I'm pretty sure Hell's Angels is better known for the behind the camera elements of it than what's on screen. I know of it as the Howard Hughes film, and even as I watched it, I kept thinking back to the scenes of The Aviator about making it. Otherwise, I just confuse this movie with Wings, the first Best Picture winner. They are pretty different movies though except for the airplanes. Hell's Angels is a lot more risqué and violent than I expected. It's clearly a pre-Code movie. Jean Harlow in particular would've been toned down just a couple years later.
For all the time and expense it took to make the movie, it is very impressive for its time. Midway through production it was turned into a talkie, and I can barely tell. The development of sound from The Jazz Singer to this in just three years is night and day. The aerial scenes are quite a sight too. I barely understand how they get shots now. With clunky 1920s technology, it's a miracle that Hell's Angels looks as good as it does.
Still, it is the 1930 version of an impressively produced Michael Bay movie. The movie didn't particularly engage me in any way. So, while it's nice to appreciate as an historical artifact, I found it much less enduring than a King Kong.
Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment