|
|
Post by topbilled on May 2, 2023 15:09:40 GMT
This neglected film is from 1946.
Many ironic truths
The plot for this romance drama is fairly basic. A well-liked woman (Sylvia Sidney) intends to become the first female elected governor of her home state. Her husband and a professor from her alma mater object to her plans. A political consultant (George Raft) objects, too, but for another reason. It doesn’t matter, because she’s determined to prove them all wrong and succeed anyway.
By the time they received the script for MR. ACE, Sylvia Sidney and George Raft had already appeared in a few films at Paramount. They share a very natural chemistry on screen. What I notice in their scenes together is how much respect Raft has for his leading lady. He seems to appreciate working with a top-notch actress and treats her well.
Sidney shines and gives a confident performance. We believe she can be a fully self-actualized woman because of him.
Benedict Bogeaus, an independent producer, made this film. The set design rivals anything you’d find in a large scale studio production from this era. The rooms in Sidney’s hotel suite are elaborately furnished. Her country estate is as fine as any country estate in the movies. And then there’s the other stuff. Sidney’s clothes are fabulous. So are her jewels and her carefully formed hair.
The dialogue is often coy. There’s a scene when they’re on the way home from a night out together, and he steals a kiss when she’s falling asleep in the back of the car. He says he had to see if there’s any woman in her. After the smooch ends, she asks if there was any woman in her, and he says plenty.
Raft’s character runs the well-oiled political machinery in their city, usually determining who will or will not be elected. Despite their romantic escapades, he doesn’t offer to support her in the election. She ends up withdrawing because of a scandal involving her husband. Later she re-enters the race as an independent candidate and at that point, Raft does support her– without her knowledge.
She is elected and tells him that she is going to clean up the political corruption, meaning her first act as governor will be to send him to prison. But she’ll be there for him when he gets out. Not a typical Hollywood love story, but it worked for me. Also, I think this film succeeds where so many others fail.
Most women in studio era pictures who espouse feminist ideals surrender everything in the end, deciding they can’t win in a man’s world. But Sylvia Sidney’s character does win, in more ways than one, and she does it because of the man she betrays but will always love. In her quest for glory, she learns many ironic truths; and so does he.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on May 14, 2023 15:39:36 GMT
This neglected film is from 1959.
Thought-provoking western
This is a UA release, one of two motion pictures that Victor Mature co-produced with John Wayne’s Batjac company. It has a modest budget and plays like a TV movie or an extended episode of Wagon Train. But the ideas presented are grand in scope, and it’s a shame there wasn’t a larger budget to take advantage of all its cinematic possibilities.
The film offers Mature as a no-holds barred widowed father trying to take his young daughter (Reba Waters) west to start a new life in Oregon. Along the way, they meet two sisters (Faith Domergue & Elaine Stewart) doing the same after one lost her fiancé in the Civil War. The backgrounds of the main characters are very well explained.
Soon there is an attack by Modoc natives. We never get to see the natives as individuals; instead, we see them intermittently as a hostile element our little traveling group must occasionally fight off.
After the initial attack, we are introduced to a black Union soldier, played by Rex Ingram. He’s in no shape to travel, but Mature’s character insists on taking him along. Of course, there is the eventual realization the old soldier is dead weight. The scene where Ingram threatens suicide to force the others to go on without him is a highpoint of the film.
I liked the way the plot smartly progressed, and there was one action sequence after another, with just enough resting time in between, for us to continue getting to know the characters better. Naturally, it all culminates in a standoff involving more Union soldiers versus the Modoc. The soldiers are not all incorruptible (in a short sequence two try to steal the payroll). Adding to the complications is the fact that Mature, to protect his daughter and the one surviving sister, must join forces with the Union, though he himself had been a rebel Confederate.
While ESCORT WEST is somewhat formulaic and predictable, we care about the people in the story and their relationships. As I said, this could have been expanded more cinematically if the budget had been greater. We could have seen flashbacks of what the lead characters had experienced during and immediately after the war. We also could have seen some more of the attack involving the natives, which mostly happens off-camera. Plus I think a better denouement where Mature and his daughter finally arrive in Oregon could have been filmed.
But it’s still a very effective thought-provoking independent western picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on May 27, 2023 14:08:45 GMT
This neglected film is from 1937.
