I Can't Escape (1934)

Excellent but underrated film

Absolutely the worst movie.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Onslow Stevens (Steve Nichols), Lila Lee (Mae), Russell Gleason (Tom Martin), William Desmond (Donovan, parole officer), Hooper Atchley (Harley, the broker), Otis Harlan (Bonn, the partner), Richard Cramer (Joe, the bartender), Kane Richmond (Bob, a college boy), Clara Kimball Young (Mrs Wilson), Eddie Gribbon ("legal" cop), Nat Carr (Watson).Director: OTTO BROWER. Screenplay: Faith Thomas. Story: Jerry Sackheim, Nathan Ash. Photography: Jerome Ash. Film editors: Frederic Knudtson, Louis Sackin. Art director: Fred Preble. Production manager: Sam Wiesenthal. Assistant director: Charles S. Gould. Associate producer: Peter Kassler. Producer: Max Alexander. Not copyright by Beacon Productions, Inc. U.S. release: 5 July 1934. U.K. release: 5 January 1935. Never theatrically released in Australia. 60 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Paroled convict settles down to domestic bliss with a good-time girl he meets in a nightclub. Unfortunately, due to harsh parole regulations, he is unable to find a job until he is hired by a couple of investment brokers, who are actually swindlers whose knowledge of the law is so slight they innocently presume the police will pin the rap on the convict when they abscond with the proceeds of their trust fund. COMMENT: In two words: supremely boring. Any hope that Mr. Brower, a noted action and 2nd unit specialist, is going to show off those aspects of his talent are quickly dashed. All we get are a couple of shots of speeding cars and a mild melee at a nightclub. The talent-less direction is compounded by nondescript players and minimal production values. True, the screenplay has a few harsh words to say about parole rules, but they are lost in the movie's relentless atmosphere of penury.

This earnest little quickie has the usual opening sequence in a nightclub and a climax set at an airfield to end the film with a wallop, and in between contrives to take a sober look at the problems faced by a young Onslow Stevens as an ex-con out on parole without references. It's sufficiently compelling to have you wondering how on earth its increasingly involved plot can possibly be resolved happily, and manages a conclusion that is contrived but satisfying. Released just days after the introduction of the new Production Code at the beginning of July 1934, it still retains the cheerful amorality and social conscience of that lost era, with the profession of the faded but still gorgeous Lila Lee being immediately obvious.

"I Can't Escape" is a perfect example of a good 1930s "B" movie -- short (about 65 minutes,) stylish, well-acted and frequently surprising. The star is Osgood Stevens who had the looks of a Gable but a weakness for booze which short-circuited his career. Opposite him -- and every bit as good -- is Lila Lee, thinly disguised as a prostitute until she meets Stevens and settles into happy domesticity. After getting out of jail and pounding the pavements, Stevens encounters a pair of swindlers who are happy to hire him as the perfect fall guy when they take off with their clients' cash. How he avoids another prison stretch is ingeniously plotted, excitingly filmed. In short, "I Can't Escape" is a fine example of what's meant by the phrase, "they don't make 'em like that anymore."

This is a low-budget B-movie—and an interesting one at that. What I mean by the term 'B-movie' is that it's a film that was designed as a second and lesser film in a double-feature. Like so many of them, this film was made by a tiny independent studio.Steve Nichols is a man who was just released from prison on parole. He claims that he was set up for a an investment fraud scheme and soon begins shacking up with a prostitute. While none of this is explicitly stated, it is easy to see that this is indeed the case. This sort of film plot is one that only could have been made before the film industry's Production Code was strengthened in 1934—as prostitution and the like are topics taboo under the new system.At first Nichols has a hard time getting a job because of his past. However, a shady investment firm offer him a job—figuring Nichols will make an excellent fall-guy! Soon after this a guy named Tom shows up looking for Nichols. His family was ruined in the original stock scheme that sent Nichols to prison—and he wants revenge. Nichols feels sorry for him and invites him to stay and even gets him a job with his new firm. In the process, Tom has no idea his benefactor is Nichols. When Tom learns that his new friend is Nichols, he assumes the worst and doesn't realize that once again Nichols is being set up for something he didn't do. When Nichols does find out, he tries to stop his bosses from absconding with the money.I know this all sounds very confusing—and it is. Perhaps the film could have used a re-write to make this all come off as a bit more believable…but at least it is different. As for the acting, it's a mixed lot—some very good and some noticeably poor. While it's not a film to rush out to see, at least it's never boring.