Swashbuckle Watch: The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)

when your artist has no idea who Olivia DeHavilland is

Watched:  11/08/2024

Format:   Amazon

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  Michael Curtiz and William Keighley

I always relate this story, but back in high school when the Costner-starring Robin Hood: Price of Thieves came out, TBS showed this on TV and ran a call-in poll which was better, and this won in a landslide.  And, I think with good reason.  The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) is just a banger from start to finish.  I don't know if I consider it comfort watching, but it kind of is.

Anyway, it is funny...  the idea of Robin Hood is that he steals from the rich to give to the poor.  And - he does!  Sort of.  But more than that, he's fighting a guerilla war in favor of a legitimate government instead of an usurper - who is treating his people (the Saxons) with cruelty simply because he has the resources to do so.  

I don't know how much of the story of Robin Hood is real, but what we do know is that the Normans and Saxons did not love each other.  In this movie, the Norman Prince John snagged Richard's throne when Richard was captured and held for ransom (this actually happened, but it's way more complicated than the movie suggests).

So, Robin doesn't care for what he sees as an illegal seizure of government - and is really irritated with how John is treating the Saxons, and begins picking off the cruelest enforcers and showing everyone up.  With a lot of joie de vivre.  

Ie:  he isn't just robbing the rich as they traverse England.  He's actively undermining the government and efforts of the oppressors while using their resources to support the oppressed.  We tend not to think of this as a overtly political movie, and it's... not.  Prince John (Claude Rains) and Sir Guy (Basil Rathbone) are cartoon villains.  But there's certainly a weight to movie tied to the politics that gets echoed over and over throughout history - and speaks to why maybe monarchies are a shitty way to run a country for everyone but the monarch and their peeps.

All that aside, it's a fun, rollicking adventure with explosive technicolor, and Olivia De Havilland having perfect teeth and laying the groundwork for Princess Leia's wardrobe.  It has the best sword fight in western film - still!  85+ years on!  Amazing sets.  And so many be-dazzled outfits.

Anyway - give it whirl.  It's a classic for the whole family for a reason.  Action, romance, comedy, drama...  you may like it! 

Annual HalloWatch: Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Watched:  10/31/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  James Whale

For evidence of our ongoing Frankenstein discussion, click here.

If you've followed this site, it is likely you know The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is easily one of my favorite films.  It takes everything I like in the first film (which is also a favorite) and turns it up to 11.  

I'm pretty sure star Colin Clive was not actually okay while filming this movie.  He was dead by 1937, and his drinking problem was likely in full-effect while making this movie.  But he's @#$%ing great as the manic Henry Frankenstein - obsessed with what he *almost* did in the last film, and not all that interested in his lovely fiancee (Valerie Hobson) in comparison to animating life with cosmic rays.  Which is a shame - Elizabeth seems nice, and psychic.

If the sets and lighting in Frankenstein filtered German Expressionism through an Anglo/ American lens, then this movie cranks it all up - with gigantic sets (what were those walls Minnie runs through returning to Castle Frankenstein?  The huge space of the entry hall!  The tower laboratory!)  and fascinating lighting and camera work - just watch the sparks and shadows in the birth sequence.

At this point, I'm not even really sure Bride of Frankenstein is a horror movie.  It certainly *looks* like one, and I'm sure the 1935 audience was primed for scares.  But, like its predecessor, it just isn't about scares.  Whale and Co. are clearly having a ball (see:  Ernest Thesiger, Una O'Connor and EE Clive playing it as high camp).  It's also got the pathos of the cabin sequence, Franky being harassed by the villagers, and the tears of rejection at the film's end.  At no point is the Monster really out to get anyone - even less so than in the first film.  If you're scared of him, you're part of the problem, amirite?

I try not to let it get to me that so much 21st Century Bride of Frankenstein imagery and merch and whatnot puts the Bride and Franky together as a couple.  To be blunt - it's demonstrating you've never actually seen the movie, and if you *have* seen the movie, you completely missed the point of it.  A point which is pretty difficult to miss here in 2024 - that all of your dumb plans to just make a "mate" for someone neglects the fact women have their own mind and are going to hiss at you like a goose if you think they just *have* to think you're a charmer.