Strike a pose
Walter Wanger’s VOGUES OF 1938 was made before TRADE WINDS, so the leading lady of this picture, Joan Bennett, still has blonde hair. And unlike most of the other films these two made together, this production is in Technicolor. So Miss Bennett is quite a sight here, and so are the other lovely ladies who model the many gowns and outfits that are on display.
Bennett plays a debutante who is being married to a snob (Alan Mowbray) to ensure that her family will stay financially well-off. But of course, she doesn’t like the man they’ve chosen to be her husband, and when she goes to Warner Baxter’s design house to try on her wedding gown, she gets an idea. If Baxter agrees not to send her dress to the house, then the nuptials will have to be postponed. Of course, he doesn’t go along with her idea, and when the dress arrives on time, she lets out a scream.
In the next scene, we learn she called off the wedding. She returns to Baxter’s place of business, followed by reporters, to toss the gown in his face. He realizes there is great publicity value in maintaining an association with her, so he offers her a job modeling clothes for him. She says yes, because without a wedding to prepare for, what else is a fashionista to do?
The story is off and running, and other characters are quickly added. There is a lead designer (Alma Kruger) who functions as a den mother to the girls. And we also have Baxter’s shrewish wife (Helen Vinson) who leaves him in a huff then comes back. Rounding out the supporting cast are Jerome Cowan as the wife’s confidante and Mischa Auer who plays a rival designer. In fact,. Auer has some good scenes with Mowbray; they provide comic relief during breaks from the main action.
In addition to the clothes and the comic relief, some spectacular musical numbers are included. It’s obvious Wanger is pulling out all the stops to make a very lavish piece of entertainment. On that level, it certainly succeeds. Everyone who appears in the story is fabulously in style from head to toe. The opening credits acknowledge several real-life designers who provide the fashions (vogues) that are seen on screen.
What helps make this production vivid and slightly kitschy is the early Technicolor photography. (The art design was Oscar-nominated and deservedly so.) The picture has the distinction of having been filmed entirely in New York City. So there’s a real sense of urban east coast ambience here– in the fashion house scenes, the club scenes and especially the outdoor scenes filmed on location.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on May 27, 2023 14:15:43 GMT
This neglected film is from 1937.
Strike a pose
Walter Wanger’s VOGUES OF 1938 was made before TRADE WINDS, so the leading lady of this picture, Joan Bennett, still has blonde hair. And unlike most of the other films these two made together, this production is in Technicolor. So Miss Bennett is quite a sight here, and so are the other lovely ladies who model the many gowns and outfits that are on display.
Bennett plays a debutante who is being married to a snob (Alan Mowbray) to ensure that her family will stay financially well-off. But of course, she doesn’t like the man they’ve chosen to be her husband, and when she goes to Warner Baxter’s design house to try on her wedding gown, she gets an idea. If Baxter agrees not to send her dress to the house, then the nuptials will have to be postponed. Of course, he doesn’t go along with her idea, and when the dress arrives on time, she lets out a scream.
In the next scene, we learn she called off the wedding. She returns to Baxter’s place of business, followed by reporters, to toss the gown in his face. He realizes there is great publicity value in maintaining an association with her, so he offers her a job modeling clothes for him. She says yes, because without a wedding to prepare for, what else is a fashionista to do?
The story is off and running, and other characters are quickly added. There is a lead designer (Alma Kruger) who functions as a den mother to the girls. And we also have Baxter’s shrewish wife (Helen Vinson) who leaves him in a huff then comes back. Rounding out the supporting cast are Jerome Cowan as the wife’s confidante and Mischa Auer who plays a rival designer. In fact,. Auer has some good scenes with Mowbray; they provide comic relief during breaks from the main action.
In addition to the clothes and the comic relief, some spectacular musical numbers are included. It’s obvious Wanger is pulling out all the stops to make a very lavish piece of entertainment. On that level, it certainly succeeds. Everyone who appears in the story is fabulously in style from head to toe. The opening credits acknowledge several real-life designers who provide the fashions (vogues) that are seen on screen.
What helps make this production vivid and slightly kitschy is the early Technicolor photography. (The art design was Oscar-nominated and deservedly so.) The picture has the distinction of having been filmed entirely in New York City. So there’s a real sense of urban east coast ambience here– in the fashion house scenes, the club scenes and especially the outdoor scenes filmed on location.
It's not fair to Jerome Cowan, as he's a fine actor, but no matter what I see him in, he is always Miles Archer to me. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on May 27, 2023 15:39:09 GMT
VOGUES OF 1938 doesn't have a very good score on the IMDb, but I like it anyway!
