Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

Sexylocher Masterful Movie

GarnettTeenage The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

mark.waltz If the beaded drapes she appears in back of don't give an indication of her cheapness, the thick lipstick and clumped eye shadow will. She's Sadie Thompson, a dame whose reputation shadows her like a moral barricade. She drinks whiskey out of the bottle, sports an ankle bracelet and jangles when she walks. Playing this hard boiled broad is superstar Joan Crawford, desperately trying to be an actress, not a personality, and at the time failed miserably.As 85 years have gone by, how does this second of three screen versions of Somerset Maugham's dramatic expose, "Sadie Thompson", which is a tale of attempted reformation and betrayal which threatens to destroy her soul even more. When confronted by doctor of theology Walter Huston over her immoral lifestyle, the awkwardness in her performance appears, trying too hard to look ashamed in her soul but rebellious. The photography on her eyes is often harsh, and certain closeups make her look cross-eyed.There's no quibbling over the strong and determined performance by Walter Huston, one of the greatest screen actors ever. He is commanding, even when demanding towards Crawford. He's obviously intent on showing the humanity and godliness behind his blunt hypocrisies, and that makes his complex characterization so watchable. In her second film, Beulah Bondi adds another nasty character to her resume, having played the nasty gossip Mrs. Jones the year before in the film version of "Street Scene". Squawking like an agitated hen, she's even more judgmental than her husband. But there's a twist, and with husband Huston's destruction comes hers.An early example of the art house film, this is a role that Joan was perfect for, but psychologically not ready for. Less strong, perhaps because their characters are secondary, are William Gargan as the marine sergeant who steps up to defend her, and funny man Guy Kibbee as the owner of the Pago Pago resort she's stuck in. It's an interesting failure, perhaps too depressing and sordid, and one of those films that you want to praise the leading lady in, but are held back. Joan delivers the lines with gusto, but the soul she needs to unleash seems somehow locked. Not at all creaky, it flows nicely with strong direction by Lewis Milestone, and is absolutely gorgeous to look at. Like "Of Human Bondage" just two years later for Bette Davis, this is too deep and emotionally overwrought to love, but can't be missed as it shows the ambitions of an art needy Hollywood that didn't fully click.

earlytalkie Joan Crawford herself reportedly did not like her performance in this 1932 United Artists film, but today, her portrayal of the prostitute Sadie Thompson stands out as a highlight of her early carrer. She is quite believable and even touching as she is transformed from low hussy to a redeemed woman. Walter Huston gives a good performance as Mr. Davidson, the "reformer" who cannot stand the evil imbued into Miss Thompson. Beulah Bondi is mostly a hateful prude as Davidson's wife, a change of pace from her usual nice Motherly portrayals. Guy Kibbee is quite good as Mr. Horn, the owner of the "general store" where the group is staying. The camera work is quite remarkable for an early talkie, and the print as shown on the Alpha disc is in a beautiful condition compared to some I've seen. The first time I saw this was on a tiny UHF station in Chicago, from the cut-down 77 minute print. Be sure and see this in the uncut 94 minute version to get the full impact of what audiences saw in 1932. This film was considered a flop in that year and Miss Crawford took some heat as there were a few critics who did not think much of her performance, but, as I said, she seems completely natural in the part as seen today. People who think of Miss Crawford as mannish and bitchy in some of her later portrayals should catch her here. When she was young she was something else. And that something is pretty damned good.

Jaco Wium (jacowium) MINOR SPOILERS AHEADAs a person who fell in with the overtly religious crowd and later (but very gradually) fell out of that crowd again, I found the premise of "Rain" very intriguing. I didn't push the DVD into the player with high expectations though, knowing that such contentious themes are often treated with soft gloves by the entertainment industry. Having seen it now, I am happy to say that it is a movie well worth seeing, if you're interested in issues like mankind and morality. The production team certainly didn't hold back on their message.Other viewers may be left with other impressions, but to me a central message of "Rain" was: if we choose to wear masks instead of presenting our own selves to the world, those masks are bound to crack at some stage.Other reviewers mentioned quite rightfully that the extremely sudden conversions portrayed, seem a tad suspect - not only in behaviour but also in appearance. For instance, Sadie Thompson's hairstyles change rather dramatically overnight. This is a movie adapted from a play though, and we have to accept the dramatic license that film-makers need in order to secure the viewer's attention for some 90 minutes. If we insist on everything being realistic, movies like these would exceed 6 hours. And due to the already dialogue-heavy narrative, there is no choice but to take a few short cuts.I certainly do not want to fault Mrs. Crawford's performance as the pivotal character here - she gives a suitably strong performance in my opinion. I can however understand some commentators' criticisms, even if I feel them a bit harsh. A Carole Lombard or a Bette Davis (not to fan the flames of the real-life Joan-vs-Bette animosity here) may have brought a bit more physical swagger to the role, and perhaps saved the film from some of the negative judgements it received back in 1932.Props to director Milestone and the crafty editors for the memorable "Crawford entrance" near the beginning and ends of the film. It is the kind of cinematic thrill that latter-day directors seem to struggle to match. The soft lighting used on Crawford in one segment of the film, and harsher lighting in other segments, were very effective too.I found "Rain" satisfying as a cinematic product, and even more satisfying as a film with philosophical substance. The latter is better discussed in the message boards.

evening1 Joan Crawford is mesmerizing in this extremely dated film on a time-honored theme -- men of stellar reputation and the women they lust after (think "Hunchback of Notre Dame" and "Measure for Measure").Unlike other reviewers, I don't think we need assume she's a whore here. (Crawford's character dresses sexily in a stereotypically tropical locale, and she's comfortable and casual with men, but to me that needn't equal prostitute.) Walter Huston should have been directed better. I got a little tired of his one-note, stentorian harangues. What's more, he might have shown more inner struggle before the penultimate scene in which he steals away into Crawford's chamber. Was I alone in finding his lustful act a bit of a non sequitur? Perhaps the best thing about this film, along with Crawford's insouciance, is its dusky mood. An expert depiction of atmosphere as a major character in a drama!