The Bride of Frankenstein Directed by James Whale
1934/USA
Universal Pictures
Repeated viewing
#92 of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
The Monster: Alone: bad. Friend: good!
Neither Frankenstein nor his Monster were killed at the end of Frankenstein. The Monster is only looking for a friend but meets with terror everywhere he turns. Is the solution to build him a Bride from dead body parts? The nutty Dr. Pretorius thinks so! With Boris Karloff as the Monster, Colin Clive as Frankenstein, Valerie Hobson as Elizabeth, Ernest Thesinger as Dr. Pretorius, Dwight Frye as miscellaneous ghouls, and Una O’Connor as Minnie.
I may be in the minority in preferring the 1931 original to this sequel. This one is just a little bit too arch for me and the original didn’t have all that shreeking by Una O’Connor. That said, Karloff is wonderful despite the ill-advised decision to have him speak, the lighting and sets are atmospheric, and the special effects are first-rate for their time. I can have fun every time I come back to this classic.
Blow-Up (AKA Blow Up) Directed by Michelangelo Antonioni
1966/UK/USA
Bridge Films/Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Repeat viewing
#448 of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
IMDB users say 7.6/10; I say 9/10
[box] Thomas: I wish I had tons of money… Then I’d be free.[/box]
When I was first exposed to the films of Antonioni, I thought he made boring films about boredom. Now I think he makes interesting and beautiful films about boredom and a whole lot more. While Blow-Up can hardly be called entertaining, it is a sometimes frustrating but intellectually stimulating and visually exciting examination of an artist’s unsuccessful struggle to find meaning within the distractions of an empty but swinging London. Although it is impossible to “spoil” the unresolved mystery the film is built around, I will get deep into the story in order to explore its themes. I would recommend not reading this review until you have watched the movie.
The film begins with a group of merry-makers cavorting through the streets of swinging London collecting money. These folks are among the most animated people in the entire film. We then segue to a shot of a group of men leaving a homeless shelter. We follow one of the men until he loses sight of the others and gets into his dirty Rolls Royce convertible, thus establishing our anti-hero (David Hemmings) as your basic super-cool fraud. He is not named in the film but is called Thomas in the credits so I will call him that here.
He proceeds to drive said car through the strangely empty streets of the city until he arrives at his studio. We soon find out that Thomas has been photographing the men at the shelter, making him also a kind of intruder and exploiter. He is very macho and apparently irresistible to women. When he begins photographing fashion models at his studio, we learn about the glee with which he keeps women waiting. The famous scene of Thomas shooting the supermodel Verushka reads like a sex scene with Thomas tiring of the woman immediately after the climax. He goes on to berate a whole group of zombie-like models until he gets what he wants.
While he leaves his models standing around with their eyes closed, he visits the apartment of a painter friend. The painter says that his abstract compositions have no meaning when he paints them but reveal themselves later. This also applies to Thomas’s photographs of the park, as we will see. Thomas then heads for an antique store he is considering buying. He also hunts for jewels among the junk and winds up buying a propeller on impulse with no particular use in mind. He later asks his agent to follow up with the owner so that he can get the shop before anyone else does.
[box] Jane: This is a public place — everyone has the right to be left in peace.
Thomas: It’s not my fault if there’s no peace.[/box]
From there, Thomas heads to the park and starts aimlessly taking pictures of pigeons. He starts to focus on a couple he sees embracing there. The woman (Vanessa Redgrave – “Jane” in the credits) asks him to stop and demands the negatives. He refuses her. We soon find out he is planning to use them in an upcoming book, along with photos of naked men showering at the homeless shelter and other gritty images of marginalized Londoners.
A very nervous and vulnerable Jane shows up at Thomas’s studio and pleads for the negatives. He toys with her, poses her as a model, and instructs her on how to smoke and listen to music. She takes off her shirt, offering herself to him and he gives her a blank roll of film. They then apparently make love. She gives him what she says is her phone number.
After Jane leaves, we see Thomas perform the most concentrated activity he does in the film. Several minutes are spent developing the images he has taken in the park. He spies Jane looking at something in the trees and enlarges the area she seems to be watching until he finds a gun in the shadows. His concentration is broken by the arrival of two young would-be models who have been pestering him throughout the day. He welcomes the distraction and dallies with them in a romp that begins in what looks a little like a rape. The girls soon get into the fun. After their three-way tryst, Thomas sends the girls on their way and returns to his photographs. He discovers what seems to be a body under a tree.
