Boys' Reformatory

This is a satisfying little B gem from Associated Artists with a solid performance from Darro as a streetsmart, yet self-sacrificing adolescent willing to endure a tough reform school for the sake of protecting his foster family's good name. It never fails to amaze me how these low budget 1930s B-directors were able to pack so much plot into a one-hour movie and Boys' Reformatory is a prime example of what seems like a truly daunting task. Maybe it was because I watched this late at night but a certain plot twist towards the end really floored me. However, those accustomed to the grittier,more realistic exposes of the thirties juvenile justice system like Crime School that Warners was putting out about this time may be disappointed that this movie focuses more on the issues that caused the kids to be sent to reform school as opposed to the conditions inside the institution. Still if you are looking for one of the more entertaining, action-packed efforts of one of the great, but nearly forgotten young B actors, this movie is well worth your while. P.S. If you own a video projector, I don't recommend watching the DVD on the big screen as Alpha used a somewhat shaky 16mm for the source print. Nostalgia Family Video has this on VHS but I have no idea of the quality on that one.

In the late 1930s, it was fashionable in Hollywood to make films about the penal system that were intended to promote prison reform--particularly films about juvenile institutions. There were a ton of them and most were actually pretty good--if a bit idealistic. In this particular film, Frankie Darro enters a prison unjustly and meets a reform-minded doctor who seems to be voicing the sentiments of the screen writers.

The film begins with two young men. One is an orphan (Frankie Darro) who lives with the other young man's family (Frank Coughlin Jr.). When Coughlin goes into a life of crime and nearly gets himself caught by the police, nice-guy Darro takes the rap for him and goes to jail--though this really makes no sense. Who would agree to go to prison for robbery if they didn't commit it?! Anyway, Darro works hard in prison and tries to make a new life for himself. However, when Coughlin ALSO later gets sent there and the boss-man wants to have both of them killed (since they know too much), things heat up and it leads to an unbelievable but enjoyable finale. Overall, while certainly not a brilliant film, it is entertaining. Brilliant? Perhaps not--but worth a look.

Orphan Frankie Darro has been living with Lillian Elliott and her son, Frank Coghlan Jr. Darro is a good kid with a steady job, but Coghlan hasn't found work until tonight, and it's for a hood. When he's caught, Darro tries to take the blame. The result is they're both sent to the State Industrial School, filled with youths with names like 'Knuckles' and 'Blubber' and guards like Pat Flaherty, who can't read a line convincingly, but thinks it's up to him to punish the wicked. Doctor Grant Withers, on the other hand, is interested in reforming the kids, and he thinks he has a likely candidate in Darro.

Like many a Poverty Row second feature, it's got good performers (Flaherty aside), a decent director in Howard Bretherton, a competent cameraman and editor.... but the story proceeds by stuttering steps that sometimes make little sense. Is this an issue of not having enough screen time, because this is a second feature and 62 minutes is enough? Are the writers incapable of dealing in more than hurried stereotypes? Or have the assumptions of story telling, the things that must be included and should be included and may be included have shifted? Sometimes I think one thing, then the other. It makes the difference between a movie that gives us an insight into its makers and audiences, one that has aged badly, and one that should simply be dismissed.

You'd think that having looked at hundreds, if not thousands of these cheap B movies would have given me experience to judge. Well, it has. But it has also enabled me to see that there is a way of looking at things by a different standard. Is that standard better or worse in an absolute or subjective sense?

Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman has said "Nothing in life is as important as you think it is when you are thinking about it." Perhaps I should note that this is a still-watchable but awkward B movie and go think about something else that will seem more important as I do so.

Frankie Darro and Grant Withers star in Boys Reformatory which if made at Warner Brothers would have had Pat O'Brien playing the sympathetic prison doctor more than likely. It also would have had far better production values.

After saying that it's not a bad if sentimental juvenile story. Darro is foster child to Lillian Elliott and he's constantly bailing her real child Frank Coghlan, Jr. out of scrapes.

One time though to save Elliott from grief, he takes the rap for Coghlan over a heist and finds himself in Boys Reformatory. It's there he meets Grant Withers as the prison doctor. Soon enough Coghlan is there and then things start happening.

A younger, a much younger version of James Cagney might have put over the part, especially when Darro takes the rap. No criticism of Darro but you have to have someone like a Cagney to make it convincing.

Ben Welden plays a Fagin like character, owner of a pool hall and leader of the young boys he lures into a life of crime. He does a decent job, the best performance in the film.

Boys Reformatory is a Monogram film, a Sam Katzman special so don't expect too much. I didn't.