolan), Edmund Gwenn (Dr. Beaumont), Marguerite Churchill (Nancy), Warren Hull (Jimmy), Barton MacLane (Loder), Henry O'Neill (Werner), Joseph King (Judge Shaw), Addison Richards (Prison Warden), and Paul Harvey (Blackstone) Directed by Michael Curtiz (#125 - Casablanca, #416 - Yankee Doodle Dandy, #505 - The Adventures of Robin Hood, #529 - Mildred Pierce, #719 - Mystery of the Wax Museum, #1370 - Life with Father)

Review: 

Sure, of course Warner Bros. thought they could have some fun making a horror film. Sure, you can see the clear inspiration when it comes to having Boris Karloff star as a lumbering man back from the dead, particularly since this came out a year after Universal's Bride of Frankenstein (1935) ...but here it is arranged within the trappings of a gangster film. Of course, the obsession with trying to bring back people from a fate worse than a broken leg wasn't limited to the current day. The "perfusion pump", for example, is shown for a moment during the pivotal resurrection scene. This glass device was designed by Charles Lindbergh and Dr. Alexis Carrel to try and keep organs functioning outside of the body (the process can be explained better in articles such as this); Lindbergh wanted to find ways to help his sister-in-law, who had a bad heart. Labeled as a "mechanical heart" in some circles, Lindberg and Carrel were even featured on magazine covers for their invention (better ways of "organ perfusion" eventually came around in the next couple of years, naturally). In 1935, a film wad made called Life Returns, which featured the exploits of Dr. Robert E. Cornish, a biologist that had an interest in restoring life that tried using a teeterboard/see-saw to try and get the blood flowing of the dead...it technically worked, albeit not perfectly, on dogs (interestingly, the film didn't exactly get a great release). Incidentally, Karloff would star in two subsequent features in the following years dealing with resurrection with The Man They Could Not Hang (1939) and The Man with Nine Lives (1940), which took inspiration from Cornish. Evidently with this film, Karloff was slated with little dialogue to speak before he raised issue with said matter. Five people were given credit for the writing: Ewart Adamson, Peter Milne, Robert Hardy Andrews and Lillie Hayward wrote the screenplay, while Adamson and Joseph Fields wrote the story. The movie was directed by Michael Curtiz, a particularly busy director in the 1930s that had some experience in horror (among others in the 30+ films he did in the decade) with Doctor X (1932) and Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933).

Okay, you're going to love the way the "resurrected" man decides to handle being framed for murder. After he is brought back from being electrocuted, he seems to have developed a certain type of clot in his brain that gives him a strange knowledge of just who had framed him. Oh, but it gets better, he actually gets his revenge, in perhaps the most curious way possible. Of course, the film is pretty fast and loose at getting there with a 66-minute runtime. Karloff proves a quality knowing presence to unnerve the soul when it comes to second sight with select times to speak or just stare. The funny thing about this horror/crime feature is that there isn't really much of a villainous presence or even a ham actor. Gwenn might be the lead scientist presence, but it ends up coming off as just warm curiosity that is fine for someone with as much experience on stage and film as you'd expect from him (one can take a guess what film you would recognize that voice from). Churchill and Hull are serviceable enough when you consider that the rest of the folks don't have much to do besides being casually terrorized after the execution. Okay, so the array of deaths that happen in the film are done not by any one man but are actually a string of accidents that just happen to involve our lead character because of his "sense" of knowing who led to his death. Probably the most amusing is a guy nervous about who just stumbled in to confront him that decides to run only to encounter a train. The movie has plenty of shadows and fog to keep things looking ideal rather than just being a Frankenstein cheapie. In general, the movie is a quietly solid one, not rocking the boat too much in unnerving horror (the resurrection scene might be the most involving for the sheer execution of it, although the last scene is interesting) but generally working well with one's expectations. This is the kind of movie you can sense was made in a few weeks by professionals that came and went to get things done without too much fuss (five writers, but still) that will prove up to code.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Big Trail.

Review #1333: The Big Trail.

Cast: 
John Wayne (Breck Coleman), Marguerite Churchill (Ruth Cameron), El Brendel (Gus), Tully Marshall (Zeke), Tyrone Power, Sr. (Red Flack), Frederick Burton (Pa Bascom), Ian Keith (Bill Thorpe), Charles Stevens (Lopez), Louise Carver (Gus's mother-in-law), John Big Tree (Indian Chief), DeWitt Jennings (Boat Captain Hollister), and Ward Bond (Sid Bascom) Directed by Raoul Walsh (#399 - The Thief of Bagdad (1924), and #907 - White Heat)

