Condamné à vivre

Condemned to Live (1935)

** (out of 4)

A Professor (Ralph Morgan) learns that his mother was attacked by a vampire bat while pregnant with him and soon he begins to fear that he is the vampire stalking his small town. This film comes from the same director as The Vampire Bat, which was made two years earlier. If you enjoyed that Lionel Atwill film then you'll probably enjoy this one as well. For me, I didn't enjoy the previous film and this one here didn't work either, although there were a few interesting twists on the vampire legend. I think the biggest problem for the film is that it's pretty much all talk from start to finish without very much happening. Whenever something exciting does happen it's usually off screen and we only hear about it through more dialogue scenes. Morgan delivers a fine performance but the rest of the cast are rather boring. The direction is also off to the point where the film, for me at least, drags quite a bit and the 65-minute running time seems very long. I enjoyed the relationship between the Professor and a hunchback but this is about the only thing that worked for me. It's far from a really bad movie but it is rather slow and dull. It's also worth noting that the movie was shot on the same sets as Bride of Frankenstein.

There's no missing the antiquated social values represented in this (including ableism), but so it goes. One also can't mistake the very dated sensibilities of "horror" - painting genre elements with the same flat tone and putting them in a small corner, declining utmost thrills, telling more than showing and leaving much to be merely suggested. Just as much to the point: while plenty of this film's contemporaries (or forebears) demonstrated perfect capability of fluid, natural storytelling and film-making, here we nonetheless see a certain stilted heavy-handedness in the direction, editing, and acting. None of this is to say that the movie we get has no value or can't be enjoyed on its own merits, but it's safe to say that viewers who have a difficult time abiding older movies won't find anything here to change their minds.

Admittedly these are issues not necessarily with this one title specifically, but with (genre) film-making as a whole of the 30s. If one can look past these matters, 'Condemned to live' is nonetheless modestly enjoyable. It's not necessarily anything special, even as it takes a slightly different approach to vampirism, but stylistic notions aside it's reasonably well made. Though restricted as such, the cast give solid performances; the production design and costume design are swell. Karen DeWolf's screenplay is less than extraordinary, but not at all bad; it's just that conceptions in this timeframe somewhat twist the content into a more imperfect form. And so on, and so on.

Ultimately this is passably entertaining for a lazy day, and suitable for those who already appreciate older titles. It's hardly anything to go out of your way for, but there are worse things to watch. Even diminished by common 30s senses of horror, 'Condemned to live' is a decent enough way to spend one hour.

Ralph Morgan plays a kind-hearted doctor, known throughout his community for his wisdom and charity, that has a terrible secret he does not even know. It seems when he was born he was marked by a vampire bat....and now in his middle age the terrible strain of over-work has caused his affliction to surface. He passes out whenever total darkness envelops him and turns into a hideous monster that rips the throats of the townsfolk. This is a pretty good, ole creaky film from Invincible Films(?). It is a low-budget thriller to be sure, but has a lot of heart behind it and is quite a satisfying story. Ralph Morgan, brother of the Wizard of Oz'z Frank Morgan gives an interesting performance. He is adequate as a man torn apart with this terrible malady as he calls it. The rest of the cast is pretty good too with Mischa Auer standing out as a hunchback and Pedro de Cordoba excelling as a friendly doctor. What I really liked about the film was its rather blatant symbolism about the light and the darkness and how each brings out a different persona..

"A small European village is the site of a series of horrible murders, thought to be the result of some vicious animal attacks. When the local doctor begins to look into the deaths, he discovers the victims were really attacked by some type of vampire-like creature. The doctor is also startled to find the he may be responsible for the deaths, due to a condition he acquired when his mother was attacked by a creature while pregnant with him," according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis.

No need to wonder about the vampire's identity; it's given away during the first attack. Although the film goes to dullsville with the idea, it is intriguing to think about a plot involving the offspring of a pregnant female vampire victim. Instead of interesting, "Condemned to Live" bores. As does a "love triangle" involving older doctor Ralph Morgan (as Paul Kristan), fresh-faced fiancée Maxine Doyle (as Marguerite), and more age appropriate young Russell Gleason (as David). Ms. Doyle seems unrehearsed.

*** Condemned to Live (1935) Frank Strayer ~ Ralph Morgan, Pedro de Cordoba, Russell Gleason

Vampiresque tale of a madman loose in a small village in the middle of the 19th century.Someone is tearing the throats out of villagers after dark. Who could it be and how does it relate to the events years earlier when a shipwrecked pregnant woman was bitten on the neck by a vampire bat? Well made melodrama with horrific overtones take many horror conventions and breathes just a bit of new life in them, Give this movie a good many points for daring to be different in its supernatural tinged tale. Add to it a great cast headed by Frank Morgan and Misha Auer (as a hunchback) and you get a fine little lost film. Sure it won't win any awards but as a movie to watch on a dark and stormy night with the lights on low its gangbusters Worth seeing, especially if you program a night of moldy oldie horror films.