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jun 21, 2023 14:09:50 GMT
This neglected film is from 1934.
Her last choice will be the right choice
The film was made in 1933 at the height of the precode era. But it ran into problems with censors, requiring producer Darryl Zanuck to do extensive reshoots and cut parts that were originally too risqué. Despite considerable trimming and the shortened 62-minute run time as a result of the last-minute editing, there is still plenty to shock and titillate.
Loretta Young plays the bad girl in the title, a supposed prostitute with a seven year old son (Jackie Kelk). Note, Miss Young’s character is in her early twenties, and she had a baby at 15 out of wedlock. It's a very alarming backstory, which Zanuck was able to keep intact.
We learn Young’s character is from a decent enough background, but she was abruptly disowned by her folks when she became pregnant. Turned away by her family and abandoned by the child’s father, she was left with nowhere to go and wound up on the streets. Just before she gave birth, she was taken in by a kind middle-aged man (Henry Travers) who runs a bookstore and offered her a job.
For awhile they raised her infant son together. But then Young got involved with a crooked businessman (Russell Hopton). She left Travers for a place of her own, where she started to perform sexual favors. In this sordid environment she has exposed her boy to all sorts of immoral behavior.
While Young is busy entertaining men, we have scenes of Kelk skipping school and getting caught by a truancy officer. The boy smokes, at the age of seven, and probably steals. Young thinks her son is being toughened up and he’ll survive the hard knocks of life.
Despite her unusual brand of parenting, she and Kelk have a strong bond. And she’s devastated the day he’s hit by a truck outside their apartment building. The truck is driven by a rich dairy owner, played by Cary Grant.
The lad has undoubtedly been injured in the near fatal mishap; however, he will be just fine. Young sees dollar signs flashing in front of her and with the help of a shyster lawyer (Harry Green), all her inherent precode badness comes out. She schemes to exaggerate her son’s medical condition after the accident, to obtain a hefty settlement in court from Grant and his company.
The defense attorney (Paul Harvey) proves the boy’s not really a cripple, and the judge throws the book at Young. Her son is removed from her care, and she’s devastated all over again.
The plot heads into soap opera territory when Grant, still feeling sorry for his role in what occurred, offers to legally adopt Kelk. From here, Young contrives to seduce Grant in the hopes of wrecking his marriage and to succeed in reclaiming her son. Some of her plan is illogical, but she’s desperate.
It’s interesting to see Young as a temptress, seducing Grant in this 1934 motion picture. In 1947, they appeared in THE BISHOP’S WIFE where Young was tempted by Grant, while her character in that later film lived a much more wholesome life. The two stars work very well opposite each other on screen. However, Young’s scenes with child actor Kelk are best.
This is probably one of Loretta Young’s most dynamic early roles. It is certainly one of her grittiest. BORN TO BE BAD is a precode from Zanuck’s Twentieth Century Pictures unit that should be better known by today’s audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jun 21, 2023 15:15:12 GMT
Born to Be Bad from 1934 with Loretta Young, Cary Grant, Jackie Kelk, Marion Burns and Henry Travers
Born to be Bad, like many pre-code movies, rips through a lot of melodrama in just over an hour of runtime.
Juvenile delinquency, adoption, marital infidelity, prostitution and litigation fraud speed by with breathless audacity in this one, especially when looked at through a 2023 "social justice" lens.
Lovely Loretta Young plays a, get ready for it, twenty-three-year-old high-priced prostitute who supports the illegitimate son she had when she was fifteen.
Back then, Mother and son were taken in by a kind, older bookstore owner, played by Henry Travers. In the ensuing eight years, Young, though, went from being a sales clerk in the bookstore to an "escort." More troubling, Young has a warped philosophy of child rearing.
She teaches her son, played by Jackie Kelk, to lie, cheat and steal so that "no one will take advantage of you in life." She just laughs off the truant officer when he brings Jackie home as Young is also down on school.
That's the set up, but then all hell breaks loose. Kelk gets injured when hit by a truck; he recovers; Young, though, plots with a shyster lawyer to get a big legal settlement, but the fraud is exposed in court.
This results in the man, played by Cary Grant, who owns the company of the truck involved in the accident, adopting Kelk because he and his wife, played by Marion Burns, can't have children and the judge, rightfully, rules Young unfit to be a mother.