Review: 
The 1930s were an evolving and experimental time for film. The decade had already started with the Great Depression that affected the entire world on an economical level (which would doom Fox Film founder William Fox in 1930). As such, escapist or big spectacle fare was quite prevalent during this time, with this decade being a prominent one for the Golden Age of Hollywood, particularly with a prevalent studio system (domination of film production and distribution by a small group of major studios). Sound films were a phenomenon during this time, and certain movies even were done in color. One film with its own attempt at innovation is The Big Trail - which was shot in Grandeur, a 70mm film process. It was the last film released by Fox Film with this short-lived process nor the first done with the intent of making a widescreen movie. The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight (1897), film's first feature film, was shot on a widescreen ratio of 1.65:1. Warner Bros released films with their widescreen process Vitascope, and MGM had the Fanthom Screen for a brief time, while The Bat (1930) was filmed in the 2:1 Magnifilm 65mm aspect ratio. Converting theaters to show in widescreen would prove futile, since they already had to deal the costs with adapting to sound, with the next push by a major studio to make films in widescreen not occurring again for two decades. One has to remember that this film was shot numerous times - not only was it done with the Grandeur cameras, it was also done with the conventional 35mm film alongside making versions for world audiences, with four versions in French, German, Italian, and Spanish done (this was before dubbing became more popular). Nowadays one can view the film in widescreen as originally intended - most theaters could not show it in this process, and the original 70mm negative was only preserved through a special printer over a year long process in the 1980s. On top of all that, the 35mm version was shorter at 108 minutes than the 70mm 122 minute run-time, so both films have scenes that aren't in the other version. This was a big spectacle piece, with over 90 actors and 700 natives from five different Native American tribes, hundreds of wagons and thousands of animals from cows to horses brought in. It only seems fitting that Raoul Walsh was behind the direction, seeing how this was the beginning his third decade of directing films, having spent the past fifteen years acting and directing before going on to direct further films in the next 34 years.

Of course the film also has a young talent with John Wayne at head. Wayne, who had went to the University of Southern California for football before an injury, had been hired as a prop boy/extra to actor Tom Mix (one of cinema's first Western stars, who also happened to good friends with Wyatt Earp) and director John Ford as a favor for his coach. He recorded bit parts in films such as Bardelys the Magnificent (1926), but it was Walsh who would notice the actor and think of him to headline this film While the film was not a major success at the time of its release (owing to its big budget), it is now noted as a prime Western for the era, one with sweeping spectacle and a well-earned first turn from its star and an engaging supporting cast to go with it. It takes its time to tell its story with an episodic nature on its take of the development of the West (which sounds a bit like The Covered Wagon (1923) - which also depicted a trip to Oregon), and it proves just as engaging with depicting the drive to make a living for oneself in a place of their own regardless of the struggle it would take to do so, whether involving the elements of weather or trying to get a wagon across the lands (along with some frontier justice). The film looks wonderful to view, where even the backgrounds can prove interesting to view besides the main conversation pairings. When it comes to Wayne, he really must have been born to play an Old West hero. Beyond his persona and the way he speaks and struts (which he took inspiration from Wyatt Earp) is a man who just has that raw presence this film desires in an everyman hero. While the film wasn't a major success, Wayne did continue to find work, albeit with B-movie Westerns before Stagecoach (1939) gave him another chance at prime status, which he worked handily. Churchill lines up fine when the film requires so, having some chemistry with him. Brendel, the vaudeville comedian turned film star does fine with delivering some comic relief alongside Carver when the film needs a fair chuckle. Power Sr, in his last role before his death the following year (along with his only talkie role), proves to be a worthy and sharp adversary, one who seeps right in as someone lurking in plain sight without needing to go for overblown theatrics. Marshall rounds out the cast in terms of being a fun highlight - warm, crusty and right-at-home kind presence (much like how he was the last time I saw him on film - which happened to be The Covered Wagon). In the end, the scenery is lush enough to be captured right on the screen, with Walsh handling a fairly well-made story (done by Hal G. Evarts, with un-credited help by Marie Boyle, Jack Peabody, Florence Postal, and Fred Sersen) together with craftsmanship and a game cast that stands tall as a gem that shines now more than ever after nine decades.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Dracula's Daughter.

Review #297: Dracula's Daughter.

Cast
Otto Kruger (Dr. Jeffrey Garth), Gloria Holden (Marya Zaleska), Marguerite Churchill (Janet), Edward Van Sloan (Van Helsing), Gilbert Emery (Basil Humphrey), Irving Pichel (Sandor), Halliwell Hobbes (Hawkins), Billy Bevan (Albert), and Nan Grey (Lili) Directed by Lambert Hillyer.

Review
This is one of those "Wait, there was a sequel to this?" kind of film, having been a sequel of Dracula (#71), released 5 years it, with no Lugosi (Except one wax model of him), but Van Sloan is back as Van Helsing (misspelled as Von Helsing, but whatever), which is a plus. The acting is ranges from good to okay, depending on the actor/actress. Kruger and Holden do a good job, along with Van Sloan, as he was back in Dracula. Churchill is okay, but not much else other then a small annoyance. The rest of the actors are all alright, doing a standard yet useful job. There are a few scares, but not as chilling as the first one or as mysterious. It is slightly original, not really based off any novels (Okay it was actually based off a short story, but it apparently didn't take any of the story's plot), but it is short enough to run a suddenly short length of 71 minutes. In the end, while the film does have some good moments that might work, it is slightly bogged down by sluggish pace at times and a weird pace of story. Not bad, but not great either. Countdown to 300 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.