Change Your Image
kitchent
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Seventh Victim (1943)
Not quite there.....
Sometimes it's hard to pinpoint why one movie works so well and another just barely misses being a classic. This is the case for The Seventh Victim (1943) brought to us by many of the same creative talents that shined so brightly in Cat People (1942) and I Walked with a Zombie (1943).
Val Lewton had put together a first rate production group for his horror line, and the results were terrific. Cat People and Zombie are still considered classics by genre fans, but The Seventh Victim never received the same treatment - and there's very little missing from the film - which makes it so frustrating.
The suspense scenes are well done with the stabbing of the detective being as good as anything in the previous films but other scenes barely miss for some reason. The final "chase" scene where Jacqueline sees danger around every corner is well done, but doesn't have the same impact as similar scenes from the previous films. The "bus" in the scene doesn't work like it does in Cat People because it is no surprise to hear the horn on a city street and it in no way mimics the current danger. In Cat People the "bus" is unexpected and reminds us of a screeching panther which is the immediate threat. Here it just seems like an afterthought.
Overall, the performances are good with Tom Conway reprising his role (I guess) from Cat People. So does this make this film a prequel, because Dr. Judd was dead at the end of Cat People? Kim Hunter is a little understated in her attempt to carry most of this movie while the rest of the characters are just fine if not terribly memorable. Jean Brooks has the looks for the part of Jacqueline, but doesn't have a whole lot to do off screen most of the film. Elizabeth Russell (uncredited) as the dying girl Mimi is haunting in the small part she plays.
All in all, The Seventh Victim is a perfectly fine and watchable 71 minutes with plenty to like. It just doesn't live up to the standards of other Val Lewton films, and certainly does not improve on the others.
Daughter of Dr. Jekyll (1957)
I'm a sucker for a cheap Edgar G. Ulmer film......
I've searched for this film for a while, and I finally found it for viewing this October Halloween season, and I'm glad I did. Yeah, the story is not that great. And John Agar is not my favorite. And I'm not sure who thought Gloria Talbott was all that pretty, but she's not my cup of tea.
BUT.....we have Edgar G. Ulmer to add his customary vision and professionalism, and all of a sudden we have a very serviceable 1950's horror film. To be truthful, this film would fit better in 1944 than 1957.
Ulmer can add flair to any film, and he does that particularly well in a few sections of this one. The cross fading between the nightmares and a sleeping Gloria Talbott is very well done. And the scene with the final murder has all the touches we would expect out of a much more expensive effort. The shot of the phone swinging cutting to the phonograph and the legs of the victim are very solid. I shook my head a few times and just muttered that this film doesn't deserve shots like these, but I would say this is a fairly enjoyable 71 minutes. Recommended for fans of older horror and for Ulmer fans especially.
Bomb Girls (2012)
Just...look...away....unwatchable!
Gave this a shot as it seemed like a great idea, great time period, and would lead to some interesting situations.
Well, not so much. The characters are all as one dimensional as possible with all of the women being great human beings. All of the men, however, are knuckle dragging Neanderthals. A scene cannot go by without a man throwing in some creepy line about the girls or engaging in some other inappropriate behavior. I'm sorry, but even in the early 1940's men were not mean spirited jackasses every second. And if they really wanted to get laid, being a horses ass is not the lead strategy.
The acting is pretty amateurish except for Meg Tilly. But even even she comes across bad spouting such terrible, unbelievable dialog in situations that even my wife said didn't feel real. In fact, I'm not sure any actor could rescue such cliché ridden dribble as, "You're not going to win this war with lies!" Give me a break. No one talks like that! I honestly can't believe the ratings on this show. Maybe it gets a whole lot better later in the series? I'll probably never find out.
Star Trek: Picard (2020)
Sorry, but this not Star Trek.....
This is a show.
It is science fiction.
It has some characters with the same names as people from another science fiction show.
But, come one now, it's not Star Trek.
This brutal, violent, depressing mess doesn't have a single character that isn't a brooding whiner. Everyone is tortured and scarred. There is no optimism. No grand future. No ideals. This is like a bad SNL sketch about a corrupted Star Trek universe. A dark parody done for satire.
And like most Star Trek fans, I really wanted to like it. I really wanted to see an older, wiser Captain Picard. Too bad they couldn't find him.
