'Guilty Hands' turns mystery tropes upside down

Guilty Hands (1931)
Starring: Lionel Barrymore, Kay Francis, Madge Evans, Alan Mowbray, William Blakewell, and C. Aubrey Smith
Director: W.S. Van Dyke and Lionel Barrymore

Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

Richard Grant (Barrymore), a former district attorney now in private law practice, conceives and commits the perfect murder to protect his naïve daughter (Evans) from a long-time client who is a sociopathic monster (Mowbray). 

"Guilty Hands" is one of those films that turns the standard tropes of detective stories upside down. Not only do we know who committed the murder and why, but the authority figure directing the investigation is also the murderer and all he's doing is shoring up the idea that his staged suicide WAS suicide and that there is no other explanation that his victim killed himself.

The tension in the plot arises from the viewers wanting Grant to get away with his crime, because the man he murdered was a piece of garbage that needed to be taken out, but also from the knowledge that Grant is a killer and he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. There's also the minor mystery as to how Grant managed to make it appear as if he was in his rooms even as he was committing murder... a question that the one character who suspects the truth--the victim's long-time lover Marjorie (Kay Francis)--sets out to answer, even as Grant is convincing everyone, including the police, that his version of events is the only possible explanation. The stakes are upped when Marjorie finds the evidence she is looking for, but will it be enough to overcome Grant's expertly staged "suicide" and the high regard he is held in? (There are a couple other twists that keep the tension growing as the film unfolds--and the ultimate conclusion remains in doubt until, literally, the film's final moment.)

From the mysterious, somewhat disorienting opening shot and dialogue through the dramatic climax "Guilty Hands" moves along at such a rapid clip that it's 69-minute runtime feels much shorter; there isn't a second wasted on things that don't either establish characters and/or drive the narrative forward. Although this is without question Lionel Barrymore and Kay Francis's movie--they have the best scenes and lines, and when they're playing off each other, they give us the film's most dramatic moments--but the rest of the cast is also perfect in their parts. 

Madge Evans, as the young lady who is about to make the biggest mistake of her life, is so charming and likable; and Alan Mowbray, as the truly awful man who uses and disposes of women as casually as he does paper napkins, is so smarmy and downright obnoxious both give such excellent performances that the audience accepts Grant's notion that some murders are not only morally justifiable but necessary. Evans and Mowbray may not be the stars, but they provide the fuel for Barrymore and Francis's explosive performances and thus are every bit as important to the film's overall greatness. (Francis also has a scene with Mowbray that is among one of the film's highlights, where Francis and Mowbray act out a scene that solidifies just how vile a character the soon-to-be murder victim is.)

With all the praise I'm heaping on the actors and the story of this film, why is it only getting a Seven of Ten? Because for all the excellence here, there are some really baffling displays of technical incompetence d craftsmanship so inept that amateurs might have been embarrassed to have the work be seen by the public.

First, there are several instances of sloppy editing that causes minor continuity errors (like characters repeating the same actions twice in row), and moments of actors standing still and waiting for someone to shout "Actions!" or starting to relax after "Cut!" has been exclaimed. Second, and far worse, is the laughably bad sound design. I realize sound was new, but the frequently recurring sounds of thunder in this film sound like something you might expect to hear in a community theatre, but which is completely laughable in a film featuring major stars that was made by a major studio. In fact, the thunder in this film is so bad that it couldn't have sound more phony if it was done on purpose. It would have completely undermined the second half of the movie if not for the excellent performances and tight script.

"Guilty Hands" is one of five films in the "Forbidden Hollywood Vol. 10" collection, and it is almost worth the price by itself.

'The New York Hat' crowns Mary Pickford's stint at Biograph

The New York Hat (1912)

Starring: Mary Pickford, Lionel Barrymore, Charles Hill Mailes, and Madge Kirby

Director: D.W. Griffith

Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

A village parson (Barrymore) triggers mean-spirited, self-righteous gossipers when he buys an expensive hat for a teenaged girl, Mollie (Pickford). 

I usually don't have the patience for silent dramas., especially the ones from the early 1910s. More often than not, when I try to watch one, I give up a few minutes in. I'm usually turned off by the pacing, the disorganized and uninspired staging of most scenes, and the style of acting which seems laughably over-the-top to my modern eyes.

