Beggars in Ermine

John 'Flint' Dawson (Lionel Atwill) was delivered one of the worst two-piece combinations you could possibly get. He lost his legs in an industrial accident, then while he was in recovery he lost his wife, his daughter, and all of his money to the same guy! That would make me want to do one of two things: commit suicide or go on a killing spree.

John was a better man than me.

John Dawson was the general manager of a steel mill and he also had a controlling interest in it. The man who ruined his life was James 'Jim' Marley (Jameson Thomas). He wanted Flint Dawson's company, and his wife was a necessary tool to get it.

Dawson never knew what hit him. He was crippled and broke within the blink of an eye. He resorted to panhandling like so many other disabled men. But, being the resourceful man he was, Dawson united thousands of unemployed cripple men to make a consortium to benefit all of them. It was either the new chapter in his life or his attempts to close an old chapter.

"Beggars in Ermine" was decent. It had enough going on to keep me attentive and invested in the ending. Based upon some of the things that occurred in the movie, If this same movie was made today, it would be about meme stocks. And who wasn't at least curious about the success of meme stocks?

Free on Odnoklassniki.

Offbeat drama from Monogram and director Phil Rosen. Lionel Atwill stars as John Dawson, the charismatic head of a prosperous steel company. He's well-liked by his workers, but his board of directors are always looking for a quicker profit, and one member of the board has his sights set on Dawson's seat. After an "accident" at the steel mill destroys Dawson's legs, he is swindled out of his company and his fortune. He's soon after believed killed in a train accident, but in fact he sets out, with new blind friend Marchant (Henry B. Walthall), to organize the city's crippled and lame men and women into a corporation of beggars whose meager daily take is invested by Dawson, making them all millionaires, and allowing Dawson to have his revenge.

This plays like many of the Depression-era fantasies that envision sweeping change at the hands of righteous people against the corrupt and greedy who are destroying the nation and its institutions. The plot is honestly one that I haven't quite seen before, which alone is a rarity, and the odd cast pull off the roles. The settings are basic, as this is a Monogram picture, but that doesn't really hinder the storytelling.

Little known now, but pretty big stars for their day, Lionel Atwill and Betty Furness star in Beggars in Ermine. Atwill is "Dawson", owner of the mill, but is injured in an accident, caused by one of his own workers. then his own wife screws him over and takes all his money. now he's broke, and he organizes the homeless, and forms an organization to get the employees to try to save the company from complete destruction from his wife and the new owners. It's pretty good... similar to John Doe. Directed by Phil Rosen.. this one just one of TEN that he directed in 1934 ALONE! wow. Mr. "B" movie factory. It's not bad. Catch it if you can.

the reviews of this film unfairly marginalize it for lack of realism. Did they scoff at, say, "Fight Club" for such reasons? It's far more unique and interesting for its cache of Depression-era lore and its assumptions about the dispossessed. Highly recommended for its bizarre mix of creepiness and homiletic. Obviously allegorical, it nevertheless fails -i think somehow deliberately - in being uplifting and points instead to something sinister in the crippled, maimed and poverty-stricken denizens of the city. The blind accordionist who attaches himself to Atwill wears glasses which are half black, half clear. His speeches are absurdly virtuous cliché, which belie his mendacious appearance in a very unconvincing way. I also noticed the back of the envelope calculations Atwill makes when pitching his stock market club for beggars only involved impossible amounts: millions in months. A lot of ticker tape shenanigans go on in the second half of the film, all of which are so exaggerated, I ended up thinking public anxiety about the market was also being channeled here quite volubly, along with fear of the disabled and wretched poor. In a word, peculiar.

It is almost as if, about a month prior to production, director Phil Rosen and his scenarist, Tristram Tupper, (sounds like a character W. C. Fields would play, huh?), got together to confer on what would be the dullest way to tell this story. I mean, clearly the most intriguing element, as the title suggests, is the forming of a labor union of homeless mendicants. You would think, at the very least, the difficulties in creating such an association would be front and center, to mention nothing of the perils such a union would face from corporate America. But no. The union is formed and, literally five minutes later, is so successful that its creator, played by Lionel Atwill, is living in a friggin mansion! Meanwhile, the conflict and dramatic tension that should have been given to the rise of organized, disabled, poor, blind beggars is instead outsourced (to employ a capitalist/labor term) to really boring stuff involving Atwill's revenge on a moustache twirling corporate villain who, for some reason that is not explained, has murdered Atwill's unfaithful spouse. The result is lots of ennui and little interest beyond some nice, left wing, pro unionism, the usual good work of Atwill, playing a good guy for a welcome change, and a fine supporting bit from D. W. Griffith veteran Henry B. Walthall whose gentle ethereality both anticipates and supersedes Leslie Howard. Give it a C plus.