Kodachrome (2017)
Performances bring this predictable film to a higher level.....
I'll be the first to admit that this film is very predictable and hits most of the beats you would expect. The troubled son, the gruff and seemingly uncaring father, the love interest nurse, but as the story unfolds we are expertly guided down the path by the excellent performances of Ed Harris, Jason Sudeikis, and Elizabeth Olsen. I think Olsen, in particular, shows great instincts in her portrayal of Zooey Kern.
In an film environment dominated by huge blockbusters full of cartoon effects, I very much enjoyed the smallness of this film. Warning - there are no explosions, no car chases, no crimes are committed, not a gun to be seen, no nudity, and the earth is not in danger. This is a simple and intimate story about three real humans swimming the best they can through the complicated sea of life. We all have our demons.
Worth a viewing if you like this type of film.
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)
Is everyone hypnotized?
I don't get the praise being heaped upon this film at all. Yes, Frances McDormand is great. Yes, Woody Harrelson is great. But, overall this film came across as a bit of a mess. It seemed like the script was written in one sitting by three guys drinking beer:
"I know, let's make the woman firebomb the police station! That'll be great!"
"Let's throw in one scene of the daughter just so people know she was pretty."
"We'll add a clever twist so people think this nutcase is the killer, but, wait for it.......HE'S NOT."
While the film strives for realism in most everything, it destroys that by the insane actions of just about everyone around. A cop thrashes an innocent man in front of the whole town. A grieving mother firebombs a police station. Abandoned billboards on a barely used section of road cost $5,000 per month?
The Academy can throw all of the awards they want at this thing, but I think Woody Harrelson did the right thing. He blew his brains out just before this film got really stupid.
Nightmare at Elm Manor (1961)
Much better than it had to be.....
OK, so I'm not that much into these kinds of nudie short films, but I ran into this one on YouTube, and I have to say I was impressed.
It's short at only about 5 minutes and silent, but it is fairly well crafted for what it was intended to be. Not sure how this thing was put together, but it looks like someone really liked and respected early horror films. In this little five minutes you see respect paid to James Whale and Tod Browning.
June Palmer is fetching, of course, and Stuart Samuels has the perfect look for the "vampire".
I rated this an eight only because it is so much better than it had to be for a nudie short, and the best one I've run across so far.
Joy (2015)
Spectacularly bad....
Sorry, but what did I just watch? Some Spoilers ahead.
I was truly looking forward to this film and now I'm not sure why.
There first rule of film making is that the audience should be entertained. This was not entertaining to me in any way.
The biggest failure was the script, which seemed more like a rough draft. Clumsy and looking for a few more edits and a polish. Russell seems intent on showing the audience meaningless shots and drawing them out while passing over important points like they were nothing. The best example is when Joy literally goes from bankrupt to on top of the world after a five minute meeting with a man we've never met. She divulges secret information that we didn't see her collect and scares the poor guy into giving up everything. At this point in the film, we barely remember the importance of anything she discusses. But I really didn't care at that point because I, and apparently Russell as well, wanted to just get it over with.
Sorry, but what does it say about film making today when this is nominated for a Golden Globe?
Boyhood (2014)
Not sure I understand....
This film, so far, is the most disappointing of the Oscar nominated films in my opinion. I'm now convinced that people are simply hung up on the gimmick of this thing being filmed over 12 years.
So what?
You still have to make a film that is interesting, has compelling characters, and has some substance and plot to it. Overall, films need to provide entertainment. This film had none of those. My life would have been more interesting than this one. Even though we experience 12 years in the lives of the central characters, I still felt like I barely knew them. Maybe that was the point. To me this felt like a reality show with some pretty boring people. Yes, his mother made bad choices in husbands. There was some drama in husband #2 with the drinking and abuse. But 15 minutes of drama does not make a nearly 3 hour film relevant.
I'm not sure I understand the hype over this film.
One Sunday Afternoon (1933)
Fay Wray Channels Mae West
Finally caught this one on TCM as part of my unhealthy quest to see every Fay Wray film possible. Not a bad little story, but nothing spectacular. Very cool to see Neil Hamilton in his early days, and Gary Cooper and Frances Fuller were equally interesting. Fay is not really on screen much which was disappointing, but then she steals the show at the end by channeling Mae West. What a treat this was!