All that took, about, only twenty minutes of screen time. Now trying to give the boy a good home, Grant and Burns are not only kind to Kelk, but they sincerely try to be kind to Young.
She, though, plots again with her crooked (and stupid) lawyer to get her boy back along with a big blackmail check from Grant whom she, now, plans to seduce.
Despite being a pre-code dripping with immorality, Born to Be Bad then pivots to a moral and happy ending that requires you to believe that Burns is the most understanding woman and wife ever put on earth. Had she been Eve, mankind would still be in the Garden of Eden.
Born to Be Bad is, obviously, not shy in its ambitions, but too much of its story is unbelievable for it to be anything more than a "delicious" soap opera that comes at you a hundred miles an hour from practically the first frame.
It's also just fun to see pre-mega-stardon Young and Grant, plus Kelk and Burns create engaging characters. Grant is good, but he's also a bit awkward here as he's yet to become the full "Cary Grant" brand we'd come to know in only a few years.
Young, too, has her issues as, while she is gorgeous to look at, her performance is uneven. She's supposed to be an uncouth, hardened tribalist whore devoid of morality, yet she keeps slipping into a nice-girl persona, sometimes, even within a scene.
Had Young been able to keep her character's portrayal consistent, the movie would have been more believable and her later conversion more moving. One wonders if director Lowell Sherman didn't see this or tried to but couldn't get a more even performance out of Young.
Flaws and all, Born to Be Bad is still a heck of an enjoyable if, sometimes, exhausting romp. It's also cool time travel to the 1930s, a fun peek at two future stars early in their careers and a reminder that some things, like litigation fraud, have been around a long time. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jul 10, 2023 15:08:37 GMT
This neglected film is from 1947.
The delicate elegance of this world is forever in danger
By the time Douglas Sirk directed this picture, he’d already established himself as someone who could turn out hits in Hollywood. HITLER’S MADMAN had been a critical and commercial success; and though it did not lead to a contract at MGM, Sirk’s services were still in demand.
The director would continue to make independent pictures in the mid-1940s for producers who released their efforts through United Artists. Several of these films starred George Sanders on loan from 20th Century Fox. LURED was the third time the actor and director collaborated, and they would team up once more a decade later.
LURED marks the first (and only) time Sirk or Sanders ever worked with Lucille Ball. Though she seems an unlikely choice, Ball fits the story quite well. The actress had just been released from her MGM contract and was now freelancing. Here she plays a dancer that helps a Scotland Yard inspector (Charles Coburn) lure a Jack the Ripper-type killer out into the open. She’s the bait, so to speak.
Ball’s character moonlights as a lady detective. Part of the job means answering ads in a personal column that are written to flush out the killer. She soon attracts the attention of a suave gentleman (Sanders). He’s a London-based theatrical producer and may be the guy they’re after.
LURED is a remake of a French film called PIEGES, which was directed by Robert Siodmak in 1939. Maurice Chevalier had the lead role in the earlier version, and Marie Dea played the bait.
To facilitate Ball’s casting in the Hollywood version, the character is now an American girl who came to London to do a musical show that folded. She stayed and found a job as a taxi dancer. One of her friends is the latest murder victim. So that’s what causes her to help police.
Sirk switches the setting from Paris to London in order to recreate some of the gothic atmosphere associated with the Ripper case. Moving it to London also allows the director to cast some well-known British character actors in supporting roles. People like Boris Karloff, George Zucco, Cedric Hardwicke and Alan Mowbray. Three of them play crooks. Although Sanders’ character calls himself a cad, he’s not a crook or a villain. In fact he’s quite vulnerable and romantic in his scenes. A love story develops between him and Miss Ball’s character, and this pairing assures the audience there will be a happy ending.
While the tone remains somewhat comedic, thanks to Ball’s snappy line deliveries and Sanders’ sarcastic quips, the storyline is somewhat grim. Sirk and his cinematographer, William H. Daniels, make it a point to enshroud the characters in shadows when the suspense is supposed to build. At nearly every turn viewers are reminded that this is a mystery with a killer on the loose. But the killer’s true identity is kept a secret until the very end.
Any one of the crooks that Sandra deals with could be a murderer, because they all have strange almost psychotic tendencies. Karoff is a mad artist; Hardwicke has a possessive attachment to others; and Mowbray’s involved in a smuggling operation where several pretty females have gone missing. While we surmise fairly early that Sanders can’t be the killer, it’s interesting to see Ball fall in love with him, when she is not yet entirely sure of his innocence.