When it comes to the dramatic short films helmed by director D.W. Griffith, however, I have yet to disappointed. He's three for three in holding my attention, as well as showing that he deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest directors of the silent film era.

Unlike many of his contemporaries, Griffith understood how to frame a scene and how to place actors within it to get the greatest impact; it's like he's creating paintings that move instead of just recording stage plays with indifferent blocking. And speaking of stage plays, Griffith also seemed to understand that if he just let stage actors give their usual kind of performances, he'd get all the impact that was needed, with the audience being more than able to pick up on the action. Griffith had a feel for the film media that was far superior to many of his contemporary, and this is why these short films are worth watching today.

And this is very much true of "The New York Hat". Aside from being a showcase for Griffith's ability to frame a scene, his ability to let actors be their very best is also on brilliant display here, with Mary Pickford convincingly portraying the hurt and excitement of a naïve young teen, despite the fact she was 20 when this film was made; and with Lionel Barrymore being allowed for the first time to show he could do more than comedy in film. (While this film was a first for Barrymore, it was a last for Pickford--it was the last film she'd make at the company that launched her film career in 1909... but far from her last collaboration with Griffith.)

In addition to great performances from its stars, "The New York Hat" is filled with other excellent performances, ranging from bit parts by customers at the hat shop to church elders; to minor players, such as the "mean girls" and the three town gossips; and supporting characters like the hat-shop clerk (Madge Kirby) and Mollie's skinflint, domineering father (Charles Hill Mailes). In fact, the only thing that isn't excellent about this film is the ending which is just a little too pat for my liking.

I invite you to take a few minutes out of your busy day and check out this great movie, right here from this post. 

The Addams Family was never as creepy as this father/daugher duo

Mark of the Vampire (aka "Vampires of Prague") (1935)
Starring: Lionel Barrymore, Lionel Atwill, Elizabeth Allen, Jean Hersholt, Henry Wadsworth, Donald Meek, Bela Lugosi, Caroll Borland, and Holmes Herbert
Director: Tod Browning
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

When a local nobleman (Herbert) is found dead, his body completely drained of blood, the villagers are certain that the vampires Count Mora (Lugosi) and his daughter Luna (Borland) have returned to spread more evil. However, Police Inspector Neumann (Atwill) refuses to believe in such superstitious nonsense as vampires--it IS after all 1935--and he searches for a more down-to-earth culprit. But when the nobleman's daugther (Allen) and her fiance (Wadsworth) come under attack, and the vampires being to menace the home of Baron Zinden (Hersholt), Neumann has to reconsider his sceptical ways and joins forces with the Baron and occult expert Professor Zelin (Barrymore) to destroy the vampires.


"Mark of the Vampire" is a fairly lighthearted mystery/horror movie, with some genuine chills thrown in for good measure. (The scene with Luna Mora winging her way across the vampire gathering while turning from bat into human is creepy as all get-out. In fact, every scene featuring Luna is creepy as all get-out!)

The actors here all to a good job, and the sets and lighting are all well-done. Although Lugosi has top-billing here, he really doesn't do much. He has a nice transformation scene after which he chases some terrified servants down a hallway, and his closing scene is hilariously self-referential, but otherwise all he does is stand around and grimmace. Borland even gets to be scarier than Lugosi.

The overall story isn't anything surprising, even by 1935 standards, but the final-act twist was not one that I saw coming. Its presence was welcomed, and it actually made the movie far more entertaining for me. I would have liked to have gotten a bit more background on the Moras--why does the Count have a bullet wound in his head?--but that may have overburdened the simple story that is already having to bear the above-mentioned twist.

(Speaking of that twist, it probably wasn't all that surprising to the audiences in 1935. It was standard in those days to provide down-to-earth explanations of anything that appeared supernatural in a film. The Lugosi-starring and Browning-directed "Dracula" from 1931 was the first movie to break that standard.)

"Mark of the Vampire" isn't the greatest of the 1930s thrillers, but it's still worthwhile viewing. And it's one of the six movies included in the "Hollywood Legends of Horror" DVD collection, which does include several must-see classics like The Mask of Fu Manchu and Mad Love.