The direction was fine with some really cool moving camera work in the opening scene. This seemed to be a trend in the early 1930's to have a really cool moving camera shot to open the film, but then fade into standard static setups thereafter.
Overall worth a look for the performances of Cooper and Fay Wray or if you just want to see what Batman's Commissioner Gordon looked like in his younger days. Otherwise, it's pretty routine.
We're Not Dressing (1934)
Painful....just what we need another song?
I'm a big fan of 1930's films, but this one I just didn't get.
First the good things: Carole Lombard
The bad things: Everything else
I should have known better. The comedy and music of the 1930's usually doesn't translate well to my tastes, and this film was packed full. Too much of Bing singing, too much Burns and Allen, and definitely not enough of Carole Lombard, who was much better than this light, fluffy little romp of a film.
I'm on a quest to see some good Carole Lombard films and I was off to a good start with "My Man Godfrey" and "No Man of Her Own" , but this one has set me back a bit.
Nebraska (2013)
Poignant, thoughtful, and lovingly made....
Psychologists say that humans need three things for happiness. Something to do, someone to love, and something to look forward to. At this point in his life, Woody Grant (Bruce Dern) is searching for all three, and we are invited along on the journey in the wonderfully made Nebraska (2013).
Things don't get easier as you get older, and Woody latches on to an obvious marketing ploy in the belief that he has won a million dollars. It shows some of Woody's confusion and borderline dementia, but it also shows Woody's need to find some kind of meaning to his life in his waning years. Along on this journey ise his son David (Will Forte), and he discovers a side of his father that he had never seen. They are joined by a quirky group of friends and family that round out the film.
I loved Nebraska. The story is populated by multiple themes of longing, searching, and family. And the age old truth that you can never truly go home. It reminds us that people that are old now weren't always old. They had lives that were full and meaningful. They lived and worked, fought and loved, and filled their lives with meaning. And in Nebraska we hear older people talk like real people, not the caricatures that populate many films. From the greedy "friends" and family members to the crass rantings of Woody's wife Kate (June Squibb) these are real people with real feelings.
Nebraska will probably not win the Best Picture award for 2013, but it is certainly my favorite film of the year.
Philomena (2013)
Well made, touching film.....
Philomena (2013) is a touching film about loss, search, and fulfillment. Judi Dench and Steve Coogan both give great performances, and it is one of the best films of the year.
Based on a true story (always a dangerous thing), Philomena tells the story of a mother searching for a son she gave up for adoption when she was a teenager. Her journey starts in Ireland, goes through America, and then returns to her exact starting place. And though we end up where we began it is all about the journey, and the lessons along the way. The script is tight and the direction excellent.
There are two main issues I have with the film overall. The first of these seems to be a common theme in the 2013 crop of Best Picture Nominees. There is simply too much black and white in the story. The nuns and the Catholic Church come off as supremely evil through most of the story. At the end, I just wanted to hear Sister Hildegarde give a compassionate answer instead of spouting religious zealotry. It would have instantly made the film more real, complex, ambiguous, and thought provoking.
My second issue is that there were some pacing issues in the story, IMHO. Some important story points were incredibly rushed (finding Philomena's son took a 30 second Google search and a few phone calls). While I strongly believe in efficient storytelling, Philomena could have afforded to takes its time a bit more.
Overall, though, highly recommended viewing. It probably won't win Best Picture, but in a weak 2013 crop of nominees, it should be talked about more.
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Well done, overlong, Scorsese epic
Another review of an Oscar Nominated Film, The Wolf of Wall Street (2013). POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD:
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) is a Martin Scorsese film. With that you've said a lot. First, you know it will be a serious well made film. Unfortunately, you also know that you've seen this style before. This is a great film. It is compelling, interesting, and hard to look away from. At the same time, it seems very familiar in its style, like a dream you've had before. Not that you didn't like the dream, but it does seem somehow familiar. The "great" film inside of The Wolf of Wall Street, however, is hidden inside a three hour long "good" movie. There are great things about the film, but it seems like we're riding a wave of Scorsese stream of consciousness here that is not to be stopped. About an hour of trimming would have given us the GREAT film we were looking for. I know that some important episodes would have been left on the cutting room floor, but this is about entertainment. And the entertainment value of the film would have been enhanced by the cuts. I like the film, but I didn't, in fact, love it. I will say that it has about the funniest 15 minutes in any film this side of Monty Python when a drug induced episode calls for some slapstick humor that had me rolling in stitches and hoping it would end before I exploded. Funny as can be and worth the price of admission.