I think part of what makes this film work is the way it’s told mostly from the woman’s point of view. Coburn’s inspector and Zucco’s copper are there to assist Ball, but she’s the one who takes the risks and becomes embroiled in dangerous situations. The various subplots reveal insights about her. After all she is luring a killer AND Sanders into her trap.
A recurring theme in Sirk’s films, which becomes more prevalent in his later output at Universal, is entrapment. There’s a feeling that Ball is trapping Sanders, even when she seems to reject him; and even when she is still focused on nabbing the man who murdered her best friend. The glamorous costumes she wears, and the elaborately designed sets give us a glimpse of bourgeoisie life. But the delicate elegance of this world is forever in danger of being snuffed out by a madman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 10, 2023 15:29:17 GMT
That's a really good write up of an enjoyable and well-done movie. I have a write up of the movie in my drafts that I should edit and post, but this day is getting away from me. My unpopular opinion is that I enjoy Ball's movie work more than her iconic role as "Lucy."
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesjazzguitar on Jul 10, 2023 18:05:40 GMT
That's a really good right up of an enjoyable and well-done movie. I have a write up of the movie in my drafts that I should edit and post, but this day is getting away from me. My unpopular opinion is that I enjoy Ball's movie work more than her iconic role as "Lucy." Not so sure that opinion of enjoying Ball's movie work over that of "Lucy" is unpopular among studio-era-movie fans like us. Most people I know are not even aware of Ball's early film work or only her later films with Dezi and famous stars like Bob Hope. Next week's Noir Alley will feature the Sirk directed film Shockproof (1949), the only other crime\noir type film directed by Sirk (other than Lured made two years before). The original screenplay for Shockproof was written by Samuel Fuller, who directed many solid noirs like Pick Up on South Street, The House of Bamboo, The Crimson Kimono, and the neo-noirs, Underworld USA, Shock Corridor and The Naked Kiss. While I've seen Shockproof, it will be interesting to hear what Eddie Muller has to say. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 10, 2023 18:13:14 GMT
That's a really good right up of an enjoyable and well-done movie. I have a write up of the movie in my drafts that I should edit and post, but this day is getting away from me. My unpopular opinion is that I enjoy Ball's movie work more than her iconic role as "Lucy." Not so sure that opinion of enjoying Ball's movie work over that of "Lucy" is unpopular among studio-era-movie fans like us. Most people I know are not even aware of Ball's early film work or only her later films with Dezi and famous stars like Bob Hope. Next week's Noir Alley will feature the Sirk directed film Shockproof (1949), the only other crime\noir type film directed by Sirk (other than Lured made two years before). The original screenplay for Shockproof was written by Samuel Fuller, who directed many solid noirs like Pick Up on South Street, The House of Bamboo, The Crimson Kimono, and the neo-noirs, Underworld USA, Shock Corridor and The Naked Kiss. While I've seen Shockproof, it will be interesting to hear what Eddie Muller has to say. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jul 10, 2023 19:06:17 GMT
That's a really good right up of an enjoyable and well-done movie. I have a write up of the movie in my drafts that I should edit and post, but this day is getting away from me. My unpopular opinion is that I enjoy Ball's movie work more than her iconic role as "Lucy." Not so sure that opinion of enjoying Ball's movie work over that of "Lucy" is unpopular among studio-era-movie fans like us. Most people I know are not even aware of Ball's early film work or only her later films with Dezi and famous stars like Bob Hope. Next week's Noir Alley will feature the Sirk directed film Shockproof (1949), the only other crime\noir type film directed by Sirk (other than Lured made two years before). The original screenplay for Shockproof was written by Samuel Fuller, who directed many solid noirs like Pick Up on South Street, The House of Bamboo, The Crimson Kimono, and the neo-noirs, Underworld USA, Shock Corridor and The Naked Kiss. While I've seen Shockproof, it will be interesting to hear what Eddie Muller has to say.
A nice copy is on YouTube.
And THUNDER ON THE HILL (1951) starring Claudette Colbert & Ann Blyth is another atmospheric Sirk picture with shades of noir. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesjazzguitar on Jul 10, 2023 23:45:25 GMT
Not so sure that opinion of enjoying Ball's movie work over that of "Lucy" is unpopular among studio-era-movie fans like us. Most people I know are not even aware of Ball's early film work or only her later films with Dezi and famous stars like Bob Hope. Next week's Noir Alley will feature the Sirk directed film Shockproof (1949), the only other crime\noir type film directed by Sirk (other than Lured made two years before). The original screenplay for Shockproof was written by Samuel Fuller, who directed many solid noirs like Pick Up on South Street, The House of Bamboo, The Crimson Kimono, and the neo-noirs, Underworld USA, Shock Corridor and The Naked Kiss. While I've seen Shockproof, it will be interesting to hear what Eddie Muller has to say.
