It's Cinco de Mayo!

For a few days now, I've been seeing posts in my Facebook feed designed to instruct me on the True Meaning of Cinco de Mayo (or lack there-of). Well, those posts convinced me that I had to do a Cinco de Mayo post of my own this year--the third one in the decade or so that this blog has been around.

I have made an effort to be faithful to the wishes of those who took it upon themselves to preach to unwashed masses. Cinco de Mayo is a commemoration of a battle that helped put an end to France's imperial ambitions in the Americas, and this post is here to remind the world about that.

PREPARING TO FIGHT THE TROOPS OF NAPOLEON III!

CELEBRATING THE VICTORY OVER THE TROOPS OF NAPOLEON III!

The Moonshiner's Daughter: Cute but not a 10

The Moonshiner's Daughter, or Abroad in Old Kentucky (1933)
Starring: Russell Hopton, Lucile Browne, Russell Simpson, Frank McGlynn Jr., Mary Carr, and Mitchell Lewis
Director: Al Ray
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

When Pa Catfield (Simpson) killed the last Ratfield, it seemed the generational feud that had bathed Wolf Mountain in blood for so long was finally over. But when a Revenuer (Hopton) turns out to be a Ratfield AND becomes romantically involved with the lovely Emmy Catfield (Browne), a whole new feud begins.

Produced as a fund-raiser by the Masquers, which was a social club for comedians in Hollywood, "The Moonshiner's Daughter" is a mildly amusing comedy that's packed full of one-liners and slapstick from beginning to end. There aren't any laugh-out-loud moments--although the baby has some moments that come close--but there aren't any dull ones either. It's a competently staged spoof, but that's about it.

That said, one of the things I found the funniest about the film is the fact that the government agent is clearly wearing his badge on his coat for the entire film, even when he's telling the mountain-folk that he's not a revenuer, no sir. I am also very fond of the second title, being the lover of bad puns that I am.

The best moments in the film are when there's interaction between Russell Hopton and Lucile Browne. The two play well off each other, and it's a shame that they do not appear to be done any other films together. One wonders what might have been if they'd been paired in something more than a quickie short film.

Trivia: There were at least three other short films titled "The Moonshiner's Daughter" prior to this one (four if you count one titled "The Mountaineer's Daughter" that had it as an alternate title. They were all silent films (from 1910, 1912, and 1914 respectively). Although the ones information is available on had plots very different than this one, it could be that this was a wide enough sub-genre back then that audiences in the early '30s were amused by elements in this film that are muted today.

May the Fourth...

It's a pun that makes fun of speech impediments and an excuse to post some Star Wars art, so May the Fourth Be Wif You!

By Tony Harris

By Al Williamson

By Sordet Romain

Princesses of Mars, Part 24

It's time for another of our ocassional trips to Barsoom to visit with the beautiful and deadly Princesses of Mars!

By Frank Frazetta

By Tom Yeates

By Scott Fischer

By Dawn McTiegue

'Horror Island' is atmospheric but the script is lacking

Horror Island (1941)
Starring: Dick Foran, Leo Carillo, Peggy Moran, Hobart Cavanaugh, and Foy Van Dolsen
Director: George Waggner
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

A struggling businessman (Foran) organizes a "mystery weekend" excursion to an old, supposedly haunted pirate hideout as part of a new tourism venture. He and his customers are soon haunted by a very real killer.

This is a minor horror film from Universal that's more spoof than horror, poking fun at the style of mystery/thriller films where a cast of characters are stuck in a creepy house and stalked by a killer. The film is amusing enough, especially once the action moves to the island, but it would have been a stronger film if a little more time had been spent on the mystery/thriller aspect of the film. Instead of trying to come up with a decent story, the writers instead seem like they were simply trying to cram as many movie mystery cliches into the story whether they belong or not. For example, a gangster on the run with his gun moll go on the tour of the island, but they are neither effective red herrings nor particularly sympathetic so we don't really care if they live or die. All they do is waste space and film running time.

"Horror Island" does manage to present a villain that is both amusing and creepy, as well as provide a third act twist that comes as a genuine surprise. The cast is also universally good, even if some of them are just wastes of space in the film and story. The sets and cinematography are all solid and add to the film's atmosphere. Aside from the weak script, everything else is solid enough... not spectacular but good enough.

'Lost in Limehouse' disappoints

Lost in Limehouse, or Lady Esmeralda's Predicament (1933)
Starring: John Sheehan, Walter Byron, Laura La Plante, Olaf Hytten, and Charles McNaughton
Director: Otto Brower
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

It's up to the Harold the Humble Apprentice (Byron) and Sheerluck Jones, the Great Detective Sheerluck Jones (Hytten) to rescue the fair Esmeralda (La Plante) from the evil Sir Marmaduke Rakes (Sheehan) and his Tong allies.

"Lost in Limehouse" is another short film produced by and starring members and friends of The Masquers Club to raise money for a new guild house. Its main targets for spoofing is the Sherlock Holmes stories and old-time melodramas, but along the way they also mock the Yellow Peril genre, which was popular at the time, as well as the British class structure. Maybe I've come to expect too much of these from the wild and crazy rides of "Thru Thin and Thicket" and "Stolen By Gypsies", but this film was something of a disappointment.