Thomas goes back to the painter’s apartment, apparently to share his discovery, and finds the painter making love with his girlfriend or wife “Patricia” (Sarah Miles). She sees Thomas and seemingly tries to give him some message. Thomas goes back to the studio and Patricia soon follows. Thomas tells Patricia about his discovery that someone has been killed in the park. Patricia asks if Thomas has gone to the police but Thomas ignores that question. He shows Patricia the greatly blown-up image that he says shows the body. She remarks that it looks like one of her partner’s abstract paintings. Enlarging the photos has both revealed and removed information from the images. Patricia reaches out to Thomas for help with a problem but then thinks better of telling him what it is.
Thomas goes to the park alone and sees the corpse. When he returns to the apartment, his cameras, negatives, rolls of films, and prints of the park photos are all gone.
He goes out to search for his publisher to get him to go with him to look at the body. He sees Jane standing at a store window briefly but when he goes to confront her she has disappeared. He goes to a club and stands with a zombie-like crowd who are absently watching the Yardbirds perform. The crowd becomes animated when they start to fight over the neck of the guitarist’s smashed guitar. Thomas manages to “win” this treasure. When he leaves the club he discards it in the street. It has no meaning for him now that he has gone; he only wanted to get it away from the others, like the antique shop earlier.
[box] [last lines] Ron: What did you see in that park? Thomas: Nothing… Ron.[/box]
Finally, Thomas arrives at the party his publisher is attending. He tries to convey his urgent need to have the publisher confirm his sighting of the body but the guy is stoned out of his mind. Thomas, defeated, goes into the back room with the publisher for some diversion. At this point, I began to feel sorry for Thomas. He seemed so utterly alone in spite of his many acquaintances.
He wakes up in the morning and goes to the park by himself but the body is gone. There is no evidence except his own memory of the shooting he saw in the photographs.
The film ends with the return of the merry-makers who proceed to mime a tennis match on one of the courts. Thomas looks on skeptically but when the “ball” goes over the fence he runs off to retrieve it. We hear the sounds of rackets hitting the ball with Thomas’s eyes following the action as the match becomes real for him. At last he stoops to pick up his camera and dissolves into air leaving only the green grass behind.
We are left only with more questions. Is the character of Thomas a misogynist creep or a tortured artist or both? What happened in the park? Do the distractions of modern life make it impossible to find meaning? Is it valid to abstract reality from second-hand experience? Can we know reality that is not confirmed by a shared group experience? Is Antonioni reminding us that the film, too, is not real when Thomas disappears at the end?
I find all this stuff fascinating so I could watch this again any time. As a murder mystery, however, it stinks.
Battleship Potemkin (“Bronenosets Potyomkin”) Directed by Sergei M. Eisenstein
1925/USSR
Goskino
Repeat viewing
#27 of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
Opening Intertitle: Revolution is war. Of all the wars known in history it is the only lawful, rightful, just, and great war. . . In Russia this war has been declared and begun – Lenin, 1905.
The sailors of the Battleship Potemkin are fed up with their diet of rotten, maggoty meat and refuse to eat their borscht. The officers threaten to kill them for insubordination and the sailors revolt. The citizens of Odessa rise up in support of the rebel sailors and are slaughtered on the Odessa steps by tsarist soldiers. The rest of the squadron closes in on the Potemkin and the crew gets ready to fight. At the last minute, victory! The sailors on the other ships allow the Potemkin to pass safely.
While this movie does not exactly make my heart sing, there is no arguing that it taught the world a lot about how to tell a story and manipulate audience emotions through editing. The famous Odessa steps sequence is still one of the most powerfully horrific scenes in film history. This time around I noticed some pretty exquisite cinematography in this film at well. The restored print brought out the ethereal ships in the harbor when Vakulinchuk’s body is brought by boat to the docks at dawn. The sequence of the fleet of little sailing boats taking provisions to the battleship is also lyrical and quite lovely. It is easy to forget such interludes in a film that seems to determined to brand shocking images on the brain.
She Directed by Lancing C. Holden and Irving Pichel
1935/USA
RKO Radio Pictures
Repeat viewing
She, Queen Hash-A-Mo-Tep of Kor: I am yesterday, and today, and tomorrow. I am sorrow, and longing, and hope unfulfilled. I am Hash-A-Mo-Tep. She. She who must be obeyed! I am I.