A nice copy is on YouTube.
And THUNDER ON THE HILL (1951) starring Claudette Colbert & Ann Blyth is another atmospheric Sirk picture with shades of noir.Thanks for that correction. Funny but I saw the film Sleep my Love was directed by Sirk, but when I saw that it starred Colbert, I just assumed it couldn't be noir. But Colbert was featured in a few noir films like The Secret Fury (1950), with Robert Ryan. While I don't feel Colbert's screen persona is a good fit for noir type films, I need to remind myself to do-research before assuming. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jul 15, 2023 12:53:00 GMT
This neglected film is from 1942.
A queen and two kings
Though this picture was released through United Artists, it originated at Paramount. It has all the high class production values we’d associate with a Paramount picture, from its elaborate sets and decorative costumes to its detailed street scenes and ornate carriages. It’s an expensive looking motion picture, and they’ve borrowed some of Warner Brothers’ top talent, including George Brent and Priscilla Lane. Miss Lane in particular is very glamorous…in fact she was never photographed this well at Warners.
The supporting cast includes Eugene Pallette as Miss Lane’s father. He plays a man that made his fortune on a silver mine in Nevada, who had come to New York City to raise a daughter with all the finest advantages in life.
By nature he’s a gambler, and the opening sequence of the story depicts an evening when Lane is hosting a charity event at their opulent home. Pallette gets a bit carried away and gambles too much. The next morning it is revealed he lost the deed to his mine, and he no longer has the assets or bank balance to pay off a slew of creditors.
Bruce Cabot turns up as Lane’s suitor. He’s supposed to be protecting her best interests when her father suddenly dies and all those debts threaten to put her into the poorhouse. He proposes marriage, but she wants to square things with the creditors that are foreclosing on the family manse– on her own terms. So she heads west with her maid to find a job.
Her idea of a job is to become a gambling queen at a casino in San Francisco. She reasons that if cards got her father into trouble, then cards can help her get out of that trouble. With this type of “logic,” she may not be playing with a full deck but hey she’s game; and if anything, she has plenty of determination to make it without Cabot’s direct assistance.
While Lane is in Frisco she rakes in a bunch of dough then sends the winnings back east to Cabot, who has agreed to settle accounts with the men her father owed. However, Cabot decides to ignore the wolf at the door; and he invests the money in a venture involving the Nevada mine that Pallette lost to George Brent.
A large part of the narrative involves Lane’s conflicted feelings about both men. She seems to have more romantic inclinations towards Brent, but she foolishly relies on Cabot to the point that it could cost her everything again. There are some nice scenes where she is wined and dined by Brent, and I have to say that Mr. Brent is right in his element as a debonair squire about town.
This all leads to the final sequence in Nevada. The men have gone to check on the mine, since it is rumored to have another rich vein. Meanwhile Cabot is planning to wed Lane to cover up any fraud he’s committed. There is a huge brawl inside a hotel when Brent confronts Cabot with evidence about his shady business dealings.
The dramatic highpoint comes when Cabot pulls out a gun and Lane rushes down the grand staircase to stop the men. She gets caught in the middle, a shot rings out and she goes down.
Of course we know she will pull through. When she regains consciousness as well as her senses, she will decide that Brent’s character is the one who’s done right by her. He’s the one she should spend the rest of her life with, since she will be happiest with him.
What I like most about the film is how leisurely plotted it is. It gradually builds to the big fight scene and shooting at the end, but is not in a hurry to get there. The story gives us a lot of slower moments to take in the characters, situations and surroundings. It’s a modest ‘A’ film. I would call it more of an indoor western as opposed to an outdoor western. It’s about gentlemen and gentlewomen during a rough economic period of American history…a time when progress and uncertainty existed side by side.
|
|
|
|
Post by kims on Jul 15, 2023 13:13:24 GMT
Reading your review, I think I saw this film, but I don't remember these being the stars. Was there an earlier or later version? Maybe I saw the film so long ago I forgot who was in it.
|
|
