User reviews

Conrad Nagel is a trial lawyer who, no sooner does he get his client off, calls him guilty. His Pecksniffian wife has been using him as a checkbook to pay her brother's gambling debts. When that very brother steal a large sum of money for an undisclosed purpose, Nagel pursues him and demands it back. For his trouble, he is threatened by some low-lifes. He calls them cowards, so they beat him to death.... almost. Fortunately, there's Loretta Young to nurse the amnesiac Nagel.

What disagreeable people all these Canadians are! Nagel offers some of his worst acting in this very slightly expanded stage play that sat on the shelf for at least six months, because Warner Brothers didn't think it worthwhile to release this piece of cheese that Frank Lloyd turned out for them. Even Snitz Edwards, in his antepenultimate screen appearance, offers nothing to please the audience.

I like a lot of the early '30s "pre-code" films but this was just drivel with poor dialog and some poor acting. I only watched it to see Loretta Young, who was a real beauty in her younger days.

The dialog and some of things in here are so dated, so sappy and so overly-melodramatic with the lead character, played by Conrad Nagel, that it's almost laughable. What lawyer interrupts his closing speech to pick up a hankie from a woman in the audience, and then whisper something, kiss her hand and leave the courtroom? The guys nickname is "Beauty," and he sure is that! I wonder if audiences in the early '30s actually took this character and dialog seriously....or were they enamored to have "talkies."

Well, at least Loretta looked super, and sounded like a normal person but how many could people today watch this and stick around long enough to see her? She doesn't appear until almost a half hour, which is almost half the movie!

It's so amazingly awful that it makes PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE seem like THE GODFATHER. This is so unimaginably bad - really bad that it's weirdly wonderful making it one of the funniest things you'll ever see.

You've got to see this with your own eyes to believe it. Once you've experienced it you'll want to see it again because it's so bad it's hilarious. Some films are bad, some are terrible but this creates a whole new dimension of hell that Dante would be proud of. It's not one of those terrible stagey dull early talkies which are so lifeless that you can't be bothered to watch - this is anything but boring. If someone wanted to make a comedy about the early talkies they could just use this. It feels exactly like one of those parodies but although it's hard to believe, it's actually meant to be serious - well I think it is?

Being made in 1930 is no excuse. There were plenty of films - or rather a few films made in 1930 and even in 1929 which were pretty good. OK, it was made on the horribly cumbersome Vitaphone system which certainly didn't help but again, others managed with it. This is just jaw-droppingly badly made.

Everything about this is as worse as it could possibly be. The story is beyond stupid, the script is completely surreal as though written by aliens and it feels like it was directed by someone from one of those isolated tribes deep in the Amazon who'd never left the jungle or discovered fire yet.

And as for the acting - you'll not believe what your eyes are telling you. You're not high - this really is happening! Conrad Nagel proves himself to be the worst actor in the history of cinema. I half suspect his remarkably utterly absurd performance was him trying to be funny but that would be too charitable. He's doing a sort of bizarre John Barrymore impersonation - indeed, were this a proper film, Barrymore might have been OK in this.

Then just when you think you've never seen such bad acting in your life you're treated to Olive Tell as his wife - O. M. G! I challenge you to watch her and keep a straight face!

Oh and there's sweet seventeen year old Loretta Young. Since she's betrothed to a sixty year old, I'm thinking that it's probably ok to find her attractive? Even she is rubbish in this which since she was ok in LOOSE ANKLES and a few other 1929/1930 movies, points the finger of blame at director Frank Lloyd - but he made MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY so what was going on here? Maybe Warners just wanted to close down their First National operation or maybe everyone was very, very drunk?

If you've run out of drugs - just watch this instead!

"The Right of Way" is the story of a glib lawyer (Conrad Nagel) who is also a mess outside the court. His brother-in-law is a thief and Nagel's character is beaten half to death. He has amnesia and ends up being cared for by some decent folks. And, as he recovers his memory, the lawyer realizes how bad his life was before his beating.

I had a very hard time watching "The Right of Way" because the film was just terrible...mostly due to very antiquated dialog and horrible overacting. It also features the worst French-Canadian accent I have ever heard--making accents in "Dudley Dooright" seem brilliant by comparison! How anyone gave this film anything better than a 3 or 4 is shocking! Heck, how you could give it anything more than a 2 is ALSO shocking! Among the worst dialog and acting I can recall...much worse than Ed Wood's "Plan 9 From Outer Space"!