My least favorite part of the film is not even in this movie.  It's not that we get so little of The Bride (she's in maybe five or six minutes of the movie), it's that she never shows up again.*  I mean, I'm aware they were not assuming, in 1935, there would be many more Universal Frankenstein movies - blowing folks up 60% of your main cast seems like a definitive ending.  And it's true James Whale did not return for a 3rd film.  I just would have liked to have seen her pop up again in one of the many, many, many... sequels.  

Not really sure what you can chalk it up to that we didn't see her again, but it's not a mistake modern filmmakers are champing at the bit to claim her story, and we have a Maggie Gyllenhaal directed Bride movie coming.  I believe there's others in the works, and I'm still cheesed we didn't get the Angelina Jolie/ Bill Condon directed version because The Mummy (2017) sucked.

*I'm not one of those folks who thinks "now I get to make up my own story and that's legit!  Head canon!" kind of people, so I take it she didn't make it out of the explosion or is lying undead under a pile of rubble somewhere.  

Annual HalloWatch: Frankenstein (1931)

Watched:  10/30/2024

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  James Whale

For evidence of our ongoing Frankenstein discussion, click here.

Every year for Halloween, I try to watch Frankenstein (1931).  I like all of the Universal Monsters main films, but Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein are the ones that resonate most with me.  Dracula feels like it's still trying to sort out how to make a talkie, even when it has moments of great beauty and imagination.  But something about the staging of Frankenstein in the bizarre, clearly artificial sets with skies painted on backdrops (where you can see folds and bunching) and sound that does sound as if it was recorded from a room mic sometimes...  Pair that with Clive's unhinged performance as the doctor, Karloff's iconic monster, and Dwight Frye's super weirdo, Fritz...  and it's a dream captured on film. 

Go look at the sets - the tower laboratory is a thing of beauty.  Castle Frankenstein's interiors.  The costuming.  A whole German village (you will see the same set 10,000x in Universal movies for years to come).  

I remember speaking with a high school English teacher years ago at a party, and she was bummed because she had to teach the novel of Frankenstein, finding it odd and unrelatable.  And I just laughed.  "What teenager doesn't feel like they've been forced into existence, and isn't mad at their parents for not understanding them?"  or, in the case of both book and movie - outright rejecting them?

For a film running a scant 70 minutes, the film contains comedy, pathos, existential dread, horror, and everything you could want in a film.  Father/son tension, contempt for local politicians, condemnation of stodgy institutions, bioelectric galvanism...

And, yes... the amazing make-up of Jack Pierce.  Who knew that almost 100 years later we'd still have a singular image in mind when someone says the word "Frankenstein".  

I've seen the movie far too many times to find it chilling - but there was a time early on seeing it that the strange atmosphere, the silence punctuated with shouting, electrical jolts,  and strange voices hit me.  And, of course, Karloff's uncanny portrayal against Clive's mania had it's own effect.  I get how people in 1931 might have seen this otherworldly presentation and lost their minds.

To me, in many ways, this is Halloween.  The weird, funny, dark, bizarre story is a match for how I feel about the holiday.

Anyway, a re-watch of ol' Frankie always pays off.  And - remarkably, the next two films starring Karloff as the monsters are classics as well.  Recommended.

Here's a podcast about some Frankenstein films from a few years back.

1930's HalloWatch: Vampyr (1932)

Watched:  10/23/2024

Format:  Max

Viewing:  First

Director:  Carl Theodor Dreyer

Apparently when this movie came out, people were just *mad* at it.  Like when you read that people freaked out about Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and rioted*, when Vampyr (1932) was shown, it seems the good people of Vienna wanted their money back and subsequently rioted. Berlin just boo'd the picture.  And it kind of went from city to city, earning a terrible reputation.

But imagine just dumping David Lynch or Tarkovsky on people who think they came to see Universal's very palatable Dracula.  

That said, this movie is *great*.  And that's with the viewing I did which was of a stitched together restoration of a film no one really wanted to see again after 1932 and was more or less lost.  

In theory, based on the work of Sheridan le Fanu, it's really it's own thing, nodding to bits of his collection of works entitled In a Glass Darkly, which contains the novella Carmilla - upon which my fave rave, The Vampire Lovers, takes inspiration.

The film is creepy enough, just based on the concepts.  A young man comes to a small French town and is visited by an older gentleman in the middle of the night (in the film's first real tell about how weird it will be), who leaves him with a package marked "open in the case of my death".  Soon, he's seeing disembodied shadows running around, a mysterious doctor, a mysterious older woman... and then witnesses the murder of the older gentleman through his window.  And then it gets weird.

