The Age of Commercialism

Thanks for the memories!

Good movie but grossly overrated

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Routed from a rather sleazy carnival sideshow (avec pickpocket) by the police, three actors reform as a theft ring with O'Grady's Bird Shop as a front. Customers who purchase the birds will soon experience home invasions. The three are Echo the ventriloquist (Lon Chaney), Strongman Hercules (Ivan Linow), and Midget a/k/a Tweedledee (Harry Earles). Echo poses as the old granny, Hercules pretends to be her son-in-law, and Midget – dressing in the baby's garb – acts as her very young grandson. In addition, the pert Rosie O'Grady (Lila Lee) is the sideshow pickpocket who later helps run O'Grady's; her dupe shop clerk and pet delivery boy is Hector (Elliott Nugent). There is even a "gorilla" to control the wild Hercules. Complications ensue when Hercules and Midget commit murder while stealing priceless jewels – against Echo's orders – and Rosie falls in love with Hector. So pinning the crime on Hector presents the impediment. There is both humor and suspense. See the scene when the detective visits the phony family around the Christmas holidays and picks up and shakes the "baby's" elephant that contains the jewels. Also, note the trial scene where Hector plays with a note unaware that it has to be read quickly to avert a deadly verdict.The film is a remake of the 1925 silent movie that plays almost the same, scene for scene, with a few minor changes. Lon Chaney and Earles each replicate their original roles. Chaney, as usual, is the master at acting (his only talkie) and makeup, and Lila Lee is appropriately cute and sexy. But much of the cast is mediocre. Because the Germanic Earles is incoherent, this writer had to view the movie in closed captioning to understand him (and the Latvian Linow). One additional point: the very last scene, with Chaney waving (to the viewers?) from the departing train seems to be symbolic of his impending death. Surely he must have known that he was dying, as he did less than two months after the movie's release.

I sure wish I could see both the 1925 and the 1930 version one after the other to compare them. I did see both--but over a year apart. Oddly, while most people seem to feel that the earlier version is the better of the two, I can't help but think that maybe the latter on is better--but again, seeing them together could help me decide if perhaps my recollection is incorrect. Considering that the first was directed by Tod Browning, I sure would think it would be the better of the two, but I just don't remember being as bowled over by it.Both versions of THE UNHOLY THREE are very, very similar. The plot is very similar and in many cases they match scene for scene. Plus, two of the three Unholies are the same actors (Lon Chaney and Harry Earles). Now I am going to recommend something that really will enhance your appreciation of the 1930 version. As I am hard of hearing, I usually have the closed captions turned on and so when the heavily accented Earles spoke, I could tell exactly what he was saying. But being a midget with a high-pitched voice and German, I know even people with 100% normal hearing would struggle to understand all his lines. Audiences of 1930 must have felt the same way, though I am glad they still had him in the movie because he was such a malevolent little creature! I especially like how the ending was changed a bit--having Earles deliberately let the gorilla out instead of it just escaping. This diminutive man made for one of the more evil characters in film history.I was particularly impressed with Lon Chaney in this film. While he was afflicted with lung cancer while he made the film, you can't tell by his performance and his voice was less affected than you might assume by the illness. His incredibly craggy and rather ugly face actually suited the character perfectly and despite having a reputation as a master of pantomime, you can see that had he lived he could have easily been a huge talking pictures star.The plot is pretty much as the original, so I am not going to repeat it. Instead, there were a few changes. First, the gorilla is obviously a guy in a gorilla suit. This isn't as realistic as the 1925 ape, but for a fake ape, it's better than most. Plus I guess you can't blame them for not using a real gorilla--that might have proved to be a bit messy. Also, while the ending still pulls its punches a bit (you don't get to see the strong man killed--just everything leading up to it), it is pretty sick to watch Earles (whose head is off camera) being strangled to death! Pretty potent for 1930, though not super-surprising considering the Production Code had not yet been strengthened.Overall, the film is exciting, well-paced and is one of the better scary films of the age. Well worth seeing and very little I would have changed in the story.

LON CHANEY delivers an interesting performance (especially when posing as a kindly old woman), but not even the great Chaney can overcome all the defects in this remake of the 1925 silent.For starters, the performances around him include two extremely bad examples of early screen acting--from awkward Lila Lee and a young man who would later turn his talent to directing rather than acting--Elliot Nugent. Nugent has the hapless role of an innocent, naive young man and plays it in hopelessly nerd style--a foretaste, perhaps, of his Broadway role as the timid professor in THE MALE ANIMAL. Anyway, his is the weakest performance in the film with Lila not far behind.The tale itself is interesting enough to hold the attention--and especially chilling is the malice (pure evil) displayed by Harry Earle as the malevolent midget. Unfortunately, most of his dialogue is unintelligible due to his German accent, something director Jack Conway should have noted.Only real satisfaction is watching Lon Chaney in one of his last roles. He is excellent and makes it painful to realize he was fighting throat cancer while filming was underway. A better script, production values, and tighter direction by Conway would have worked wonders to make this tale more chilling and believable. Summing up: At best, it is an interesting example of Chaney's considerable talent despite the primitive acting technique displayed by Lila Lee and Elliot Nugent. Nugent's performance makes one grateful he switched to directing later in his career, with more satisfying results.

Two things I like about this film, nevermind it's historic significance. It's just plain mean! A classic example of on screen bitchiness among the whole cast. Harry The midget pinches Lila Lee not out of lasciviousness, but with utter contempt. Echo loves her, but is really mean as well.And the fact that Lila Lee is smokin' hot, and does an incredible stunt, tumbling down an embankment then running out into the road crying for help,. Wow!