Not to be disrespectful of the early days of talkies, but if you see this one listed on TCM, skip it. It absolutely creaks with age. Set in Quebec, "The Right of Way" is a melodrama about a rather mean attorney nicknamed "Beauty" (don't ask me why) who gets involved in a bar fight when he goes to see his thieving brother-in-law in a bad part of town. As a result of the beating he takes, he develops amnesia and is brought to a rural area by a man he defended. When he regains consciousness, he remembers nothing, and takes the name Charles Mallard. He falls in love with the lovely daughter of the postmaster, played by Loretta Young. Young, radiant and beautiful, was about 18 when she did this film.

Except for a naturalistic Young, the acting is outrageously bad, intensely melodramatic, with many lines said with tremulous voices. As is often the case in the early days of sound, the actors weren't used to the medium yet so their timing is off. And the French Canadian accents - horrific. I can't agree with one of the posters about Conrad Nagel - yes, he was over the top, but so was his atrocious dialogue. He at least didn't drag the pace.

Not good.

I fell asleep whilst watching this utter load of bilge and so went and watched most of it again.Where does one start.The court scenes are laughable.After all how could a barrister walk out of court whilst a Judge sums up.If he misdirects then how is the barrister to know.However the most ridiculous moment comes when Nagel is told his true name having lost his memory,and because of this suddenly regains his memory.It all comes back to him in an instant!Other than Loretta Young it is clear that the actors do not have a clue how to act for the talkies.We have gestures and looks and abysmal attempts at accents.This is a film to avoid unless you want a cure for insomnia

Right of Way, The (1931)

** (out of 4)

A hot shot, loud mouth and obnoxious attorney (Conrad Nagel) is beaten and left for death. A fisherman finds his body, takes him home and soon the attorney recovers but he can't remember who he is. With the help of a nurse (Loretta Young) he learns how to be nice but will the past catch up with him? This is one of those early talkies that talks way too much. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that this 65-minute movie had more dialogue than a three hour movie of its time. Another major problem is the casting of Nagel who delivers a very bad and embarrassing performance. Young isn't given much to do either. Previously made in 1915 and 1920.

This movie was a waste of time. The acting was awful and the plot was thin.

In Quebec, Canada a snobbish lawyer who dislikes his wife is beaten and left for dead on the waterfront. He is found by the man he had recently represented in Court and won an acquittal. But he sort of lost his memory after the beating and takes a job with the local tailor. While in the rural area of Quebec, he falls in love with "Rosalie" but cannot marry her because he sort of remembers that he is still married to the woman he dislikes.

I suggest that you watch the first 10 minutes of this movie and the last 5 minutes. That seems to be enough to know what happened without wasting all of your time.

Canadian lawyer charley steele (conrad nagel) enjoys the drink. He gets clunked on the head during a fight over money. Some bad acting and bad accents in this one. It's all so forced. And the sound quality is pretty iffy. To be fair, the thing is almost 95 years old. Loretta young is the nurse who helps steele recover from his injury up in the woods. When he recovers, steele realizes he has more problems now than when he was blissfully out of it. Strange ending. Especially since we were still pre-film code, and in canada to boot. The story is pretty droll and outdated. But it is an early speaking, starring role for loretta young. Directed by frank lloyd, who won two oscars! And nominated for two more. Based on the book and play by gilbert parker. This was a remake of the films from 1915 and 1920. Parker had a bunch of his works made into film in the early 1900s. Apparently nagel was hollywood royalty for making the transition from silent to sound, and being a founder of the various actor organizations. The official math would make young about 17 years old, but she looks older than that in this one.

The Right of Way is a film that was made several times during the silent era and was based on a novel. It concerns a lawyer named Charles Steele (Conrad Nagel), a man whose marriage with a society woman (Olive Tell) is falling apart and whose brother in law is going down the wrong path in life. Steele goes to defend his family against a group of ruffians who beat him up and throw him in the river to die, but a man he defended in a murder trial finds him and takes him to his home in the mountains. Unable to care for the man alone, he enlists a young lady from the village named Rosalie (Loretta Young) to nurse Charles back to health. When he awakes, Charles has no recollection of his former life and begins a new one in the mountains.

This film is short, but it is hardly sweet. Nagel is the biggest ham in this movie, constantly overacting in scenes that need subtlety. Young is beautiful but somehow and obvious novice in her scenes, which is strange because she made so many wonderful pre-codes. Perhaps the direction was not up to par.

One might enjoy this film simply to make fun of the acting, but the dramatic story might make one uncomfortable in doing so. The movie isn't meant to be a comedy, but it was certainly made to be that way by the acting.