Hallo-Universal-Watch: The Invisible Man (1933)

Watched:  10/18/2024

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  James Whale

We watched this one with some folks.  

I always enjoy that this movie is essentially about a guy who injects himself with a serum that, yes, makes him invisible - but it also makes him an incredible a-hole.  It's a real take.

But Jamie and I discussed this in what turned out to be the penultimate episode of The Signal Watch PodCast.

Anyway, you can listen to our thoughts on it!

How can you not like a movie where the main character declares the moon is afraid of him (and means it!)

Hallo-Watch: The Ghoul (1933)

Watched:  10/10/2024

Format:   Amazon Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  T. Hayes Hunter

Well, they can't all be winners.

The movie is probably more interesting for it's goofy history than the movie itself, which is disappointing on almost every level if you're looking for good old-fashioned Halloween fun, but I suppose it's a great movie if you think cousins should hook up by a film's ending.

The story is unnecessarily convoluted, but the spaghetti mess doesn't reveal itself until the very end, and up til that point, it's mostly skulking.  So much skulking.  Sometimes someone skulking after someone who is, in turn, skulking after someone else.  It's crazy.  And a waste.  We have Karloff, who only did the movie because he and Universal were in a spat, and all they gave him to do was wander around dressed like a grandpa after church and wear some iffy make-up. 

The plot is:   there's a supposedly mystic artifact that will allow the Egyptian god Set to take you to Egyptian Heaven?  And Karloff spent his fortune on it just before passing.  Now, everyone wants the amulet, and so a manservant has it for a minute, he gives it to Karloff's estranged niece, who runs into her estranged other cousin, Rafe.  There's Egyptians looking for the thing.  A comedy lady.  A pastor.  And skulking.

And I shouldn't have to say, look, your cousin has great hair, and that's how a wave was supposed to look in 1933, but you still should stop touching her.

The big let down is that it's a movie that has been about mysticism and dark magic, and then at the end, they explain everything away as a series of coincidences, misdiagnosed maladies, scam artists, etc... that all *happened* to line up to make it seem like Karloff came back from the dead and was lumbering around.  Which, I do not need to tell you, absolutely sucks.  Don't do this.

What is good:  

Well, the set and lighting and visuals are all amazing.  No notes.  Loved that.  I liked the funny lady swooning over the Egyptian who is, in turn, absolutely bullshitting her.  And..  yeah.  That's about it.  I liked that it had Ernest Thesiger, because he's one of my favorite parts in one of my favorite films in The Bride of Frankenstein, and I'd never seen him in anything else.  And I don't feel guilty pointing out star Dorothy Hyson is cute since Rodgers and Hart wrote The Most Beautiful Girl in the World about her.  

I don't really know why I've seen this movie cited as "see The Ghoul sometime" but now I wonder if they meant the much later movie called The Ghoul, and I just clicked on the wrong one.

Just watch The Old Dark House.  It's a better movie.

 

1930's Watch: Dead End (1937)

Watched:  09/15/2024

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  First

Director:  William Wyler

After seeing Sylvia Sydney - and quite liking her - in Merrily We Go To Hell, we decided to check out one of her many other films.  Amazon lists things like "Oscar Nominations x4" now as you're scrolling, and as Dead End (1937) had 4 Oscar noms, we gave it a spin.

The credits on this thing are bonkers.  Directed by William Wyler, it was a movie based on a play - and the screenplay was by Lillian Hellman.  Then the cast list came up.  Sylvia Sidney, Joel McCrae, Humphrey Bogart, Claire Trevor, Ward Bond.... not a bad line-up.  

The credits done, the movie then moved over a multi-story, gigantic set depicting the titular "dead end" of the film as a New York street runs into the river and where a gigantic high-class apartment building had gone in amongst tenement buildings - gentrification of a rough part of town (and based on a real building, in a real dead end in New York, 53rd Street and the East River.  I believe FDR Drive now runs through the location of the play and film.)

The set has a river, restaurants, etc... all built, the intersection feeling as real and immersive as anything I think I've seen from the era.  While it's not Intolerance, it's a massive set that's as accurate as possible.  

