A Caprichosa

Sort of a very early "Twin Peaks" look at a small town and its corruption. Ralph Bellamy is a man just out of jail for accidental manslaughter but the town hates him. Fay Wray is running away (from what?) in the dark night in a slinky gown. She comes to his cabin where he is trying to get rid of the sheriff's daughter. She got him in trouble first time around.

Then Melvyn Douglas and a stooge barge in looking for Fay Wray. In a tussle the stooge shoots Wray's dog so Bellamy clunks him one and he hits his head on the fireplace. Here we go again.

Bellamy and Wray take off but get sidetracked by a cop and end up hiding out in the city with Bellamy's old cell mate and his wife, Roscoe Ates and Ruth Gillette.

Then the cops arrest Wray for stealing jewels from Douglas (which were a gift). To get out of jail she agrees to go back to Douglas but when she catches him trying to kill the stooge (who lingers on) she changes her mind.

Wild plot but the 3 stars are all pretty good. This is a 1934 film and it was made at Biograph Studies in New York City. I thought they had gone out of business 20 years before this!

I've known of Ralph Bellamy for most of my life. During the fifties and sixties, he was a bit of a staple in television dramas and had a fairly extensive movie career. Rediscovering him in some of these old films, he appears to have a quality that was utilized. He was frequently used as a very masculine character, a kind of dominator of women. He seems to be characterized as a person who once he makes his mind up, won't listen to anyone. This is no exception. He has been framed and put in prison for manslaughter, his temper getting the best of him. It isn't long before he is in trouble again, hooking up with Fay Wray (who really was quite beautiful) and alienating a few people in his community. The problem with all this is that we are expected to believe that people will act in such knee jerk ways, not looking at evidence. Of course, the good guys don't help because instead of pleading their cases, they just take off. Shootings occur and people end up making deals when a simple explanation would have probably circumvented the whole thing. This is a sort of pleasant movie, but not worth a whole lot. There is some pretty bad comic relief that only distracts from what is supposed to be serious.

"Woman in the Shadows" AKA "Woman in the Dark" (1934). It's not a bad lighthearted crime drama - would have been much better without the comedy - would be better as a serious piece but it's not bad as it is. It's not a complicated story - it's simple but effective for what it is.

John Bradley is a man out of prison for manslaughter. He decides to live alone - he simply wants to be alone because he's afraid of his own bad temper hurting someone again. And for a man that wants to be alone he sure attracted a lot of company and that company leads him to fear he's killed someone again so he and his newfound female company goes on the run together.

And for a tough guy that doesn't like chicks to well because they are trouble he sure turned out to be a soft romantic.

5/10

Woman in the Shadows (1934)

*** (out of 4)

Lightweight but entertaining crime/drama about a man (Ralph Bellamy) released from prison and deciding to stay alone in his cabin so that his bad temper won't get him back into prison. Everything's going well until a woman (Fay Wray) shows up being chased by her psychotic lover (Melvyn Douglas). There's nothing overly special about this "B" film from the Biograph Company but the three stars make it well worth watching. The pre-code elements with Wray's dress slipping down or the close-ups of her legs being shown are nice touches. Also known as Woman in the Dark. Directed by Phil Rosen who would go on to direct several Charlie Chan films as well as Spooks Run Wild and Return of the Ape Man.

Interestingly, this isn't a Hollywood film - it was made in New York at the old Biograph studios. That's about the only interesting thing about this other than wondering why reasonably high profile actors ended up in this low budget rubbish. The story behind that might be more interesting than this film?

The difference between this and something from a major studio is blatantly obvious. It looks decidedly amateurish. It's directed with all the skill of an arthritic chimpanzee trying to teach the tango in a dance school. It's hard to believe that some of these people are proper actors and that they have actually seen a camera before. I don't however harbour any pre-conceived notions that the cinematographer had seen a camera before.

It's just entertaining enough that you'll probably watch it to the end but you'll have the feeling that you've just watched a local amateur dramatics society put on a play in a church hall.

It's also a perfect example of how not to efficiently use your film time. They seem to have forgotten that in a movie you can have more than one thing going on at the same time. This results in weird long gaps in dialogue whilst each member of the cast waits in turn to read their lines. For example, He asks Her a question - does she reply? Yes but only after she's walked for about 5 seconds in silence to the other side of the room (where the microphone is?) to reply. It makes it so slow. 'Speak as you walk' you'll be wanting to shout.

I wonder if this explains why Fay Wray's career didn't go anywhere after Kong?