Curtain at Eight (1933)

Expected more

Captivating movie !

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Movies like this make me appreciate the technical categories of Academy Awards. In this case, especially film editing and camera work. Both come into question in "Curtain at Eight," along with directing. The cast is mostly OK in this early "B" level mystery, but no one particularly shines in his or her role. The bombastic Sam Hardy stands out some in his role as Martin Galllagher, chief of detectives. Dislikable as he is, his braggadocio helps viewers see the clear difference in the abilities of the two policemen. That probably was intended in the script. We are supposed to like C. Aubrey Smith as the more calm and collected detective, Jim Hanvey. Smith is OK, but there is nothing special in his or any of the other performances. The plot of this film is interesting, and is what kept me watching. But a number of disconnects makes it difficult to follow at times. It jumps around between abrupt scene breaks and suffers from lack of cohesion. Again, that may be the editing. The ending is rather abrupt as well. And though it leaves us with a sense of justice having been achieved, it also reinforces doubt about the police work. And, the character of the police. The production quality is very poor, and even a digital remastering of this film couldn't improve it enough to make it a good movie to recommend. One other reviewer noted the retort by the reporter, Terry Mooney (played by Russell Hopton), to a boastful comment by Gallagher. "Says Hitler!?" surely says a lot about the times. Hitler had only just risen to power in Germany the previous year. The press on him was obviously good enough that the folks in Hollywood already perceived him as a liar and untrustworthy. But then, we should remember that a number of entertainers, writers and other artists were among the early people to flee the Nazis, in the early 1930s.

The set up of the mystery is pretty conventional. An over-amorous leading man (Paul Cavanagh as Wylie Thornton) feels like he must mate with every woman between 18 and 35 who crosses his path. All the while he's telling each of them that she is the only one for him. In one case though Wylie over-achieves and actually marries one of the women (Natalie Moorhead as Alma). That is a mystery in itself since Wylie is quite the social climber yet when he marries he does so with his secretary, the two are not living together, and he treats her badly but expects her to keep their marriage a secret. Even stranger is she DOES keep their secret and continues on as his secretary! But Natalie Moorhead does shine in the part of the wife. She sleeps with Wylie when the urge hits her then ridicules him in the morning and demands extra spending money. Maybe that's why he seems to hate her so much - she's the only one of his women who seems to see him for the not so wily ham actor that he is.When Wylie is shot at his birthday party after the lights go out, there are a multitude of suspects. Two detectives are brought in on the case - Martin Gallagher (Sam Hardy), a young detective, is in charge. His subordinate, Jim Hanvey (C. Aubrey Smith), is a much older man. The younger detective is always going off half cocked and jumping to conclusions, and the older detective is methodical and does not confront the younger detective about his careless methods. He just investigates in his own quiet way. In the end, when the younger detective thinks he has solved the crime, Hanvey lets him believe he is right and take the credit because it doesn't mean false arrest for anyone (I'll let you watch and see what I mean), plus, as Hanvey tells the actual killer, he would have done the same in their shoes. Thus the ending is definitely precode in that an actual killer goes unpunished.The unexpected history lesson I was talking about is when one of the reporters is hounding the younger detective for information. When the younger detective tells the reporter something he thinks is ridiculous his retort is "says Hitler!". I guess a popular alternative phrase in 1933 would have been "nuts to you". In other words, in 1933 at least, Hitler was seen as just a buffoonish little man.I'd recommend this as one of the better poverty row productions I've seen. It really is a showcase for C. Aubrey Smith, who usually played supporting roles in films at the bigger studios. Just don't expect much in the way of sets because these smaller studios didn't have the money for such niceties.

"Curtain At Eight" is only 61 minutes long, and I can't figure out if that's an asset or a detriment. It should have been longer to allow more plot development and it suffers from an editing problem - some scenes seem to be out of sequence and continuity suffers as a result.On the other hand, maybe it's a blessing it was wrapped up quickly, as the production in general and the acting in particular is too stagey. There were no exterior shots and I thought that Sam Hardy, as the Detective Captain, nearly sank the whole picture with his outrageous overacting and obnoxious demeanor. He detracted from every scene he was in. C. Aubrey Smith and the female actresses were quite good, and the women were attractive (always enjoy watching Dorothy Mackaill), given that this was 1933, and this was an early 30's production through and through.The mystery was above average and accounted for my rating - after all, the play's the thing, right? It was a whodunnit right up until the final scene, and with lots of suspects to choose from. Interesting and marginally entertaining.

This is going to stick in my head as the movie with the chimp and a gun. As for the rest of it I'm not too sure. The plot of the film has a cad of an actor going around romancing all the ladies. Several fall for his charms, including the chimp, unfortunately someone puts an end to his romancing when he's shot during a party in the theater for his birthday. Two detectives, an really annoying young one who jumps to conclusions and an older one who is slow and plodding get onto the case and try to figure out who shot the cad. Okay mystery takes a long while to get going, indeed it's almost half over before the murder occurs and then the film kind of runs around from pillar to post trying to unravel what happened. Actually the younger detective goes running around and shifts the tone from one of slowly unfolding drama/mystery to silly comedic mystery. While the soapy set up to the murder kind of threw me since I expected a different sort of film, I did fall into it and was rather enjoying myself until the Nimrod detective showed up. Personally I much preferred the older gentleman who managed to fit in to the pace of the proceedings and who's quiet demeanor hid a man who knows more than he says. I wish we had more time with him. Over all an okay film, worth a look see if you run across it, though I'd try to pair it with something else.