Beggars in Ermine

Unbelievable plot, Beggars that invest in hedge funds. But I enjoy the simplicity of the stock market, the characters are also simple but you don't care too much about that, because you're inside a story thats goes around different dramatics situations to finalize with a happy ending. Only for lovers of the 30's the golden age of hollywood.

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.

It starts out with Lionel Atwill the co-owner of a steel mill where he eats lunchbox meals with the puddlers. Partner Jameson Thomas steals his wife and tries to have Atwill killed, but 'only' cripples him. He wanders the country in a wheelchair, and with the help of blind accordionist Henry B. Walthall, organizes the handicapped beggars into a huge self-help organization, to take over his company and gain his revenge.

It's a fine performance by Atwill, and a beautiful print to watch it on. There are several peculiarities about the film that make me think that the novel it was based on, by Esther Lynd Day, was far more polemical than the movie, and that extensive swaths and subplots were trimmed by editor Jack Ogilvie. Instead, we have sequences of motionlessness centered around Atwill that made me stare.... but from which I could garner nothing.

Even so, the essentially bizarre story kept me interested through the end, as did Atwill's calm and thoughtful performance. Plus any chance to see Walthall in a significant role is a treat for me. With Betty Furness, Astrid Allwyn, and a clean-shaven Gabby Hayes with his teeth in.

A rare turn for Lionel Atwill as the hero. He plays a factory owner and friend of the working man who is crippled by a real piece of work (Jameson Thomas), who not only steals the guy's company but his wife as well. Years later Atwill plots to get even with the help of a blind homeless man.

Well this certainly sounds like a hoot, doesn't it? Unfortunately, it never quite hits the mark. I did like it, especially the first half, but it just kind of petered out after that. This is largely due to the static direction, a colorless villain, and a script that could use some punching up. Also the movie hits one of my pet peeves by skipping over some events and filling them in after the fact, largely through dialogue. "Show not tell" almost always works better, in my view.