To look at a movie from 1931 and say that it has over-the-top acting would be similar to some uncomplicated creature from the past looking at a modern movie and proclaiming too much sex and/or confusing action sequences. I'll place myself among the creatures of the past. Gilbert Parker's "The Right of Way" was performed on stage seven years before any of the movie releases. It comes off a little stagy, but didn't most of the early talkies?

The movie took the usual liberties with a novel, changing a few things here and there - then squeezing it into sixty-five minutes. However, the feel of the book is intact. Nagel's handsome looks and seemingly over-the-top acting personify "Beauty" Steele.

Though I cannot claim someone could have done this better, some of Nagel's best moments kept me riveted to the screen.

Loretta Young played her part well, but I was more impressed with Fred Kohler's performance, next to Conrad Nagel's. I think that had it been a longer movie it would have been very fitting to dwell more on the friendship of this former snob and this lowly, almost hermit-like man (Jo in the movie). There were a few sub-plots that came together very nicely, and I would have liked to have seen a little more of the aftermath that the book explains nicely.

There is much in here that is relevant to our modern society, as well as our very soul. There is much more in the book as well. The book is available freely online, but watch out for typos. I thought enough of the movie to buy a copy of the book, so that speaks for something.

It's easy to see why people feel the acting is a little much, but hey! I like Calamity Jane.

One nice thing about old movies is that you don't have scripts that play to the actors. Were a Tom Cruise (God forbid!) to be in this movie, I could imagine all sorts of personal asides and thinly veiled messages.

Lastly, this movie made me a fan of Nagel, though most of the rest of his serious work was already behind him.

Try to see a little more deeply into the monocle of Charles "Beauty" Steele and check out a wonderful romance book!

Frank Lloyd , an early Oscar winning director has one classic to his name the 1935 version of Mutiny on the Bounty. This one is deadly dull and sluggishly paced. It is quite different from the pre-codes we usually get from First National's sister company Warner Bros.

Conrad Nagel is way over the top and the rest of the cast is not far behind. Nagel's movie star career didn't last too long and based on this movie you can see why. The only virtue is the luminous Loretta Young from whom everyone in this cast should have taken lessons. She is a natural.And her undeniable beauty and charisma enliven every scene. The plot has one of those Random Harvest amnesia twists that might have worked with better acting or less stodgy direction. Here you can see the gears turn all the time as the hokey plot lurches to its' fake religious conclusion.

Skip this one.

A Bizarre, far-fetched, wholly unrealistic bit of nonsense! Conrad Nagel's performance is so overripe it is actually hilarious! And what the hell was with that mustache of his? As most of the other reviews have said, the one saving grace is the presence of beautiful Loretta Young, who was obviously adapting to making talking films much better than her co-stars! The film is so crudely constructed and acted that i cant help but wonder if it was made earlier and sat on the shelf for a while? I cant agree tho that one should avoid this film, it is def an early talkie curiosity and because of Nagel's outrageously overwrought performance, almost a must-see!

A beautiful young woman influences a callous lawyer into regaining THE RIGHT OF WAY to moral decency.

Conrad Nagel dominates this little soap opera, based on Sir Gilbert Parker's novel, with his highly melodramatic performance as a hardhearted Quebecois lawyer who exhibits an enormous distaste for nearly every other human being. His behavior would repulse the viewer, were it not that his acting is so over the top that it becomes quite a bit of fun to watch.

Beautiful Loretta Young appears rather late in the story and ushers in the best scenes of the film, when Nagel is suffering from amnesia. Their moments together, as she cares for him, are touchingly tender.

A small group of character actors add much to their supporting roles: Olive Tell as Nagel's distraught wife; William Janney as her pathetic brother; Fred Kohler as the backwoodsman who saves Nagel's life; Halliwell Hobbes as a benevolent seigneur who loves Miss Young; little Snitz Edwards as a village tailor; and George C. Pearce as a kindly priest.

I am giving The Right of Way (1930 copyright date on the opening credits, not 1931) a perfect 10. Never have I laughed so hard and so prolonged through any motion picture. This movie is completely priceless and proves you don't have to see anyone slip on a banana peel in order to laugh until you are breathless and giddy from lack of oxygen.

Conrad Nagel got his start in silent pictures and was a romantic lead in many B and A pictures over the years. Because of his politics Louis B. Mayer disliked him and often put him in silly vehicles which didn't show off his acting talents to their best advantage. Conrad is obviously hamming it up through this picture, maybe to get even with Louis B., maybe because he just wanted to have some fun with a deadly dull and stupid early talkie script.

Conrad makes this picture. He's the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life. Forget Chaplin and Laurel and Hardy and WC Fields. Conrad in The Right of Way is the right way to go for complete belly laughs until you drop.

See this movie! But don't take it seriously or you'll miss the point!