Leo Vincey’s (Randolph Scott) dieing uncle tells him of the family legend that a 15th century ancestor, John Vincey, found the flame of immortality. Leo bears a remarkable likeness to his ancestor. He sets off with the uncle’s assistant on a journey to the Arctic to locate the flame. On the way, they meet up with Tanya (Helen Mack), a guide’s daughter. An avalanche reveals the entrance to a volcanic cave and from there to Kor, a land ruled by Hash-A-Mo-Tep or She (Helen Gahagan), an immortal beauty and absolute monarch who has bathed in that same flame. She has been waiting through the centuries for the return of her beloved John Vincey and believes Leo is his reincarnation. In the meantime, Leo has fallen in love with Tanya which does not bode well for Tanya’s survival.
Helen Gahagan and Randolph Scott
Marien C. Cooper, who produced this film, intended it as a lavish special effects successor to his 1933 King Kong. Unfortunately, it was a box office bomb. I believe the problem may have been that Helen Gahagan just lacked the charisma to bring life to the title role. In addition, the rituals of the civilization of Kor and the screenplay are both fairly clunky. The film is nothing special on any front, though the Max Steiner score is rather nice and the settings are certainly lavish.
I thought it was fun to find out where Rumpole of the Bailey’s wife got her nickname (“She Who Must Be Obeyed”). This movie killed Helen Gahagan’s film career. She went on to become a U.S. Congresswoman from California.
Excerpt – scene between Helen Gahagan and Helen Mack
La Mujer del Puerto (“The Woman of the Port”) (1934) Directed by Arcady Boytler and Raphael J. Sevilla
1934/Mexico
Eurindia Films
First viewing
You just never know when you are going to find that special film! I had never heard of this one until I was gathering films for this exercise. Rosario (Andrea Palma) lives in poverty with her aging father and is in love with a neighbor who says he will marry her when he has more money. Her father dies and her lover proves unfaithful so Rosario becomes a prostitute on the docks in another town. One night she meets a client who defends her from a drunk and her fate takes an even more tragic turn. (I will not spoil the ending but I was shocked.)
The plot and acting in this are secondary to some exceptionally beautiful images. In terms of the story, the film is uneven with certain parts moving at a very leisurely pace and the final fifteen minutes unnaturally rushed. Some of the acting is a bit overdone. However, the composition of the shots and some of the editing are just masterful. There is a scene where Rosario is escorting her father’s coffin through a group of carnival revelers that is breathtaking. The whole movie is bathed in gorgeous expressionist lighting. Well, well worth seeing.
Director Arcady Boytler was born in Moscow and directed silent films in the USSR and Europe before arriving in Mexico and meeting Sergei Eisenstein at the time of the filming of Qué viva Mexico! (1932). He made several other films during Mexico’s Golden Age of cinema but it looks like this is the one that is most readily available on DVD.
Excerpts with song “Vendo Placer” (Pleasure I Sell) as background
Baby Take a Bow Directed by Harry Lachman
1934/USA
Fox Film Corporation
Second viewing?
Trigger Stone: So you’re Eddie Ellison’s kid. Shirley Ellison: I’m not a kid, I’m a girl, and today is my birthday.
Kay (Claire Trevor) is waiting for her sweetheart Eddie Ellison (James Dunn) to be released from Sing Sing. Eddie goes straight and they marry and have an adorable little girl, Shirley (Shirley Temple), who they love dearly. Fast forward to six years later and Eddie is working as a chauffeur for a wealthy family. Fellow ex-con Trigger Stone shows up and wants Eddie to fence some stolen property. Eddie refuses. A valuable pearl necklace is stolen from Eddie’s employer and insurance inspector Welch, who has long had it in for Eddie, tries to pin the blame on him. Shirley helps clear her father’s name.
Shirley is irresistible, to those of us who love her, in this film, released when she had just turned six years old. James Dunn is her ideal Daddy and Claire Trevor turns in a good performance as her mother. This is part prison film, part gangster film, and part musical. It all works in that 1930’s studio alternative reality. No masterpiece but I enjoyed it.
Clip “On a Account-a I Love You” starts at 3:14 – sorry about the colorization
Jane Eyre Directed by Christy Cabanne
1934/USA
Monogram Pictures
First viewing
“I am not an angel,’ I asserted; ‘and I will not be one till I die: I will be myself. Mr. Rochester, you must neither expect nor exact anything celestial of me – for you will not get it, any more than I shall get it of you: which I do not at all anticipate.” ― Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre
The first sound adaptation of the Charlotte Brontë novel. After a lonely and difficult childhood, the independent-minded Jane Eyre (Virginia Bruce) becomes a governess at Thornfield Hall. There she falls in love with the master of the house Mr. Rochester (Colin Clive) but he has a shocking secret that stands in the way of their happiness.
