This poor excuse for a film is truly dreadful. It doesn't even deserve 1 out 10. It should get a zero because there is nothing in it that merits it being called a movie. I don't know what it is, but it's not a movie.
Charles Laughton appears 52 minutes into the film, but his presence adds nothing to the project. It has multiple writers and directors, but it is a waste of talent and expertise. Clearly, filmmaking in the 1930s was primitive because 'Tales of Manhattan' did it better in 1942 which also featured Laughton. Although Edward G. Robinson stole the show in that ensemble piece, Laughton's performance in that film was far superior to this poorly made effort.
Not worth the money on DVD and I can see why it has not stood the test of time.
Charles Laughton appears 52 minutes into the film, but his presence adds nothing to the project. It has multiple writers and directors, but it is a waste of talent and expertise. Clearly, filmmaking in the 1930s was primitive because 'Tales of Manhattan' did it better in 1942 which also featured Laughton. Although Edward G. Robinson stole the show in that ensemble piece, Laughton's performance in that film was far superior to this poorly made effort.
Not worth the money on DVD and I can see why it has not stood the test of time.