Virginia hams


This wince-inducing, failed dramatic experiment is painful to sit through. I'm familiar with all the performers in it so I can tell that the director must have pushed everyone into smoked ham-itis. What I find astonishing, this old creaker is still around.

reply

I have just watched this for the first time and admit was astonished at such talented actors working their way through this. It is a wonder they didn't all just stop and say ENOUGH! The premature aging, mentioned in another post, was so absurd, it was laughable.

reply

Films made in 1932 were churned out by MGM and usually adapted from plays or novels. If thought this was meant to be very theatrical in style, as if being performed on stage and filmed. The problem was the play lasted 4+ hours and this was edited down for film length. Not a great film.

reply

netshopper-2 says > ...this was meant to be very theatrical in style, as if being performed on stage and filmed. The problem was the play lasted 4+ hours and this was edited down for film length. Not a great film.
I know the movie was based on a play but if it was intended to be theatrical in style, I'm glad it didn't turn out that way. I happen to like the movie as it is. Revealing their internal thoughts was awkward but I felt necessary.

The movie was certainly different and there were things about it I didn't like, like the ending, but I enjoyed the story and the actors enough that I was able to deal with it.

I don't feel the movie needed to be as long as four hours. The story was told quite well in the time allotted.


Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply