Change Your Image
djpass-1
Reviews
Postal Inspector (1936)
Interesting in several ways
At heart, this is a 1930's B movie with a fair story and some interesting aspects. There are the usual characters: the straight-laced older brother, the reckless younger brother, the beautiful nightclub singer, and the criminal nightclub owner--plus an array or unnecessary comic relief characters.
What sets it apart is that it is part propaganda for the U.S. Post Office Department (as there were similar films promoting the FBI, Coast Guard, etc.) Cortez (the postal inspector) and Lugosi (the nightclub owner), not the most subtle of actors, are pretty restrained here.
Also interesting is that about half the movie takes place during a disastrous flood (which doesn't affect the electrical system, it seems) and includes some interesting stock footage of floods from the period. So instead of ending with a car chase, there is boat chase through flooded city streets. I was left wondering how those scenes were filmed--did Universal really flood streetscapes for a B movie? However it was done, it looks realistic.
All in all, worth watching if you are a fan of 1930's movies.
Lot in Sodom (1933)
Well. That was interesting.
I could hardly spoil this, since everyone knows the story.
This film looks, as one writer here noted, as if it were made in Germany about 1920. The directors seem to have used all the special effects they knew, like neophytes. It is more ballet than conventional movie, using music, singing, voice-over and text (though some is in Latin) to augment the action.
I seem to recall that this group made their few films in Rochester, so perhaps they were connected with Kodak. Sorry I can't give a citation for that.
On the whole, the film is interesting as an historical glimpse into early independent work. A good film for stoners.
Rich and Strange (1931)
Clever and funny.
There is no dialog in the first four minutes of this film as we watch our hero at his daily grind. These scenes could have been leading into a Busby Berkley dance extravaganza. In fact, the first half of the movie is like a Berkley film without music and dancing. Much of it is laughing out loud funny--not what I expect from Hitchcock. The direction is clever. Instead of watching a couple walk around the deck of a ship, we watch the train of her dress dragging over the deck. Despite the twin beds, this is an adult story, especially compared to post-code American movies of a few years later. By turns it is hilarious, dramatic and grim. Presumably it is in the public domain; I downloaded a nice clear version. Well worth watching.
The President's Mystery (1936)
How Republicans must have hated this!
Mild spoilers. How Republicans must have hated this! It might seem innocuous today, but this is very much a story about the little guys being screwed by big business. Blake lobbies successfully to defeat a bill that would help small businesses stay afloat during the depression. Already disenchanted with his life, he decides to start over when he sees the effect his work has on a small agricultural community. The version I saw ran 94 minutes, much of it exposition. The latter half of the movie seemed rather rushed. The relationship between Blake and Charlotte doesn't develop, it is just presented without explanation. All in all, a pretty good 30's film.
Know for Sure (1941)
Social history
This film is not in the league with "Sex Madness" and other exploitation films. Instead of trying to scare people away from a problem, it explained how to avoid or treat it. It is melodramatic, but well acted with good production. Tim Holt, Ward Bond and J. Carroll Naish appear as victims, and Lewis Milestone directed.(I image there were a lot of outtakes, though, when the actors couldn't help laughing when they had to say things like "I noticed a sore...down there.") I'm not old enough to remember syphilis--or patent medicine "doctors"--being a big problem, but I appreciate this film as a slice of the social history of our past.
Tales from the Darkside: Anniversary Dinner (1985)
Giving myself credit
Well, naturally, I liked this episode, mostly because I wrote the story it was based on, though IMDb doesn't give credit.
The original story appeared in 'Twilight Zone' magazine not too long before the series went into production.
It was interesting to see the progress from a short story to the script to the final product. Reading a script, for people not used to reading them or reading plays, doesn't really give much idea of what the end product will be like. It makes you appreciate the director's work, especially since this was a VERY low budget series. There were only four actors and maybe three sets in the whole show. Alice Ghostley and Mario Roccuzzo did a great job.
It was a bit telegraphed, as the previous entry mentioned. If you see a giant spoon on the wall, you have to be pretty thick not to guess the end.