Gambler's Choice

Pine and Thomas were known around Paramount as 'The Dollar Bills' because they were both named William and they could turn out a watchable second feature that would turn a nice profit on the cheap. For a decade or so they prospered, giving B talent a chance to shine in decently-written movies with good production values.

Here Chester Morris, Nancy Kelly and Lyle Talbot -- a decade past their primes -- are enjoyable in the sort of movie that W.S. Van Dyke used to direct people in a decade earlier -- MANHATTAN MELODRAMA and SAN FRANCISCO, where the two male leads grew up together, one became a gambler -- usually played by Clark Gable -- and the other became a priest or a lawyer -- that could be Spencer Tracy or William Powell -- and they both love the same girl, of course. And that's the beginning, middle and end, with, of course, an interesting run of good character actors, of which Hollywood had a plethora in the 1940s. So don't expect anything startlingly original, but do expect a pleasant ninety minutes.

Gambler's Choice is the kind of movie where halfway through, you're trying to guess how it's going to end. Why? Because the plot is so familiar and you've already wracked your brains trying to remember how it ended when Cagney and O'Brien and Gable and Powell and them were in it. –No, Gambler's Choice is not especially original; perhaps oddly, it's still quite watchable.

Three childhood friends are reunited after many years apart: Chester Morris has grown up to become a charismatic but crooked casino owner; Russell Hayden is an honest cop in a city of corruption; and Nancy Kelly is the nightclub singer who loves them both. Which one will she eventually choose? and what will happen when Lucky and Blackie—er, Hayden and Morris—inevitably clash?

Of the supporting cast, Sheldon Leonard as the rival casino owner looks most like he's enjoying himself, but his is only one of several familiar faces (Tom Dugan, Lloyd Corrigan, even Lyle Talbot). Morris does well in the second half but seems somehow unnatural in the early going. Hayden is okay but isn't given a lot to do that's really interesting. Kelly could also have been more interesting; again, there's not a lot that she does or says that remotely surprises. The performances are all fine, but the actors just aren't given much to work with.

So it's corny and unoriginal, but hand it to the filmmakers for trying. Halfway through the picture, there's a scene where the three main characters gaze out a window over the growing city. "There it is, Mike," says Morris. "Little old New York….And it's all ours. Just like we dreamed about when we were kids." --A film that's strictly a quickie with no ambition doesn't pause for philosophical musings, corny or not. It's brief, but just for an instant there you get the feel of that epic moment that "big" movies shoot for.

The last fifteen minutes—when things really start popping—are exciting, even tense, and satisfying. I was glad I stuck around to find out what happens.

Funny scene: the horseless carriage chase. Even in 1911, apparently, you sometimes needed to lose someone following your auto in his own.

Gambler's Choice (1944)

** (out of 4)

Low-budget rip of MGM's MANHATTAN MELODRAMA has pretty much the same story (which itself was ripped countless times before this movie). In the film three childhood friends get caught stealing some money with two being released to their parents but the third being sent to a reform school. As adults, the bad gambler (Chester Morris) meets up with his friends with one being a cop (Russell Hayden) and of course they're both in love with the good girl (Nancy Kelly). If you're familiar with the crime pictures of the 1930s then it's pretty certain you've seen MANHATTAN MELODRAMA or if not you've probably seen the classic ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES, which followed the same storyline in a way. The entire plot of friends going on opposite sides of the law wasn't original in the 30s but by the 40s it was even more played out and tiresome. I must admit that I was pretty much bored out of my mind at the five-minute mark when the kids were finishing up. When the adult actors came on screen things never really picked up and that's a real shame because they could have done so much with this film. Morris, one of my favorites, is wasted and pretty much sleepwalks through the film. That typical charm and energy the actor brings to most roles was missing here and his chemistry with Davis and Hayden wasn't too strong. Hayden was pretty good in his role but the screenplay offers him very little. Supporting players Lyle Talbot, Lee Patrick and Lloyd Corrigan are pretty much wasted in their small roles as well. What I never understood about rips is why their producers, screenwriters, directors or at least stars never spoke up to try and change at least a little something. I mean, would it have been too much to ask for at least one little pinch of the story to be altered? I understand going down the same road but why not at least change it up a bit to where your viewer won't be bored because they've seen it all before? Granted, some rips are at least nice entertaining but sadly that's not the case with this thing and its 66-minutes go by at a very slow pace.

I had a very strong sense of déjà vu as I watched this film. That's because although IMDb doesn't say it's a remake, it is a retooling of many popular films of the 1930s--particularly "Manhattan Melodrama". Because of this, I found the plot rather predictable. Now I am not saying that it's a bad film--it's competently made--but it's certainly not very original or inspired.

The film begins with three kids out hustling. One, who you KNOW is destined to grow up bad, steals something and soon the cops catch them. The court scene pretty much shows what the future will be for the trio--the bad kid has a criminal-type father (so he'll grow to be a crooked guy), the girl's father a drunk (so she'll spend most of her life caring for the irresponsible guy) and the other has parents that are concerned (naturally, he grows to be a cop just like his old man).

Years pass and now the bad kid has grown into Ross (Chester Morris)--a professional gambler who is willing to do just about anything to make his mark on the world AND be the biggest man in town. Mary is now a beautiful barroom singer (Nancy Kelly) and Mike (Russell Hayden) is a cop. Of the three, Ross is the center of the story--just like gambling Clark Gable was in "Manhattan Melodrama". I could explain more about the plot but don't particularly feel it's that important--as I said, so much of it is familiar territory. What is also familiar is that Ross and Mike are destined to have a confrontation and the question, as always, is can they avoid hurting each other in the process and also remain friends.

Overall, well acted and a decent time-passer...but not much else.

The movie never rises above programmer status, but it's a good lively cast that gets the most out of clichéd material. Three childhood friends meet up as adults. Ross (Morris) has become a big time gambling house owner while Mike (Hayden) is now a police lieutenant and Mary, a stage entertainer. The boys become friendly rivals over Mary; at the same time, Mike's friendship gets compromised by Ross's sometimes shady operations. Sound familiar. That's because this sort of theme was common during the 30's, from Cagney to Gable, that is, childhood friends graduating into different sides of the law and becoming friendly enemies. What did surprise me here was Russell Hayden as Mike. I'd only seen him as the happy-go-lucky Lucky in the Hopalong Cassidy series. Here, sporting a mustache, he plays a more dramatic role in fine fashion. Otherwise, the movie's a decent little time-passer.