"THE GLASS KEY" (1935) ReviewYears ago, I watched the 1942 adaptation of Dashiell Hammett's 1930-31 novel called "The Glass Key". At the time, I had no idea that there had been a previous adaptation. Then I stumbled across one - produced and released by the same movie studio, Paramount Pictures, back in 1935."THE GLASS KEY" told the story of Ed Beaumont, a gambler and the brainy aide of a crooked political boss named Paul Madvig. The latter plans to support the political campaign of the corrupt Senator John T. Henry and marry the latter's daughter Janet. Unfortunately, the senator's son, Taylor Henry, is a gambling addict who is in debt to a gangster named Shad O'Rory, a gangster whose club Paul intends to put out of business. Also, Taylor has been romancing Paul's younger sister, Opal Madvig, much to the political boss' dismay. When Ed finds Taylor's dead body not far from Paul's home, everyone begins to suspect him of murder. Ed begins an investigation to discover Taylor's true killer, much to the displeasure of not only O'Rory, but also the Henry family and Paul.I have read a few reviews of "THE GLASS KEY". Most of the reviews seemed to be of the opinion that it is more of a film noir than the 1942 version. To be honest, I did not make a big deal of trying to determine how much of a noir movie it was. I was too busy trying to maintain my interest in the story. What can I say? The plot seemed pretty damn good. And screenwriters Kathryn Scola and Kubec Glascom, along with dialogue scribe Harry Ruskin did a very solid job of adapting Hammett's novel. Sure, they made a few nips and tucks in the narrative. But overall, I had no real problems with the story.The performances in "THE GLASS KEY" struck me as pretty solid. I thought the most memorable performances came from Edward Arnold as political boss Paul Madvig, Claire Dodd as Janet Henry, Guinn Williams as the O'Rory thug Jeff, and Ray Milland as the privileged and weak senator's son, Paul Henry. All gave very interesting performances. Rosalind Keith, Charles Richman and Robert Glecker also gave solid performances as Opal Madvig, Senator Henry and Shad O'Rory. One would notice that I have not said anything about lead actor George Raft. Before one assumes that I have a low opinion of his performance . . . I do not. I thought he did a pretty solid job, even if there were moments he came off as slightly wooden. He certainly did a pretty good job in carrying the film.So, if I had no problems with the movie's narrative and the acting . . . why did I find it so difficult to maintain my interesting in the film? I have to lay most of the blame on director Frank Tuttle. I found his direction of the film rather dull and lifeless. Boring. It is a miracle that the cast managed to rise above his insipid direction. In fact, I find it a crime that a director could make a movie with a first-rate narrative and an eighty minute running time so dull and slow. Even the famous scene in which Ed Beaumont suffered a beating at the hands of Jeff the Thug came off as slightly dull.Another problem I had with "THE GLASS KEY" proved to be its production values. Just because a movie has been labeled as a film noir does not mean I had to spend most of the film trying to make out the shapes and figures on the screen. There were plenty of moments when I could barely make out the images on the screen, due to Henry Sharp's photography. I found it incredibly dark at times. Sharp's dim photography was not helped by Hans Dreier and A. Earl Hedrick's art direction for this film. I was less than impressed by the film's production designs and art direction. The entire film looked as if it had been produced as an off-Broadway stage play. I have seen Warner Brothers B-movies released three or four years earlier that looked more prestigious. When one combines dark photography with less-than-mediocre production designs, well . . . it does not look good for a movie based upon a first-rate novel by Dashiell Hammett."THE GLASS KEY" had plenty of virtues to offer - solid and excellent acting from a cast led by George Raft, and first-rate adaptation of Hammett's novel. It seems a pity that those virtues seemed wasted by the movie's mediocre production values, a slow pacing and limpid direction by Frank Tuttle. Oh well. It has been years since I saw the 1942 version of Hammett's story. It would be interesting to see how it fares in compare to this film.
"SADIE McKEE" (1934) Review
Back in the 1930s, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) was king of the Hollywood industry, thanks to the business and artistic acumen of Louis B. Mayer and Irving Thalberg. One major aspect of MGM that made it the most successful studio eighty years ago was its star system. The studio used to boast that it had "more stars than there are in heaven". One of its top stars was Hollywood icon, Joan Crawford.
