Before Morning

"Before Morning" was originally a play and it looks as if they were filming a play when they made this movie. This is NOT a good thing....as the acting is very stagy, there's no incidental music and the pace is glacially slow. It's a shame, as the basic idea of the story isn't bad at all.

An actress is planning on getting married and she tells a male friend about this. The man isn't feeling very good and goes to her bedroom to lie down. Soon, however, she finds the friend is dead and she is worried what the man's wife will think. Nothing happened unseemly, but she's worried about the appearance of impropriety. One of her friends recommends they call a trusted doctor (Leo Carillo). Unfortunately, this plan is not a good one, as the doctor is evil and uses this as an opportunity to shake down the actress as well as the man's wife!

As I said, the idea was interesting...the execution was clunky and dull. I blame the director for this...as the pacing and acting are his responsibility. It also didn't help that the big twist came long before the movie ended and the film kept dragging on and on afterwards.

The bad things about this movie are mainly due to its age. It is black and white. The sound and picture quality are not up to most movie goers expectations. The acting is very slow. There are long pauses between the spoken sentences. It is like the actor or actress is waiting for a truck to drive by.

The good thing is the end of the movie. It actually goes somewhere. It could be redone today with a crisp delivery and the right cast. There are a few surprises that make the movie worth watching.

Leo Carrillo is actually good, but for some reason the acting is slowed down in almost every scene. There also is a great concern about a man and woman having an affair, which seems laughable today.

Is the first line "Good evening, Elvis?" I think that is what she says. Watch it and give me your opinion. This film was made two years before Elvis was born.

I agree that the first line is "Good morning, Elvis." There is no doubt about it in my mind.

Louis Jean Heydt's part in the film is interesting, as it was his first motion picture. And he played many parts in movies from 1933 until his death in 1960. There are a few awkward times when his performance in this movie. That is no doubt due to his inexperience.

At the time of Heydt's death, he was appearing in a production of the play There Was a Little Girl, and his co-star opposite was Jane Fonda. He died of a heart attack immediately after the first act of that play, and the performance went on by understudy William Adler.

I love the old movies dating back to this era. Who cares if it moves a little slow at times? There could be a counter-argument made that today's films move much too fast. I also agree with the observation that this one, with its engaging storyline, could be successfully remade today.

In answer to a previous reviewer, the opening line is clearly: "Good evening, Albert."

I agree the film is in a very poor state, though it's not surprising nobody bothered to preserve it - the direction, staging, and acting, along with photography and editing are appalling, even for it's age - there were hundreds of decently, and professionally made films at that time - this is not one of them.

I expect it worked better in the more intimate environment of theatre but it's transference to the screen leaves a lot to be desired... Even many silent movies were more exciting than this.

The gaps in the delivery are almost big enough for the 'prompter' to get the words in... :)

The opening reel is so dull, it's the opposite of a grabber: if multiplexes had been invented by 1933 (too bad they invaded en masse in the '70s), patrons would have skipped for another screen on the premises showing a different movie after about 10 minutes. Low point immediately follows, as lead Lora hums (with sudden musical accompaniment from nowhere) a lullaby over the phone at the request of her adorable (not) kid in the hospital while her sugardaddy old fart Russell Hicks lies dying in the bedroom.

Things fail to pick up when Carillo enters as a shady sanitorium doctor who takes over the show. The "hit stage play" this was based upon is not opened up at all in basically a single-set movie drama, and nothing happens as the wax figures yammer on screen. Final reel of twists involving mystery and scandal are merely hot air, unconvincing and stupid. Carillo remains boring throughout until the final minute when the plot is explained stupidly.

Carillo's big line is: "For the love of Mike, get me a cigarette", a bit ironic in that the script has poisoning (presumably from an insecticide) with a capsule of nicotine as the murder weapon.

Acting and direction by Arthur Hoerl is so flat and static it could have been executed via animatronics rather than live actors.

Though ethnic Leo Carillo gets the lead role, the era's discrimination has a Black actress relegated as usual to playing the heroine's strictly functional maid Jenny, and gets no credit at all. The other characters say "Jenny" in conversation dozens of times, so one would think that the role of Jenny would be listed in the credits. And the bland leading man who has plenty of lines and is scheduled to mary Lora goes uncredited, too.