A phony spiritualist hypnotizes the daughter of a wealthy banker in a scheme to swindle the banker out of his money. A reporter investigating the swami discovers the plot, determines to expo... Read allA phony spiritualist hypnotizes the daughter of a wealthy banker in a scheme to swindle the banker out of his money. A reporter investigating the swami discovers the plot, determines to expose it.A phony spiritualist hypnotizes the daughter of a wealthy banker in a scheme to swindle the banker out of his money. A reporter investigating the swami discovers the plot, determines to expose it.
- Directors
- Writer
- Stars
Earl McCarthy
- Jimmy Reeves
- (as Earl McCarty)
Julia Griffith
- Seance Attendee
- (uncredited)
Kit Guard
- Newspaper Office Janitor
- (uncredited)
Harry Todd
- Harry
- (uncredited)
Dorothy Vernon
- Seance Attendee
- (uncredited)
- Directors
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
A crew of phony spiritualist scammers hooks a big bucks sucker, but things get complicated when an undercover reporter joins the crew.
It's hard to do a spiritualist scam movie without getting hokey, especially with the lesser technology of the 30's. Nope, no digital wonders here, just costumed characters, back- projection screens, and fateful voices. Do the suckers fall for the phony theatre. Of course, they do, and for big money, too. I guess the pigeon here is smart enough to be a big-time investor, but dumb enough to be taken in by dime-store theatrics.
Anyway, if you can get past the stumbling narrative and the awkward staging, there are a few compensations. Actress Busch conveys a sassy sense of reality that may not fit with the rest, but lends needed spark to the flat direction (two directors, which probably didn't help). Looks like she should be trading barbs with other street-smart types like Joan Blondell. Auer's got the face of a supernatural type, but rather surprisingly, doesn't play it up, thus weakening a pervasive sense of evil. And, I may be alone, but actor McCarthy could pass for an earlier edition of Paul Newman, at least in some shots. Too bad he died so young. And those two hulking black door guards amount to a note of visual inspiration, even if their dialog amounts to Amos and Andy.
Overall, the movie's not bad enough for camp. In fact, it might even suffice for old movie junkies, like myself.
It's hard to do a spiritualist scam movie without getting hokey, especially with the lesser technology of the 30's. Nope, no digital wonders here, just costumed characters, back- projection screens, and fateful voices. Do the suckers fall for the phony theatre. Of course, they do, and for big money, too. I guess the pigeon here is smart enough to be a big-time investor, but dumb enough to be taken in by dime-store theatrics.
Anyway, if you can get past the stumbling narrative and the awkward staging, there are a few compensations. Actress Busch conveys a sassy sense of reality that may not fit with the rest, but lends needed spark to the flat direction (two directors, which probably didn't help). Looks like she should be trading barbs with other street-smart types like Joan Blondell. Auer's got the face of a supernatural type, but rather surprisingly, doesn't play it up, thus weakening a pervasive sense of evil. And, I may be alone, but actor McCarthy could pass for an earlier edition of Paul Newman, at least in some shots. Too bad he died so young. And those two hulking black door guards amount to a note of visual inspiration, even if their dialog amounts to Amos and Andy.
Overall, the movie's not bad enough for camp. In fact, it might even suffice for old movie junkies, like myself.
The Amazing Mr. X (1948) - watch that one for a fairly good film on the subject of a scamming swami it's in the same vein of Sucker Money. The Amazing Mr. X (1948) really is far superior to Sucker Money - it's not as cheesy and a much darker film.
Sucker Money isn't a great script, it's bad really, but it's a fun film. Lots of hogwash, bologna and cheese - lots and lots of cheese. I enjoyed the film to a degree because I take it all in fun. It's just a film to watch if you want to see a swami on film in a mildly entertaining bad story.
I really don't recommend Sucker Money to most people - but it is a film for people who are interested in occult topics and scams as well as enjoys the older films.
