Vaudeville obviously was terrible

Color might of helped especially the last number,very badly choreographed.

I tried my hardest to put everything into context, but I just couldn't make it all the way through this.

I actually thought the first scene with something like 192 "dancers" was pretty well done given the limitations they had going for them, but the rest was pretty bad - some of the banter from the (or one of the) MCs/announcers was okay - very hammy, but some of it still held up.

The rest of what I watched - about 25 minutes, just didn't hold up.

I'm not sure it would have held up well in 1929 either - though perhaps the novelty of sound wouldn't have worn off yet or whoever the audience was would have found it entertaining at the time.

No, not the mind probe!

Totally agree - even the Keystone Cops had more dignity. Watching something like this hammed-up mess makes one seriously question the mentality of the 1920's moviegoer. No wonder that 'singing and dancing' in the movies went by the wayside. The only things that made this monstrosity worth watching were the short bits by Richard Barthelmess and Chester Morris.

Vaudeville wasn't known to be sophisticated, and if this movie is any indication it certainly wasn't. It is interesting, though, to see what people were buying tickets to see on the late 20s. Some of the performers obviously were talented, but the songs and jokes just don't make it. Also interesting to see how a revue like this would have been photographed with sound recorded live. Wish they had named some of the performers so that we could know who they were. Bea Lillie is named and so is Louise Fazenda (who later married producer Hal Wallis), and I guess Frank Fay (the host) was a leading comedian at the time. But who are some of the other people? I suppose most of them have been forgotten. Of course, the stars of our time won't be. Right.