30's Watch: Merrily We Go To Hell (1932)

Watched:  09/09/2024

Format:  Library Disc

Viewing:  First

Director:  Dorothy Arzner

One nice thing about wandering a shelf of movies is that you may experience "serendipitous discovery" - the thing where you weren't looking for an item, but suddenly you are pretty sure this is what you really needed.  And what I needed was to find out what a movie from 1932 called Merrily We Go To Hell was all about.  

I recognized the male star's name - Frederic March - March was a major star staring at the end of the silent era and continuing for decades.  And the female lead's name rang a bell - Sylvia Sidney - but I couldn't say from where. 

The film was directed by Dorothy Arzner, perhaps the lone female director working in Hollywood during this period.  It was an *incredibly* strange time in the industry as the film business had employed women writers, directors, editors and more for the first twenty years of the industry, but as the Silent Era wrapped, the key roles in film showed women the door, and it's difficult to know what was lost as a result of this change.

Merrily We Go To Hell is a film about two stock 1930's movie characters - a newspaperman with aspirations of writing plays, and a rich society gal - meeting and falling in love.  At first blush, it seems it will be a comedy about heavy drinking in society circles - and it is about drinking.  But it changes tones, becoming very obviously about the evils of spirits and fancy actresses.  And, perhaps more importantly, it's about the "modern" marriage, where women allow their husbands to cheat and carry on, because they're doing so themselves.*

Screwball Watch: Bringing Up Baby (1938)

Watched:  07/19/2024

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  3rd of 4th

Director:  Howard Hawks

This is a movie that I liked the first time, but I feel like - the more time you see it, the more it works.  

I won't linger too long on this one other than to say, Howard Hawks was such a wildly talented director - it's unreal to scroll his filmography and think that eight years later he's doing The Big Sleep and ten years later, Red River.  And fifteen years later, he's doing Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.  Pair that with a young Hepburn and Grant, a leopard and absolute pros who get how this works in stage comedies, and it's a bit of a delight.

It also features the greatest shoe-based joke in cinema.

Anyway, if you want to watch two pretty people be very funny, this is it.

I do think, with screwball, there's a YMMV aspect, but I don't think it's too hard to trace Susan from this movie to some of the wackier characters in, say, What's Up, Doc? or NBC's better comedies.*  But Hepburn is so sweet in this even as she's wreaking havoc, and seems *genuinely*, instantly in love, it's kind of adorable.  And who better to bounce off than Cary Grant?

*I'm a huge fan of Mo Collins' Joan Callamezzo character, for example.  Or Jane Krakowski on 30 Rock.  Just anyone who is work on a parallel plane.  

Fritz Lang Watch: M (1931)

Watched:  04/01/2024

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Fritz Lang

Selection:  Me

I've been meaning to get to this one for at least fifteen years.  Maybe much longer.  And if I can keep my act together, I'll watch another Fritz Lang movie soon, Ministry of Fear.  

But M (1931) was priority as it's on a lot of "best movies ever" lists, and cited by academics as wildly important and influential - and I'd argue - as this is 1931 - so influential it's imprinted itself onto mass media to such a degree that tracing it back would be quite the cladogram.  

Also, it turns out: the universally praised movie is, in fact, shockingly good.

Essentially what delayed my viewing of the film was what I assumed the movie would be about, and any enjoyment would be largely academic.  And the movie is about the things I suspected, in part.  But stunned was I when the movie took a hard pivot and became about something far more nuanced and difficult to wrangle.

Here's what I knew:  M stars Peter Lorre in his breakout role.  In 1931 Berlin, someone is murdering children.  A frantic manhunt begins.

Those things are correct.  

SPOILERS

Joanie Watch: Sadie McKee (1934)

Watched:  03/25/2024

Viewing:  First

Format:  Amazon

Director:  Clarence Brown

Selection:  oh, definitely me

In honor of Joan Crawford's birthday, I decided to take in one of her movies.  

This turned out to be slightly more of a chore than I thought.  I checked all of the services to see if anything was streaming as part of the cost of my service.  Honestly - I was kind of shocked that nothing was really out there.  And then, I remembered - Amazon bought the MGM catalog.  And Crawford was signed to MGM for the first phase of her career.  So, you can count on most of Crawford's pre-Mildred Pierce films to be at MGM where she was from 1925 to late 1943 (she was loaned out once or twice).  