I have a few more films to watch but I do believe I may have hit the bottom of the barrel for 1934. This film might not be worse than Maniac but it is certainly less fun. Where to start? With the sets that quiver when brushed? No, I think the worst part is the amateurish brutalization of the novel. Here we have a glamorous Jane Eyre with golden ringlets who sings to Rochester at their first meeting for what seems like five minutes of this 62-minute movie. The Adele character is changed to being Rochester’s niece and has quite a prominent part in the story so that she can do hilarious stunts like falling head first into an urn. Crazy wife Bertha shows up at the wedding looking quite OK and asking to see her husband. There are many times when it seems like the actors have been asked to improvise their lines. Since it is evident that no one, including the director, has read the novel, this was a bad idea.
I may be revising how I go forward with my year-by-year project. Seeing so many mediocre movies in a row is making me jaded and cranky. I think I may forego seeing anything with a user rating less than 6.0/10 on IMDb. This one was rated 4.7/10.
Music Land
Directed by Wilfred Jackson (uncredited)
USA/1985
Walt Disney Productions
Second viewing
Music Land is one of the Disney “Silly Symphony” animated cartoon shorts. The Princess of the Land of Symphony (a violin) and the Prince of the Isle of Jazz (a saxophone) fall in love, much to the disapproval of their parents. A war ensues. Peace is achieved through the wedding of the Queen of Symphony (a viola) and the King of Jazz (an alto saxophone) on the Bridge of Harmony. The story is told in music. There is no dialog. This is fun and shows Disney’s build up to what would take flower in Fantasia.
The Thin Man
Directed by W. S. Van Dyke
1934/USA
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)
Umpteenth viewing
#138 of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
IMDb Users say 8.0/10; I say 9.0/10
Nick Charles: I’m a hero. I was shot twice in the Tribune. Nora Charles: I read where you were shot 5 times in the tabloids. Nick Charles: It’s not true. He didn’t come anywhere near my tabloids.
An inventor mysteriously disappears and is blamed for the murder of his girlfriend and her possible paramour. His daughter (Margaret O’Sullivan) appeals to retired detective Nick Charles (William Powell). Charles would prefer to enjoy the high life with his rich, beautiful, and witty wife Nora (Myrna Loy) but she thinks it would be exciting for him to pursue the case.
Having a Merry Christmas
I have seen this many times and I always forget who the murderer is. That is because the mystery is just a vehicle to showcase the fantastic repartee of Loy and Powell. They make the perfect married couple, playfully bickering but obviously in love. It is also the ideal escapist fare when one has, say, spent a whole day watching a manhunt in Boston and thinking about people who have lost their lives and limbs.
The Lost Patrol Directed by John Ford
1934/USA
RKO Radio Pictures
First viewing
The Sergeant: What’s the use of chewin’ the rag about something we might of done? Morelli: Right you are, Sarge! The Sergeant: Yeah, I know what you’re thinkin’. Perhaps I’ve done everything wrong! Perhaps this and perhaps that! But what I’ve done I’ve done, and what I haven’t, I haven’t!
A British Army patrol is on duty in the Mesopotamian Desert during WWI when its officer is killed by Arab sniper fire. Since the officer was the only one who knew where the patrol was headed, the men are lost. The Sargeant (Victor McLaglen) leads the men to a desert oasis where their horses are promptly stolen. The men hunker down to await rescue while under constant threat from Arabs. With Boris Karloff as an unpopular bible-thumping soldier and Wallace Ford as another of the men.
The rather depressing story did nothing to capture my attention. It was nice to see Karloff in a fairly meaty non-horror role. Unfortunately, his character goes mad and Karloff heads straight over the top. Victor McLaglen is always pretty good. Some nice photography of sand dunes. Meh.
I’ve been a classic movie fan for many years. My original mission was to see as many movies as I could get my hands on for every year from 1929 to 1970. I have completed that mission.
I then carried on with my chronological journey and and stopped midway through 1978. You can find my reviews of 1934-1978 films and “Top 10” lists for the 1929-1936 and 1944-77 films I saw here. For the past several months I have circled back to view the pre-Code films that were never reviewed here.
I’m a retired Foreign Service Officer living in Indio, California. When I’m not watching movies, I’m probably traveling, watching birds, knitting, or reading.
Photographs and videos found in this blog, unless indicated, are not owned by me and are here only for the purpose of education and discussion. Media found here are not intended for any commercial purpose. Copyright infringement is not intended.
Written material belongs to me and is copyrighted by flickersintime.com