Dynamite

DeMille works wonders with his first "talkie," avoiding the complications most directors encountered during this transition period. The cinematography, sound and set design are excellent, and the acting toned down the over-dramatization that most early "sound" films wallowed in. Just view DeMille's "King of Kings," directed two years earlier, to witness the advancements being made in film at the time. From the elaborate Deco rooms, to a shanty neighborhood and mine shaft, DeMille puts on quite a show. My only complaint would be the opening courtroom scene, which definitely does NOT set the scene for the rest of the movie. I wonder if those "aero wheels" were indeed a trend in Europe at the time; obviously, the sport didn't catch on.

Dynamite (1929)

*** (out of 4)

Cecil B. DeMille's first talkie was the first of three pictures that the legendary director would make at MGM. The filthy rich Cynthia (Kay Johnson) needs to be married on her birthday or else she'll lose millions from her grandfather's will. The only problem is that her boyfriend (Conrad Nagel) is already married to a woman who doesn't mind her husband dating Cynthia but she refuses to marry him unless the money is right. On the other side of the tracks, convicted killer Hagon (Charles Bickford) is about to be put to death and offers his body for $10,000 so that his kid sister will be taken care of. Cynthia decides to marry the death row inmate so that she can be "married" on her birthday and since she'll be a widow soon after she can get back to her normal life. The only problem is that after the marriage the real killer comes forward and Hagon is set free.

Is that enough plot for you? DYNAMITE features enough plots for about ten different movies and everything I wrote above is just the opening forty-minutes and that leaves eighty-seven more minutes of craziness. This is without question an incredibly bizarre film but there's no question that it's highly entertaining on so many levels. One such level is that it's just downright nuts from start to finish and I just sat there watching it in a complete amazement that anyone could actually pull it off. DeMille proves what a genius he was by taking this outrageous stories and making them work. If any other director had tried this we'd laugh them right out of the theater. I'm not sure what DeMille's secrets were but he makes us care about the characters and their fate. It also doesn't hurt that we're given some excellent performances with Bickford leading the way as the tough coal miner. This is the type of role he could play in his sleep and he pulls it off wonderfully. Johnson is very believable and good in her part as is Nagel. Julia Faye plays his wife and we get supporting performances from Joel McCrea and William Holden.

DYNAMITE features some very campy moments including the scene where the killer confesses to the crime. I dare you not to laugh during this sequence. I also found it rather hilarious how casual the wife, her husband and the lover were at hanging out with each other. I think this threesome relationship is something that even Jerry Springer would roll his eyes at. Still, this is so entertaining that it really doesn't matter and it would make a great double feature with DeMille's other 1929 film, THE GODLESS GIRL.

One of the best of the early de Mille works - given that most of those films featured the same stable of actors. You get to see the last glimpses of that Golden Age before the stock market crash led to the Depression (when a relay comprised of women rolling themselves along a track inside giant hoops passed for racing excitement, probably since horse racing, like alcohol, had been banned in the US at that time) Stunning costumes and Art Deco details (lucite and sequins and pincurls, oh my!) provide welcome diversion from the inconceivable plot - although the two female leads and their society set planning one's divorce so the other can marry the ex-husband is racy!

Of interest especially is the fact that you can recognize the stage training of many of the actors brought to Hollywood with the advent of sound, and how wooden previously silent actors can be when given voice. Also interesting is the characters' flagrant flouting of Prohibition, which still had 4 years left - after all, this was "pre-Code" Hollywood when there wasn't a censor to be found!

Most significant is the sound. The scene which annoys modern viewers is the chaos in the jailhouse wedding scene. However, this is one of the first instances of layered sound: the hammering of the gallows over the prisoner's singing over the wedding vows was a first for a medium that had gone talkie only a year & a half earlier.

So watch it for the details, not the drama

... are clearly illustrated here in a tale that includes a fascinating look at the idle rich at the end of the roaring 20's who are so bored that they'll try anything for a thrill, owe their income to forefathers long dead, and basically play all night and sleep all day. But that's just the set-up for the real story.

Ordinarily I'm not that huge a fan of DeMille, but I found his first foray into sound, "Dynamite", a very good and innovative film. The actors don't speechify endlessly, the camera moves, and the story moves with it. Unlike many films from 1929 it's worth a repeat viewing for the entertainment value, not just the novelty of seeing an industry in transition.

That doesn't mean that there isn't plenty of an industry in transition on exhibit, but rather than inane musical numbers, De Mille uses sound appropriately and also employs largely unknown actors from the stage to keep the emphasis on the plot and in particular, the relationships. From the hammering of the builders of Hagan Dirk's gallows and the singing of "How Am I to Know" by a fellow death row prisoner played by Russ Columbo during the wedding scene, to the strange aero wheel race at the country club, to the playing of a particular song on the radio introducing a romantic moment, this film was an innovative technological marvel when it was first released. However, technological marvels fade with time, and what you do remember are relationships that hit home and are memorable. Many have already stated the outrageous premise of the plot. What is not outrageous and rings true after almost 85 years is how you don't get to pick who you love - it just happens and it can often be most inconvenient, and how heroes can be found in the strangest places and in people you would not think would be up to the task.

I'd recommend this one highly and not just to early talkie enthusiasts.

Utterly insane story but so phenomenally well made, even though it's from 1929, it's brilliantly entertaining. This experience completely changed my opinion of De Mille - ok, it seems he was a genius after all!

Maybe because of his pompous and pretentious vats of nauseating drivel such as SIGN OF THE CROSS, I instinctively avoid the self-professed great man's movies. But his excellent FOUR FRIGHTENED PEOPLE and MADAM SATAN tempted me to give this ago. So glad I did - it's fantastic, honestly it's a million times better than I was expecting.

There's exceptions of course but I'd normally expect a 1929 talkie to be terrible. Early talkies are generally static and stagey with theatrical actors taking it in turns to enunciate their lines very, very slowly huddled around a hidden microphone. This displays absolutely none of those tell-tale traits. You'll not believe it's De Millie's first talkie! It's so dynamic and as far removed from a studio bound film as you can imagine. Clearly hours and hours of preparation went into this to get it just perfect. Like much more modern films, the camera doesn't simply point at whichever character is speaking. You get cut-always to bystanders showing and hearing their reactions. It's a proper film, not a filmed stage play.

These are people from the 1920s, real people from 1929 so don't expect them to be like us (which is part of the appeal of watching old pictures) but nevertheless the acting in this is natural with characters speaking normally and as in Mamoulian's APPLAUSE, sound is employed virtually another character. An example of that is the portentous beating of the hammer making 'Derk's' scaffold as he's waiting on death row which ominously returns in the dramatic climax.

This is not typical 1929 acting. You're drawn into believing that you're not watching actors but somehow glimpsing into the lives of real people. I've never really rated Charles Bickford before but under a skilful director he's a revelation. A pretty odd sort of guy but one who captivates your attention.

Being as I am, Mr Shallow, my inclination is to watch films with sexy ladies like Joan Blondell or Alice White so I wouldn't normally go out of my way to watch Kay Johnson but like with Charles Bickford she's thoroughly outstanding here. She's a sort of less sexy version of Norma Shearer but in my opinion a more modern and naturalistic actress - dare I say a better actress? I've already enjoyed her performance in MADAM SATAN but now that I've unexpectedly become a fan, I'm going to search out the rest of her work.

A great director, excellent acting and exceptionally high MGM production values make the maddest, silliest story into something quite amazing. Sorry Cecil for doubting you for all these years!

Being made in 1929 we even get the extended roaring of Leo the lion at the start.