Rio Hayward
All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Nayan Gough
A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.
Nicole
I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
JohnHowardReid
Director: WILLIAM NIGH. Continuity and dialogue: Harry Fraser. Story: Lee Sage. Photography: Edward Linden. Film editor: Holbrook Todd. Settings: Tec-Art Studios. Assistant director: Harry Fraser. Sound recording: B.J. Kroger. Associate producer: George M. Merrick. Presented by Louis Weiss. Produced by Supreme Sound Pictures (President: Alfred T. Mannon). Distributed by Weiss Bros., Artclass Pictures, Corp. No recorded New York opening. U.S. release: 2 January 1932. 66 minutes. SYNOPSIS: Peter Marlan is a professional gambler who works both sides of the border. When his brother, a Texas Ranger, is killed, Pete sets out to discover the killers. Along the way, he discovers that Bernie Donovan is actually...COMMENT: Although a bit rough at the edges (partly due to a few minutes of discarded footage), this is one of the best westerns of the year. And no wonder! It has a great story with interesting characters enacted by a great cast, produced on a fair-sized budget using some really atmospheric locations and sets, and it's directed with power by William Nigh, a top "A"-feature director in the 1920s, who was just beginning his descent into the "B" league. Ideally cast, Harry Carey gives one of his most impressive performances as the reluctant hero. Although his role is much smaller, Gibson Gowland is almost overpoweringly ferocious as the sadistic villain, while Mary Jane Irving enacts his victim so appealingly that we share every terrifying minute of her ordeal. AVAILABLE on a very good Platinum disc DVD.
MartinHafer
Although fans of John Wayne's films will remember Harry Carey for his wonderful supporting roles, earlier in his career Carey had actually been a leading man--with many leading man roles in silent and talkies which included cowboy films as well as movies like "Trader Horn" and "Last of the Mohicans". "Without Honor" is one of his westerns where he was given the lead. Sadly, however, despite his nice and natural acting style that sets it apart from the average film in the genre, so much about the film is terrible that I just cannot recommend it for anyone.When the film begins, Pete Marlan (Carey) meets up with his brother, a Texas Ranger. It soon becomes obvious that Pete is the black sheep of the family. While not exactly a criminal, he's a tough gambler who is far from law abiding. But when the brother is murdered, Pete joins the Rangers and goes in search of justice.Why is this such a bad film? Well, the plot is extremely standard and offers few surprises...but what really bothered me while watching it is the acting and direction. For example, early in the film, Carey flubs a line (even fine actors do this on occasion) but the director didn't even bother re-doing the line! Additionally, Bernice (played by Mary Jane Irving) is a shrill and stupid character due to the bad acting and writing in the film. In fact, Irving's acting is so bad that I found myself laughing when she delivered some of her over-wrought lines! Another example of bad writing is when the baddies reveal the entire plan as Pete is hiding in the shadows! Who does this sort of exposition?! After all, the two guys KNEW what was happening--so why did they talk about it and the plan?! Overall, a dopey film that I wanted to like.
winner55
Every now and then you find a real gem in the rough among the old genre films.This is the toughest-minded Western of its type I've ever seen. There are elements here prophetic of the 'adult Western' that would come into its own in the '50s, and some elements are suggestive of what became the 'film noir' of the '40s. As a gambler out to avenge his brother's murder (really a precursor of the 'anti-hero' type that would dominate Westerns in the '60s), Harry Carey gives a bravura performance: Marlin (Carrey) is on his way to meet the gang leader. Mary: Oh, that's dangerous! Marlin: Huh? Mary: That's dangerous. Marlin (pushing his hat forward): Gosh, I hope so.Mary. BTW, is Marlin's old flame, a woman of questionable repute who has married a bad man after being widowed and who gave her daughter away - a daughter raised by an alcoholic who beats her.Yeah, this is not one for the kiddies. Consider for instance the fist-fights - typical barrel-house round swinging, broken chairs, etc, right? Wrong. How about close order efforts to get behind the other guy and knock him down with a gun butt. Fighting fair is for people who don't like to win.Short, dark and handsomely made, this film is light on genre conventions and hard on impact. Absolutely remarkable for it's period. 1932? Absolutely remarkable.
FightingWesterner
Slick gambler Harry Carey returns from cleaning up in Mexico to find his younger brother, a Texas Ranger, murdered by a gang of smugglers and in possession of a letter implicating himself in criminal activity. Carey pins on the slain man's badge, setting out to clear his brother's name and nab the killers.In all, this is a very typical, ordinary low-budget production and is often quite turgid. However, this benefits greatly from a fantastic performance by Carey, who even in an impoverished movie such as this, has much screen presence. Co-star Mary Jane Irving is awfully pretty too, even though she overacts just a tad.Carey and Irving, along with some good scenery and sets, all make this a lot more entertaining than it should have been.The last scene has a joking reference to Scarface, another 1932 release!