5/10
Sucker Money isn't a great script, it's bad really, but it's a fun film. Lots of hogwash, bologna and cheese - lots and lots of cheese. I enjoyed the film to a degree because I take it all in fun. It's just a film to watch if you want to see a swami on film in a mildly entertaining bad story.
I really don't recommend Sucker Money to most people - but it is a film for people who are interested in occult topics and scams as well as enjoys the older films.
5/10
Mischa Auer of all people plays Swami Yomurda--the leader of a vicious gang of swindlers. They bilk folks out of their fortunes doing fake clairvoyant shows...and they aren't above killing as well! A reporter infiltrates the gang and becomes a trusted member of their team. However, this gets him in bad with his girlfriend...who thinks he's a crook as well. Here's where it gets dumb...he finally tells her that he's posing as a crook in order to catch them all breaking the law...but he tells her this in a public place and, wouldn't you know it, a gang member is nearby and tells the boss. DUH!!! Will he manage to escape with his life AND stop these thugs?
The acting is occasionally dopey and the film also relies on a stupid and tired plot device--Swami uses hypnosis to make the newspaper man's girlfriend become his slave. Pretty dumb...which is a shame as the IDEA of the film is pretty good.
The acting is occasionally dopey and the film also relies on a stupid and tired plot device--Swami uses hypnosis to make the newspaper man's girlfriend become his slave. Pretty dumb...which is a shame as the IDEA of the film is pretty good.
It's rather unbelievable that anyone would fall for this spiritualist stuff. Here the spiritualist world is simply a movie shown on a regular movie screen, which isn't very other worldly. There are a number of interesting 1930s characters in the movie though, which made it pretty enjoyable to me. It's interesting to contrast their fake "spiritualism" work day personalities with their actual everyday personalities. The 2 black dudes spend their working day being zombie like guards, but then enjoy tossing dice after work. I'd enjoy hanging out with them more than anybody else in the movie.
Anyway I always enjoy Misha Auer, who never gets a starring role, as far as I know, except in this movie. I also enjoyed seeing Mona Lisa, in her only talking role. I always wondered what she did after posing for that painting :-)
Anyway I always enjoy Misha Auer, who never gets a starring role, as far as I know, except in this movie. I also enjoyed seeing Mona Lisa, in her only talking role. I always wondered what she did after posing for that painting :-)
An undercover newspaper reporter answers an ad for an acting job and winds up with a swami taking "Sucker Money" in this 1933 film.
Mischa Auer plays the crooked swami, who has a team of people appearing as loved ones to unsuspecting suckers and cheating them out of their money. Then the team grabs the money and runs to another location.
This was a difficult film to follow because the film looked terrible and had bad sound. I assumed the story would focus on the undercover reporter, but he barely had anything to do.
I didn't like the movie.
Mischa Auer plays the crooked swami, who has a team of people appearing as loved ones to unsuspecting suckers and cheating them out of their money. Then the team grabs the money and runs to another location.
This was a difficult film to follow because the film looked terrible and had bad sound. I assumed the story would focus on the undercover reporter, but he barely had anything to do.
I didn't like the movie.
Did you know
- TriviaThis film is one of over 200 titles in the list of independent feature films made available for television presentation by Advance Television Pictures announced in Motion Picture Herald 4 April 1942. At this time, television broadcasting was in its infancy, almost totally curtailed by the advent of World War II, and would not continue to develop until 1945-1946. Because of poor documentation (feature films were often not identified by title in conventional sources) no record has yet been found of its initial television broadcast. Re-titled Sinister Hands, Its earliest documented telecasts took place in Albuquerque Thursday 7 August 1949 on KOB (Channel 4), in Cincinnati Friday 26 August 1949 on WKRC (Channel 11), in New York City Tuesday 26 September 1950 on WATV (Channel 13), and in Los Angeles Saturday 18 November 1950 on KTSL (Channel 2).
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Sinister Hands
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 59m
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content