The first half of "Lost in Limehouse" is only mildly funny, with most jokes being poorly delivered and all attempts at physical comedy being simply lame. It is further slowed down by the presence of a completely unnessary character played by Nola Luxford that would have been key to the plot if the film had been written by decent writers. The character reappears during the film's sloppy non-ending, where her presence further underscores the sense that it really should have played a bigger role. Maybe it's just the writer in me filling in the blanks, or maybe it's because Luxford showed such charisma in her small, do-nothing part next to those she shared the scene with, that I wanted her character to be more important. It really felt like she was being set up to be a secret ally of Sir Marmaduke; maybe if this had been a longer, more serious movie, she would have been. As it stands, it would have been better if she had just been left out.

While the Sherlock Holmes spoof, which gets underway as the film enters its second act, is spot-on both plot-wise and dialogue-wise, it ends up falling mostly flat because Olaf Hytten simply isn't much of an actor. In fact, the funniest part of the Holmes spoof grow mostly out of physical comedy related to its intertwining with the Yellow Peril spoof.

The shining highlight of "Lost in Limehouse" is John Sheehan as the lampoon melodramatic villain who's kidnapped the lovely maiden with the intent of forcing her to accept his love. His performance is appropriately over-the-top, he plays well with La Plante and Byron (the two performers he shares the most scenes with), his "evil laugh" is spectacular, and it is his prominence the film's second half that makes it worthwhile. The fact that he manages to abduct Lady Esmeralda twice and tie her up three different times in a very short span makes his character all the more funny. Unfortunately, even Sheehan couldn't save this film from its abysmal script... and while it ends on a literal bang, it feels more like a whimper.

Sherlock Sunday: It's the Great Detective's Greatest Case?

The Sign of Four: Sherlock Holmes' Greatest Case (1932)
Starring: Arthur Wontner, Ian Hunter, Isla Bevan, and Graham Soutten
Director: Graham Cutts
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

After Mary Morstan (Bevan) receives a mysterious string of pearls and a mysterious letter requesting a meeting, and is then menaced by a mysterious thug (Soutten), she retains the services of private investigators Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson (Wontner and Hunter) for protection and to get some answers. What is brought to light is a tale of greed, decades-old treachery and murder, and a madman seeking revenge.


"The Sign of Four" is one of the most often adapted Holmes tales, with this 1932 film being the third version and the first talkie. It's a fast-moving and at times very chilling mystery film, with a cinematic style that often anticipates techniques that wouldn't come into wide use until the rise of film noir in the late 1940s and the 1950s. These stylstic flourishes help to offset some of the film's acting styles, which are still heavily influenced by what was then the fast-fading silent movies period, giving the film a more modern feel that many of the early talkies lack.

Another strong point of the film is the portrayal of Sherlock Holmes. Not only does Arthur Wotner's Holmes seem as though he was brought to life straight from the pen-and-ink illustrations in "The Strand Magazine," but Holmes here seems more at ease with himself and those around him than the one we most often find in the films. He comes across as a unmatched genius, but he also has a good sense of humor and a compassionate nature and friendly demeanor that makes it easy to understand why Watson admires him. Another aspect I like about this adaptation is the Holmes is shown to be as excellent at physical confrontations as he is with the matching of wits. During the film's climax, Holmes kicks much butt, just like the character that Doyle described in his fiction.

Similarly, Watson is portrayed as an intelligent and useful assistant to Holmes, so there is no difficulty in understanding why the Great Detective keeps him around and relies on him for important tasks. This cannot be said of Watson in several other Holmes adaptatations.

While I generally liked how Watson was handled in the film, one aspect of Ian Hunter's portrayal of Watson I didn't care for was the way he came across like a lecherous pervert whenever he was around Mary Morstan. He is ogling her, pawing her... obviously barely able to keep himself from jumping her right then and there. While I understand that the intent was to portray "love at first sight" between Watson and Mary--who becomes his wife in the Doyle tales--the combination of clunky writing and silent movie-type acting makes one wonder why Mary wasn't beating this disgusting lech (who is also at least twice her age) with his cane and then running screaming from the room.

While the film keeps most of the generalities of the original Doyle tale, there are a number of changes that lend the film to be internally inconsistent and even nonsensical at times. The villain is so over the top and reprehensible that one wonders why his henchmen stick around, or even helped him in the first place; while the fact that the entire stolen treasure seems to be intact when Mary is sent the pearls instead of partially spent as in the original story; and a bizarre bit of comedy involving the neigh-obligatory "Holmes-in-disguise" scene. Some viewers might also be annoyed by the fact the story has been transported from the 1800s to the modern-day period of the 1930s, but it really makes no difference to the overall thrust of the tale.

On balance, though, it's a strong adaptation that is made even stronger by Wontner's excellent portrayal of Holmes. It's well worth checking out.