Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaThe lives of a number of the workers and executives in a Manhattan skyscraper are affected by the actions of a philandering and crooked company boss.The lives of a number of the workers and executives in a Manhattan skyscraper are affected by the actions of a philandering and crooked company boss.The lives of a number of the workers and executives in a Manhattan skyscraper are affected by the actions of a philandering and crooked company boss.
- Bank Executive
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Mechanic
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Young Mechanic
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Inspector Ned Connors
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Information Clerk
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Elevator Passenger
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Crook
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Janitor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
The plot concerns the free-wheeling industrial executive Burns who's not above using other people's hard earned cash to float his own misbegotten investments. These shenanigans eventually culminate in a run on a cash strapped Tower bank and hardship for the workers. At the same time, Burns chases anything in skirts, his beleaguered wife be darned. So how will things straighten out.
It's a low-budget, indie production with a largely lesser-known cast except for Bryan and Hall, and a few glimpses of an early Walter Brennan. The acting's okay, though, as others point out, the fistfight is amateurish, along with a cheaply done featureless sky in scenes from atop the tower. Also, the comedic scenes with the pill-popping secretary and the silly wandering drunk tell the audience that despite serious intent, it's only a movie after all. Besides, the occasionally clever innuendo provides all the chuckles needed.
Overall, as a product of its time, the cheap flick succeeds importantly in giving us a one-sided glimpse of that stressed out time in a largely entertaining way.
(In Passing-- in the year following this movie's release, namely 1933, Congress passed the New Deal's Federal Deposit Insurance legislation that insured bank deposits up to an elevated amount. The practical effect was to prevent 'bank runs' such as occur in the movie. Now depositors could rest easier if a bank got in trouble.)
I wanted to watch this movie because of curiosity about the director, Frank Strayer. He directed the early movies in the Blondie series and he was surprisingly adventurous for a b-movie director (one entry was even a musical). I was surprised that someone with so much artistic ambition was so forgotten.
Manhattan Tower may be a good explanation of why.
The movie starts very well, establishing the hustle and bustle of a skyscraper, with workers and business people toiling away and with birds-eye looks at the hectic streets below. There are quirky and original shots, most notably the way traveling through the elevator shaft is used to indicate height in the building.
Unfortunately, the movie is painfully dull, involving a bickering couple and a sleazy executive. The story is as thin as gruel, both unpersuasive and completely predictable (hence my confusion at the IMDB reviews). The acting is abysmal. The financial stuff is a bit unclear. The comic relief of the drunk guy and the pill-popping receptionist fails to work.
This, perhaps, is the difference between someone like Lewis Milestone and someone like Frank Strayer. They both liked to play with the camera, but the former understood that trick shots are nothing if you don't have a solid story behind them.
I had no idea this type of production could be so good.
It's a well-constructed movie, with a goodly number of second-ranked players which focus around Clay Clement, a womanizing executive, Irene Rich as his wife, tired of his cheating and anxious to get a divorce so she can marry Hale Hamilton, who is also concerned about buttressing a shaky bank. Director Frank Strayer does a fine job of mixing major and minor characters, and cinematographer Ira Morgan of some offers some fine camera-work. Editor Harry Reynolds does some fine work, even though some of his cuts don't quite work; his moving wipes achieved by taking the camera up through floors gives the unfortunate sense that the shutter has stuck midway between frames. Once you get used to the effect, you'll likely admire the technique, while understanding why it didn't catch on.
Nonetheless, it's a nicely concocted movie, with some good talent, including James Hall in his last movie, elegant Irene Rich (unfortunately slow in her line readings) and a stuttering Walter Brennan. It's by no means a great work, but it will pass an hour of your time very pleasantly.
Coinciding with Mr. Burns is Mary Harper (Mary Brian). She's Mr. Burns secretary and he can't keep his hands off her, much to the dislike of her fiance, Jimmy Duncan (James Hall). Fighting off Mr. Burns--or rather downplaying Mr. Burns' grabbiness because she wants to keep her job--became the least of her problems after she drained her bank account and gave it to Mr. Burns to invest. She didn't know he was loose with money and she was clearly too naive to give it much thought. The money she lost wasn't just her own, it was hers and Jimmy's to start a new life together.
Now Jimmy had two reasons to hate Mr. Burns.
Going on concurrently with the aforementioned was an attempt of the tower bank to stave off its biggest clients from withdrawing their money. If they withdrew then the bank would collapse. Dave Witman was going to try to quietly convince the bank's biggest clients to stay, but the genie got out of the bottle.
It was quite a madhouse in the Manhattan Tower, but you got the impression that everyday was a madhouse. I thought the romantic excursions of Mr. And Mrs. Burns were superfluous considering so many movies in the 30's had that element. It's almost like it was a requisite part of any script. Romantic trysts aside this was a good movie with plenty of entertainment and even a little suspense.
Free on YouTube.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizOne of a number of early 1930s films such as American Madness (1932) and Prosperity (1932) made on the subject of business corruption and banking practices in the wake of the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the onset of the Great Depression. In many cases, when reviewing the screenplays of these films prior to production, the censors demanded that such films must instill "confidence in banking institutions" and "big business" in the average American. The studios begrudgingly obliged.
- Citazioni
Kenneth Burns: 'Brought that voucher for a thousand dollars?
Mr. Hoyt: I won't take the responsibility. I can't.
Kenneth Burns: Then you can take the consequences. You're through.
Mr. Hoyt: I worked hard for you and the company.
Kenneth Burns: Go on! Get out!
Mr. Hoyt: Before I go, I want to tell you something. Everyone who works for you hates you. But they haven't the courage to tell you. Men like you always have someone in their employ whom they can torment and persecute. Someone weak and powerless who can't fight back. Someone like me. I suppose when you were a child, you pulled the legs of grasshoppers just to see them wriggle and squirm.
I più visti
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 50.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 7 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1