Based on absolutely nothing - except that I hadn't seen it and that it comes up from time-to-time - I picked Sadie McKee (1934).  Listed as a "comedy" on Amazon, it's far more of a melodrama with some comedic elements, and has the spunk and fire in the Sadie McKee persona that female characters were given in movies starring a studio's best and brightest in the early sound era. 

HalloWatch: Werewolf of London (1935)

Watched:  10/29/2023

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  First

Director:  Stuart Walker

Every year, Jamie and I each carve a jack 'o lantern.  Usually we put on a movie something we've seen before, often a comedy or horror-comedy.  But this year I squeezed in one of my Halloween bucket movies for the year, but I can only say I *partially* watched this one, because I was also carving a pumpkin and then cleaning up the aftermath.

this year's effort.  Jamie's Dracula on the left, my ghoul on the right

I had just never gotten around to Werewolf of London (1935), which is a bit of a surprise even to me.  I am a fan of Lon Chaney's take on The Wolfman that would pop up 5 years later, but I never make it through the rest of the werewolf films in the box set.  I'm trying to get a picture of 1930's and 40's horror, one Halloween at a time, and have tried to watch offerings from Universal and RKO.  Also, I exist in the same world as Warren Zevon, so you'd think I'd eventually just be curious to see the damn movie.

The plot is nowhere near as tight as The Wolfman, and the performances not as punctuated.  But that doesn't mean it doesn't have anything to offer.  I liked the make-up, the transformation FX, and the general idea of the story.  

Scientists visit Tibet to find a flower they've heard only blooms in moonlight, and while securing the plant, are attacked by a werewolf.  Returned home, renowned biologist, Wilfred Glendon, begins acting anti-social and ignoring his wife (played by Bride of Frankenstein's Valerie Hobson), who just happens to have her childhood boyfriend show up at the same time.  A doctor Yogami appears and is also looking for the flower, which he says alleviates the symptoms of werewolfery.  

Anyway, mayhem ensues, the doctors both are werewolves, etc...

All in all, it's really not bad, but the lead - unlike most Universal films - doesn't really have a sympathetic motivation in the same way we see Larry Talbot - a victim of chance.  There's a dash more Jekyll and Hyde to the story than in the case of The Wolfman, but not enough to get hung up on thinking it's borrowing too heavily.   

In general, it's an okay movie.  I didn't dislike it, and will watch it again with my full attention.  A highlight was seeing Valerie Hobson in another movie shot at literally the same time as Bride of Frankenstein, but given far more to do.  She's good!  

But, yeah, I need to watch it again next year to say much more.  But I've 100% seen far worse.

HalloWatch: The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Watched:  10/28/2023

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  James Whale

Some of my pals were over Saturday night, and I made them watch Bride of Frankenstein (1935).  It's no secret it's one of my favorite movies (easily top 10, perhaps top 5), and it was a delight to share it with folks who would otherwise likely never see it.  

Anyway, we kind of talked over the movie, so they missed some good lines and good moments, but it's a first viewing, and it was all excited chatter, so they were enjoying it, which is all that matters.  

Matt did wisely point out how the comedy worked within the movie much how Shakespeare inserts fun stuff into even his tragedies - Matt watched a bucket-ton of movies that I mostly do not ever see - and it was all a good talk.

Anyway, glad to get to this year's screening of the movie.

PodCast 257: "The Invisible Man" (1933) - A Halloween 2023 PodCast w/ Jamie and Ryan

Watched:  10/21/2023

Format:  BluRay

Viewing: Unknown/ First

Decade:  1930's

Director:  James Whale

For more ways to listen

Jamie and Ryan are transparent in their madness about this 1930's cinema classic! It's a ghostly good time as they get wrapped up in a conversation that makes it clear, you can see right through them when it comes to their enjoyment of this film.

SoundCloud 

The Signal Watch PodCast · 257: "The Invisible Man" (1933) - A Halloween 2023 PodCast w/ Jamie and Ryan

YouTube

Music:

Invisible Man Theme - Heinz Roemheld 

The Invisible Man - Queen, The Miracle 

Halloween 2023

The Signal Watch PodCast · Halloween 2023

All Halloween and Horror Playlist

The Signal Watch PodCast · Halloween and Horror

HalloWatch: Frankenstein (1931)

Watched:  10/24/2023

Format:  Peacock

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  James Whale

Every year during the spooky season I try to give Frankenstein (1931) a watch.  The past several years, I've double-billed Frankenstein with Bride of Frankenstein, usually the night before - or night of - Halloween.  