Crawford first gained the notice of the MGM brass back in the mid-to-late 1920s. By the early 1930s, she had become a major star, whose metier was the "shopgirl-turned-Cinderella" story. This certainly seemed to be the case for her 1934 movie, "SADIE McKEE". Based upon Viña Delmar's 1933 short story, "Pretty Sadie McKee", this movie told the story of a young part-time serving maid from upstate New York, who moves to New York City with her n'er do well boyfriend, Tommy Wallace, to start a new life as a married couple. When Tommy abandons Sadie to become part of a nightclub act with a beautiful singer named Opal, Sadie is forced to take a job as a chorus girl at a nightclub. There, she meets a wealthy businessman named Jack Brennan, who falls hard for her. Although she marries Jack, Sadie realizes that she still loves Tommy and that her new husband is a serious alcoholic.
When I first saw "SADIE McKEE", I feared it would become another "EVELYN PRENTICE", an old and rather unsatisfying MGM melodrama that had been originally released during the same year. And I viewed "SADIE McKEE" with a jaundiced eye. I am happy to say that my wariness proved to be groundless . . . for about two-thirds of the film. I have to commend both director Clarence Brown and screenwriter John Meehan for setting up Sadie's story - her initial friendship with childhood companion Michael Alderson, attorney for her future husband; their falling out over Sadie's romance with Tommy; and her engagement to and abandonment of the latter. If I must be honest, Meehan's screenplay - at least two-thirds of it - proved not only to be detailed, but also well paced. Probably the best aspect of "SADIE McKEE" was its dark portrayal of alcoholism in the form of Sadie's husband, Jack Brennan. In a scene that I never came across in a movie made before 1950, the film revealed how excessive alcoholism could lead an affable man like Brennan commit a shocking act of violence against the leading lady.
I managed to enjoy and appreciate "SADIE McKEE" so much that I was surprised when the movie took a disappointing turn during its last fifteen to twenty. Two things occurred that I believe brought about the movie's downfall. Brennan finally became sober - a bit too early for my tastes - and Sadie discovered that her former fiancé, Tommy, was dying from tuberculosis. I honestly wish Brown and Meehan had either allowed Sadie's story with Brennan and Michael to last longer. In fact, I wish she had never re-entered Tommy's life in the first place. Their reunion at a hospital reeked with over-the-top sentimentality that bored me senseless. I believe in forgiveness as much as the next person - which is probably barely at all. But I thought Sadie's forgiveness of Tommy happened a little too quick for my taste. I also had a problem with the movie's last scene, which followed rather quickly on the heels of Tommy's death scene. I read other reviews of "SADIE McKEE" that claimed it ended with a romance between Sadie and Michael. Really? I certainly did not get that impression. I felt more of a renewed friendship between them.
The performances in "SADIE McKEE" more than made up for the movie's last act. Several bloggers have complained that leading lady Joan Crawford had failed to convey Sadie's innocence in the film's early scenes. I cannot agree with this assessment. I thought Crawford did a fine job in portraying the more innocent Sadie. More importantly, she expertly conveyed Sadie's developing character as the latter faced more troubles. Franchot Tone gave an earnest performance as Sadie's once and future friend, attorney Michael Alerson. On paper, his emotions seemed to be all over the map, but Tone skillfully kept his performance under control and did not allow his character's emotions to get the best of him. I have never been much of a Gene Raymond fan. In fact, the only movie I had previously seen him in was the 1933 musical, "FLYING DOWN TO RIO". Needless to say, I was not impressed. However, I was impressed by his portrayal of the charming, but shiftless Tommy in "SADIE McKEE". Raymond made it easy for me to understand Sadie's attraction to him.
Esther Ralston gave a funny, yet sympathetic performance as Sadie's dependable friend, Dolly Merrick. Jean Dixon gave a skillful performance as the charming, yet shallow songstress Opal, who lures Tommy to her act and later dumps him. Fans of the television series, "THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E." would be surprised to see Leo G. Carroll portray the butler in the Brennan household. I thought he gave a solid performance. But the movie's best performance came from Edward Arnold, who was outstanding as Sadie's alcoholic husband, Jack Brennan. Arnold once claimed that Brennan was his favorite role. It struck me as a difficult role for any actor to perform. But Arnold more than held his own in a skillful performance that revealed the best and the worst of this complex character. Personally, I feel that Arnold should have received an Academy Award nomination for his performance.
Despite the disappointing finale, I still managed to enjoy "SADIE McKEE". I would not regard it as one of the best films to star Joan Crawford. But aside from its maudlin finale, I found it fascinating. Director Clarence Brown, screenwriter John Meehan and a talented cast led by Crawford did a solid job in bringing the adaptation of Viña Delmar's short story to the screen.