Highly recommended, and one of the best films of the year. HOWEVER, I consider it a weak year in the best picture category.
Dallas Buyers Club (2013)
Great performances highlight a good film....
The accolades heaped upon Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto are well deserved, and this film is definitely one of the best I've seen in 2014. However, it is what I consider a weak year in the Best Picture category.
There are times when this film feels gritty and real enough to come off the screen, but there are also times the film comes across as a Lifetime television melodrama. The story tended to lose me when the "big bad drug companies" and the "evil FDA" were shown to practically dance on the graves of AIDs victims while lining their pockets and protecting their positions in the war to find a treatment. Just a little bit of humanity in the doctors and FDA officials would have gone a long way and added a bit of complexity to the story that was painted as all too black and white. It is harder to believe people do purely evil things knowingly, than to believe people simply do the wrongs things with the best of intentions.
That being said, there is plenty good to find here. The story is crisp and efficient, and the characters are all well rounded, believable, and compelling.
Recommended as one of the top three films of the year, IMHO.
Inside Llewyn Davis (2013)
What was the point again?
While not the most overrated film of the year (that belongs to Her), Inside Llewyn Davis tells a story that doesn't seem worth telling. The film follows Llewyn Davis through a week in his life in the NYC folk scene of the early 1960's.
The film looks amazing. The recreation of the time period is incredible, the camera work extraordinary, and the direction is splendid. If there was just a story here somewhere we would all be happy. There are interesting scenes, and a laugh or two inside this bleak environment, but mostly we watch Llewyn go through his miserable paces. He crashes with whatever friend he hasn't ticked off lately. He loses one cat, then kills another. He finds out that he has a child, but finds no strength to actually go find it. He takes a meaningless trip to Chicago with an out of place John Goodman. Nothing happens so he comes back to NYC. And the film ends up exactly where it started - LITERALLY - by showing us the first scene of the film again.
Sorry, but not my cup of tea.
Her (2013)
I'm sad. The computer I was in love with ran off with the toaster!
When I first saw the trailer for this movie I thought the idea looked a bit silly. But with the hype and hoopla, the Golden Globe Nominations, the Oscar Nominations, well, hey, I could have been wrong. Unfortunately, I wasn't. This (so far) is the most overrated film of the year.
First the good things. The cinematography was wonderful, and I overall liked the look and feel of the film. No loopy, shaky, out of place camera sequences. Just long and subtle movements, deft editing and beautiful pictures. Well done. The other thing I really liked was the fact that the technology, although elegantly advanced, was very well founded. You could definitely see how we could there from here, and that lent a great deal of credibility to the film.
However, I failed to see the point of it all. About 30 minutes into the film, I really thought I could have been wrong, and I saw some glimmer of hope. But the utterly ludicrous plot (presented straight forward and without apology) of a man falling in love with an operating system was just too much. I found myself laughing at unintentional humor and riffing on the film ala MST3K. There was nothing touching or romantic about any of this - it was just as silly as the trailer. Same old story. Man falls in love with computer, computer breaks up with him and runs off with the toaster. The film comes across as pretentious and bloated. Way too self important to really connect with me. Some scenes were embarrassing. The "sex" scene comes to mind as well as the "double date" with the other couple. I laughed until I stopped.
On the acting side, Amy Adams was fine in her limited role, but Joaquin Phoenix seemed to be channeling nerdy Johnny Galecki from The Big Bang Theory. All I could think of was that "this is what Hollywood thinks modern men are like."
In what is shaping up to be an off year (IMHO) for films, this is my least favorite of the films nominated for Best Picture that I've seen. But that's only because August:Osage County was not nominated for Best Picture!
August: Osage County (2013)
Sam Shepard was the lucky one.......
First let me give the positive things about this film:
The direction was great, and the editing was fluid with scenes allowed to play themselves out instead of hacked up like chopped meat. There were no quick cuts to annoy the hell out of me, and this film was shot beautifully.