But this year I wanted to give the movie a bit more time to percolate and watch it as its own thing.  

It's a movie I've seen *a lot* and so I can spot the places where the dolly shot bounces on the tracks, and I can see the literal creasing in the backdrops used in the forest scenes.  I laugh with anticipation at the jokes and know which bits work best as scares.

I make a lot of notes about how Dracula movies don't match the novel, because there's usually some adherence to the book and seeing where and why they diverged is a curiosity.  But by the time you get from the publication of Mary Shelley's novel in 1818 to the play and the movie, this story was well over 100 years old, and folks were going to do their own thing.*  There's barely any of the novel left in this film.  Themes.  Some names.  Some settings.  A wedding.

So I tend to separate them and consider them their own thing, and it's usually in subsequent adaptations that I look for whether they're borrowing from this film or from the novel or doing something entirely new.  

Even if the film is nearing the century mark, it still plays.  The creatures' pathos is as real as the novel, if reduced to a child-like state of confusion rather than a sort of existential crisis of existence.  The performances are of their time but would absolutely put fire in a modern adaptation.  You simply won't beat Colin Clive going mad in the moments of success after the monster is lowered from the tower.  

The look is borrowed from German Expressionism, and between the Gothic horror of Dracula's settings and this film, we get a language for how the best sets and scenes should look in horror that will be endlessly copied, parodied, stolen from and refracted for the next 90 years.  That's not to say this was the final word, but the starting line and the thing to which everything else can draw comparison.

Further, the themes of "who is the real monster?" would echo throughout horror and science fiction, and are often the best part to chew on in a film (and something zombie movies picked up and ran with).  But I think this movie does the best job of bringing a Dr. Frankenstein to life who really thinks he shut the door behind himself and his experiments, only to have it come roaring back.

I'm now curious to read the play upon which the movie is based.  Curiously, next year sees the publication of the script for what I believe to be the first time.  

Some time I will write a much longer bit on this movie, it's sequel and the novel and why I keep coming back to them, but not today, kids!

But for the best Halloween spookiness for the whole family, I humbly submit this classic.

*worth noting, this film will be 100 in just 8 years

Hallo-Watch: Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932)

Watched:  10/09/2023

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  Robert Florey

I'd heard Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932) mentioned a lot as part of Universal's early offerings in their Dracula and Frankenstein adjacent period.  It's considered part of that first wave and thus foundational as horror was being created on the fly for talkies.  Lugosi had turned down the part of the monster in Frankenstein and was looking for actory roles, and up popped this adaptation of an Edgar Allen Poe tale.

Carl Laemmle, who ran Universal at the time, didn't actually think much of horror, so basing his movies on known literature probably eased his conscience a bit.

Poe's original short story is credited as the first modern detective story.  The lead, Dupin, uses logic and reason to deduce what occurred, not something common to the literary world in most stories of the time.  This form of detective fiction would quickly become mastered by others, and you get Sherlock Holmes and how we think of a *lot* of modern fiction - pretty much anything with a central mystery.

Pre-Code Watch: Thirteen Women (1932)

Watched:  10/01/2023

Format:  Criterion

Viewing:  First

Director:  George Archainbaud

So, I became aware of this movie via the You Must Remember This podcast during an episode discussing the ill-fated Peg Entwistle, the actress who famously threw herself from the H in the "Hollywood" sign when her career stalled.  I was also aware this was one of several pre-Thin Man films in which Myrna Loy (praise be her name) appears as an Asian character/ person of mixed heritage.*

It's a tight hour-long movie, and more thriller than horror, although there's quasi/ possibly supernatural elements.  

The movie was only semi-available for a while, then in the Internet Archive and other places in pieces, but now it's at Criterion and looks and sounds terrific.

Here's your story:  a group of former sorority pals are still in touch, writing chain letters (this is 1932 and facebook is not a thing).  At some point, one of them decided to start reaching out to a famed Yogi/ Swami to get her horoscope, and suggested all of the girls do the same.  But as the horoscopes trickle in, they predict death and chaos.  We see one of the girls, a sister-act circus acrobat, learn someone will die in her act, and she immediately drops her sister to her death, and goes mad.  Entwistle's characters kills her husband with a knife, I believe, and she's out of her only performance well before the half-way mark.

