Back Pay

Back Pay (1930)

** (out of 4)

Watching this early talkie makes it easy to understand why Corinne Griffith's sound career really didn't take off. This here would turn out to be her next to last film (before making one more nearly three decades later) and with material like this it's no wonder she stepped aside. In the film she plays Hester Bevins, a small town girl who is loved by Gerald (Grant Withers) but she turns down his proposal because he'll never make much money. Hester runs off to New York City where she gets involved with various rich men but when Gerald goes off to war everything changes. BACK PAY is a really, really bad film on many levels but I must admit that it kept me totally entertained because you never really knew where it was going to go. I should say that the film is 100% predictable so in that way it's not hard to see where it's going. What's so strange is that the film just goes off in various directions and some that you won't see coming. Just check out the first minute when the film starts off with Griffith singing a really bad song and this here tells you things are going to get crazy. The story itself is pretty predictable but it's also hard to figure out. It seems like stuff just happens for no reason at all including Gerald going off to the war, which has apparently been going on for a while yet it's never mentioned in the film until his broken heart goes. The ending, which is meant to be powerful, is so poorly done that it actually had me laughing harder than most of the comedies I've seen from this period. Griffith actually isn't too bad in her role but the screenplay simply gives her nothing to do. Withers, on the other hand, isn't suited for the role here and comes off pretty bad at times. BACK PAY is a film that most people are truly going to hate but I think fans of Griffith will want to check it out as well as those who enjoy bad movies. I will say that the 56-minute running time flew by, which I'm very thankful for.

Written by Fannie Hurst (Imitation of Life, Back Street), Back Pay is a prime example as to why some silent film actresses took a nosedive. Talkies revealed Miss Griffith's shortcomings as an actress. Although a very beautiful lady, she seems very uncomfortable with dialogue and gives an inconsistent performance. Some of her scenes are well acted but most are not. To be fair, she did give some good performances--in silents--like her Oscar-nominated title role in The Divine Lady (1929). This was her last Hollywood film and her only surviving all-talkie. The other one, Lillies of the Field, is lost. A typical Fannie Hurst tear-jerking melodrama.

This early talkie is hampered by an inadequate cast. The story is similar to a lot of other precode movies- poor, small town girl leaves equally poor, small town, boy to go to big city to search for opportunities. She becomes a mistress of a rich man and part of a set of whore like gold-diggers. Her new life actually seems pretty good. She has a great apartment, her own stereotyped black maid to wait on her,lots of furs and jewelry. And her life back home was pretty dreary- she lived in a boring , small town. She had a dead end job in the local dept. store. And she lived with her aunt who ran a boarding house/brothel. The big city seems a huge step up. But of course, according to the morals of the film, she has erred.

The movie seems to take place in 1930-the cars are all late 20's vintage and the clothes are all stylish flapper stuff we are used to seeing in the movies of this time.

Then the movie turns totally preposterous- it seems there is a war going on. But where? in 1930? What war? Oh no. This is World War 1. So the movie pretends the year is 1917, even though we are clearly in 1928 or 1930.

The heroine's former small town beau is called to fight and he is wounded and she has to nurse him back... you get the idea. She learns and earns redemption.

She is played by Corrine Griffith who was a big silent star in her day. Her performance is inadequate at best. You can see why she failed in talkies. She speaks as if she has marbles in her mouth and the movie actually has the nerve to begin with her singing a song. As if she is showing us the breadth of her talent. The singing is so awful, that I can imagine, the audiences of the day, booing or laughing. I can't believe it wasn't cut. The male lead Grant Withers is also pretty bad,but unfortunately, the movie rests on Miss Griffiths shoulders and she can't make it work. This plot which was based on a Fanny Hurst story,was used in various forms in other pre codes and strong actresses like Barbara Stanwyck, Ann Harding, and many others, made them believable. Miss Griffith did not succeed here.

The copy of "Back Pay" that is being shown now on TCM is apparently a very truncated version. Over 20 minutes is missing--as some studio types thought this change would make for a better feature. It also is often a sign that a film is in trouble and the studio was desperate to make it more marketable. So, this review is only for this short version.

"Back Pay" starts with one of the most unintentionally funny musical scenes I can recall. Corinne Griffith is singing to her boyfriend but it seriously looks as if she is a zombie!! I have NEVER seen anyone sing with less energy or conviction. Heck, her lips barely even move nor does she even twitch! And, her boyfriend lies there as if he is dead! Seriously--you just have to watch this opening to believe it. Now I know this is an early talking picture--but even by the standards of 1930 it's pretty awful. And this gets me to the single biggest problem that ruins the film. Although I might have expected an early sound film to be stilted and have lousy acting, by 1930 this was NOT a problem in most films. So, had the film come out in 1928 or even 1929, I might have cut the film some slack. However, the director must have either been insane or totally incompetent as the actors (particularly but not exclusively Griffith) had poor delivery and many of the scenes should have been re-shot. Surely any sane director would have noticed the zombie-like delivery at the film's beginning--but this one apparently did not. And, repeatedly, the actors seemed to have little in the way of delivery--and they were allowed to give such lackluster performances. They either talk too fast, too soft or look stilted. As a result, the movie sucks. I know this sounds mean, but it irritated me that Miss Griffith was allowed to give such a bad performance--along with a cast of folks who seemed to have little idea how to act in a talking picture.

I you STILL decide to see this film, a few things to look for apart from Griffith's awful singing is the masseuse who can barely be understood, the scene with her old boyfriend where the actors keep talking over each other's lines as well as when actors inexplicably talk too fast in some scenes. Some might blame the actors, but isn't it the director's job to notice this and re-shoot these awful scenes?!

This movie is not the disaster some have made it out to be, and although only 55 minutes in length it felt like a well-made, complete picture. To my mind Corinne Griffith was quite good, even singing during a charming early scene. Her costars ranged from adequate to good, but never bad enough to sink the picture. Because this may turn out to be her only surviving sound picture, it is a must see for film historians. I cannot thank the studios enough for making so much of their old inventory available for viewing, and I encourage everyone to show your appreciation by continuing to purchase titles from any archive collection.The plot of this one was probably dated even in 1930, but it is earnestly acted nonetheless. I do agree that there appear to be anachronisms throughout, mostly relating to clothing/vehicles, but that was not fatal to the picture for me. Overall, a charming curio, nicely photographed. The print has some damage but is surprisingly good overall. I think I'd give Back Pay 3 stars out of 4.