bernardoarquivo I can't understand for the life of me what people are thinking when they criticize this movie for the xeriff's jokes, the songs or the accent. First of all, IT'S A COMEDY. It's not drama, adventure or whatever genre IMDB claims it to be. It's a sweet, lighthearted romantic comedy about a mexican thief who's actually a nice guy. The screenplay is not intended to be anything else.Second of all, it's a movie from 1930. An early talkie. Directors were pretty much still learning how to work with music and accents. Overall it works out fine. We all know - as much as the audience in 1930 - that Victor Varconi and Fay Wray were not mexicans. What matters is that Fay Wray is drop dead gorgeous! She's talented and stunning. Every one of her scenes, as the cute young girl that dazzles the good bad guy and ends up with a bit of a crush on him, is a delight.Varconi does a very good job in a role that would have been perfect for Douglas Fairbanks, ten years earlier. One of the reviewers said Varconi "in spite of his age, did a wonderful job in this film". Once again, I don't understand it. What the hell is wrong with him or his age?? The man was thirty-nine!! The perfect age for any role in a romantic comedy!Forget these reviews. It's a sweet little comedy with one of the most beautiful actresses of all time.

barnesgene Welcome to 1930. Talkies are one year old and studios are continuing to experiment madly with all kinds of plots, all kinds of screenplays, and all levels of acting competence. In this film we get broad elements of slapstick and mushy love scenes, and, because it's pre-Code, a little skin deliciously displayed (Fay Wray being happy to oblige). You'll see early on that this film turns out to be way too rough-hewn, and its slapdash construction will not be successful: audiences don't want to watch a mess. The only person really trying to make it all work is Ms. Wray; she practically owns the screen every time she appears, even with her awful accent. If you find yourself attracted to her work -- as I have become -- this flick's worth a quick watch.

Michael_Elliott Captain Thunder (1930)* 1/2 (out of 4) Early talkie has Victor Varconi playing El Captain Thunder, a Mexican bandit who causes as much trouble as he can but he'll always keep his word. The bandit goes from one form of trouble to the next until he meets and falls for a lady (Fay Wray). I had heard some incredibly bad things about this film but it didn't turn out as bad as I had feared, although this is still one of lesser films I've seen from this era. Director Crosland is best known for THE JAZZ SINGER and other films from that era including DON JUAN and OLD SAN FRANCISCO and I must admit that I've never been a big fan of his work. That trend continues here but to be fair I'm not sure how much blame should go towards him and how much on the screenplay. Even as I write this I can't be certain to what this film was even trying to do. I'm going to guess it was meant as a low-budget version of THE CISCO KID but I'm still not sure if the title character was suppose to be a good or bad guy. Either way he is 100% annoying and it doesn't help that the first time we see him he's pretty much trying to get laughs by harassing women. Wray, playing a Mexican woman, doesn't earn many acting stripes but she did have KING KONG coming in a few years. She certainly looks great, which at least gives the viewer something to do in the film.

arthursward I voted a 4 for this film only because Fay Wray's Spanish accented English was well modulated and consistent. We must remember the times afforded Mexicans virtually no work in films and the rest of this turkey is evidence of the folly of that practice. The film's setting is a Mexican village populated by: the cop from Warners' gangster films, a Swede as El Commandante and an Italian as the lead El Capitan Thunder, the much feared bandito. The film drips with stereotypical south-of-the-borderisms.My problems with the film go beyond the casting. As the film opens, El Capitan Thunder's gang has kidnapped 5 women that he tries to come on to. An uncomfortable scene that gets worse with Varconi's histrionics. Wildly gesturing, Crosland's camera has not only difficulty keeping him in frame, but the composition is somewhere between medium close-up and close-up, leaving his hands out of frame. His arms flail, why? The effect I found to be jarring and this sequence is long. Seems like the director is trying to recapture Jolson's Jazz Singer magic with this somewhat ad-libbed bombast. Charles Judels as Commandante Ruiz, the police captain, is given a similar scene with the same bad framing. His scene stinks, too.And I'm not done complaining, yet. While a nice musical underscore was added to the soundtrack, it must have been mixed at the Vitaphone "sea-of-100-turntables" as my print was clear and several layers of pop and crackle were evident. Silent movie titles were frequently used between scenes and the plot is incredible. Worst of all is Varconi's acting. I got the impression he watched Fairbanks in Zorro (a silent), concluded good acting was emoting to the back row and then proceeded to emote past the lobby! You'll wish lightning would strike Captain Thunder.The positives included Don Alvarodo as Fay's love interest and two dozen men riding backwards on horseback (with hands tied) in the first reel. Best part: the film's only 5800 feet long so you'll only suffer for an hour.