As more members of the friend circle are picked off, we learn there's a mysterious and exotic beauty (Myrna Loy) paired with the Swami, but she's pulling the strings using some form of hypnosis.

It's a fascinating, exploitative film relying on an absurd premise and set-up.  featuring a largely female cast - thrusting Irene Dunne into the lead as a widower who is neither overly skeptical nor biting on the power of the stars hook, line and sinker.  It's also kind of sexy in that pre-Code manner of suggesting lots of sex off-screen as Loy's character bewitches dudes who are useful to her.  

The only real mystery is the "why" of the murders and chaos.  And, as it turns out, we never really, fully find out.  But it seems the sorority had been responsible for making Loy's life hell at the school, and forced her to leave after working and scraping to get in and afford it.  A "half-caste", she's half "Hindu" and half-Anglo, and fits in with neither.  Although the movie's most eye-poppingly racist moment isn't the reveal that the women we've been so worried about were maybe terrible people in college.  It's when the cop helping them out describes Loy's character's ethnicity.  

The movie's brief run-time means we don't get to all 13 women, but that would probably feel repetitive as a film, anyway.  It also gets to the point and wraps up within seconds.  

Anyway - it's a product of it's time, but could be remade now with no problem.  

I looked into the book it's based on, and it sounds like an absolutely crazy ride.  I may check it out.

*this is Pre-Code, but nonetheless, implying or indicating romantic or sexual relations between people of different ethnicities was frowned upon (I know) unless the actors were both white and one was playing a different race (I KNOW).  It's part of how you wind up decades later with John Wayne as Ghengis Khan

 

Ape Watch: King Kong (1933)

Watched:  06/11/2023

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  Merian C. Cooper / Ernest B. Schoedsack

So, last week Stuart sent me a link to a doc on YouTube to watch.  It was, roughly, a 3-part series on King Kong (1933) and the impact of the film over decades.  I texted him 15 minutes in to the first part and said "there's no way I don't wind up watching Kong this weekend", and, indeed, I'm a man of my word.

We all have our foundational films, and King Kong, in it's very roundabout way, is one of mine.  

Growing up in the 1970's and 80's, and in the wake of the 70's monster craze, Kong was more or less a household name, concept, etc...  Everyone had an idea of King Kong as a giant ape liberated from an island who winds up in Manhattan and wreaks havoc, winding up atop the Empire State Building.  

My first exposure to Kong's full story was in a hard-back book my dad read to me (and, I assume, my brother) when I was about 5.  Only later would I learn it was an official novelization worked on by no less than Merian C. Cooper, director of the film.  

Screwball Watch: Libeled Lady (1936)

Watched:  01/23/2023

Format:  TCM

Viewing:  Second

Director:  Jack Conway

You can do worse than a movie with Myrna Loy and Jean Harlow.  But our male leads are Spencer Tracy and William Powell.  So.  

A newspaper accidentally runs a badly sourced story about a rich young woman (Loy), claiming she carried on with a married man, but it's not accurate.  Tracy is attempting to marry Harlow, but the emergency (threats of libel and slander suits) pulls him away from his own wedding.  Looking to find a way to get the $5 million lawsuit dropped, he employs scoundrel William Powell to set Loy up for a fall in front of cameras and make her lawsuit moot.  

There's nothing I don't like about the movie.  It's brilliantly conceived, acted and it's hysterical, careening from one sequence to another.  It's top tier talent making the most of a great set-up.  

VidCast - PodCast 226: "The Thin Man" (1934) - a Day-Drinking the Holidays PodCast with JAL and Ryan

Watched:  12/18/2022

Format:  BluRay

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  W.S. Van Dyke 

For more ways to listen, click here

Join JAL and Ryan as we get into the gin, watch a bona fide cinema classic, ponder what makes it great, and toast the hell out of each other. It's a festive good time as we talk classic mystery, the fading of memory around even the best of stars, and Ryan probably overplays his hand discussing Myrna Loy.

Video PodCast

Audio Streaming PodCast

The Signal Watch PodCast · 226: "The Thin Man" (1934) - A Holiday Day Drinking the Movies w/ JAL and Ryan

Playlist Holidays 2022

The Signal Watch PodCast · Holidays 2022

Noir Playlist

The Signal Watch PodCast · Noir Watch