The acting was first rate (as you can imagine with this cast), and I thought Julia Roberts especially was spot on. Meryl Streep got on my nerves, but I'm not sure it was her or the fact that her character was as hateful a character as you can imagine.
Now the problems for me. By the 30 minute mark, I was over it. I could identify with no one in the film, nor did I care about any of the characters.
At the 60 minute mark I was pretty sure that Sam Shepard was the smartest person in the film by drowning himself within the first 10 minutes. With envy I longed for the sweet death of sucking water into my lungs and never hearing this bickering, awful family again.
By the 90 minute mark I was convinced that these were some of the most vile, hideous creatures on the face of the earth. They had no redeeming qualities at all. All I could think of was the line from Aliens, "Nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
By the 121 minute mark, I was grateful it was over. Meryl was alone in the house, Julia had left, and we had no resolution to a story we had suffered through for two hours.
I'm not opposed to dark films. I'm not opposed to sad films. I'm not opposed to films that try to qualify and explain the human condition. But what I am opposed to is a film that makes no effort to be ENTERTAINING.
August: Osage County is a film that doesn't give a crap if the audience is entertained. It's too busy showing how smart and edgy it is.
The To Do List (2013)
I chuckled slightly once or twice.....
Watched this over the Thanksgiving holiday as I'd heard the buzz on it. We usually like quirky little indy films, and this one looked like it was perfect.
Boy, was I wrong! For a comedy, this film was simply not funny. In fact it was more annoying than funny with the main actress not able to carry a scene. The only decent moments were when SNL's Bill Hader was on the screen, but those were too few to save this film. I felt no connection with the main character. She was supposed to be so smart and independent, yet yielded completely to peer pressure when it came to sex.
I could not recommend the film to anyone.
Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)
J.J. Doesn't Get It
I know I'll sound like an old guy, but J.J. Abrams just doesn't get Star Trek. Maybe that's just fine because he is searching for a new and younger audience that probably doesn't get Star Trek either.
Star Trek was never about the special effects or action. Most of the best Trek stories from all of the television shows (TOS through Enterprise) didn't rely on either. Action and special effects were always there, but they were used to tell a story instead of becoming the story.
To be fair, there is one thing to like about the new Star Trek reboot. The cast is great, and it is easy to see the original actors through them. After that, I'm over this thing. It is just an action movie series using Star Trek's name to sell tickets.
If you think this is great science fiction in the Star Trek universe, then enjoy it. If you are looking for something more and want to really understand what Star Trek is about then queue up "Measure of a Man" from TNG, just one of many classic Star Trek episodes that expose this new "reboot" for the sham that it is. Gene Roddenberry would be ashamed.
Voodoo Man (1944)
Not a complete loss.....but almost.
Voodoo Man is like a lot of the poverty row horrors in that it showed signs that there was a good film in there somewhere, but somehow it just doesn't quite come together.
The film starts out pretty good and the first fifteen minutes or so allow for a fine introduction to the story. Girls are disappearing in the town and everyone is concerned. Then we are treated to an excellent scene with Louis Currie and Bela Lugosi with some eerie lighting, great close ups, and a generally spooky atmosphere. Things are looking up!
But then 4 minutes later we have George Zucco in face paint and a headdress chanting rubbish backed up by John Carradine acting a fool and banging on a bongo drum. Sigh. Welcome to a Monogram horror film.
Oh well, the story continues and it becomes typical poverty row horror dribble with ineffective humor thrown in. The good part is that Louis Currie, Wanda McKay, and the other kidnapped girls look great. George Zucco in the headdress is always funny, and I laughed out loud when the Sheriff said, "Gosh all fish hooks" when he spots Louis Currie wandering around the road. You just can't get that kind of dialog in an 'A' picture.
Voodoo Man is not a total waste. Bela Lugosi is fine in the film, and the ladies look great. The first fifteen minutes could almost be mistaken for a better film, and if that mood had continued, Voodoo Man could have been so much more.
Behind the Make-Up (1930)
Disappointing
Sometimes you run across an old movie that really makes you stand up and take notice that there were some truly GREAT movies made in the 1930's. This is NOT one of those times.
In my unhealthy quest to see every available Fay Wray film (what a dish!), I picked this one up somewhere and was really disappointed in it. I won't go into the plot as others have explained that, but suffice to say William Powell steals the show as an Italian vaudeville performer. I know he is supposed to be the bad guy, but being William Powell, you know, the Thin Man, it's hard not to like the guy. The supposed good guy is so bland as to be unwatchable and the direction in this film is pretty bad. I'll give some leeway as this was done in 1930 and sound was still pretty new. But overall, this film just plods along with very little propelling it forward.
More to the point, Fay Wray looks horrible in the beginning of the film with a hair style that looks straight out of a 1990's revival of the Broadway show "Hair". She gets it together after hooking up with William Powell, though, and looks her delicious self the rest of the film. However, she has very few close ups and one of those is ruined by a stray shadow across her face. Sigh.....
Overall, I can't recommend this to anyone but die hard fans like me. I'm glad I saw it, but won't watch it again. I'd rather watch "The Most Dangerous Game" for the 100th time.
The Finger Points (1931)
Interesting Crime/Reporter Drama
This is another film I had to see in my unhealthy quest to see all of the available Fay Wray films out there. However, this film surprised me, as it was a pretty good story. It also has a young Clark Gable as a gangster in a scene stealing role that demonstrates his star power very early in his career.
The plot has been covered in other reviews, so I'll keep my review short.
The pluses: Fay looks great, Clark Gable is good, and the story is solid and interesting.
The minuses: Richard Barthelmess is fine, but being from the south, he shouldn't have even tried the accent.
Overall a fine film and definitely worth a viewing.
The Vampire Bat (1933)
Underrated
"The Vampire Bat" is one of those underrated horror films of the early 1930's that seems to impress more with each viewing. I won't go into the details of the plot, as that has been covered multiple times in other reviews, and it's not the story that makes the film shine.
There are three things that make "The Vampire Bat" stand out from the other poverty row films - the cast, the direction, and the comedy.
The Cast - Lionel Atwill, Melvyn Douglas, and Fay Wray get the heavy lifting in the film, and all are excellent. Atwill is perfect for this type of part, as he demonstrated many times. Douglas is sufficiently perplexed as the investigator, and Fay Wray is just gorgeous in distress. The other players add sufficiently, especially Dwight Frye channeling a dimmer version of Renfield from Dracula.
The Direction - Frank Strayer does an admirable job in shooting the film, with creepiness abundant and lots of camera movement. Some shots are just so outstanding (such as the opening scene), that they almost seem out of place in a cheap horror movie. Strayer provides loads of atmosphere and never loses the audience. An excellent job.
The Comedy - As with most horror films of this time, comedy relief was thrown in to lighten the mood of the audience, and in most films, the comedy was misplaced and terribly unfunny. However, in "The Vampire Bat" the comedy, mostly provided by Maude Eburne as Aunt Gussie, is spot on and still funny today. This helps to keep the film watchable.
The Downsides - There is really only a couple of downsides to the film. The first is the editing, which is clumsy and hurried. It sometimes spoils the excellent direction. Cuts are often not matched, and this can distract. Obviously, this was not a big budget film, so the sets and overall production values are not high, but this is mostly glossed over by the efficiency and care shown by the director, but there are a few scenes where the seams showed too much, like the cave scene, parts of which look like it was filmed in a closet.
Overall, "The Vampire Bat" is certainly worth a look for the great direction, a mad Lionel Atwill, and the always lovely Fay Wray.
The Crime of Doctor Crespi (1935)
Worth a look...
Although certainly not up to the standards of the competition over at Universal, this little horror film provides enough good moments to warrant at least a look. Stroheim is wonderful, and it's always a treat to see Dwight Frye in anything.
There are some great moments, all involving Stroheim, but some of the best scenes are ruined by sloppiness either in direction or editing. Stroheim's best scene is where he gloats above his paralyzed victim, but the scene is choppy and the edits are so jarring that it's simply a tribute to the actor that the scene works at all.
The funeral scene, however, is very well done. The intercutting between the funeral and the restrained Frye attempting to kick his way to freedom is very good, and continually reminds the viewer of the fate of the poor man in the coffin. The subjective camera angle as the dirt hits it was probably pretty strong stuff in 1935.
If your a fan of horror movies, especially 1930's films, this one should be on your list to view.