califcomedy I viewed this film as a historical piece on locations. It is footage of the town of the old mining town of Bodie, pre-fire which destroyed 90% of the remaining town in 1933. It is now a state park and the official ghost town of Calif. Having visited several times, it was amazing to see actual businesses and buildings that no longer stand. And the ones that do - 80 years later. The church that is seen in several of the exteriors is still there today, but none of the buildings seen between it and the main street exist. This would have been, in 1929, a long way to travel for a location shot with crew and equipment. I'm glad they did.

MartinHafer This is the third sound remake I have seen of this film. It already has been filmed as Broncho Billy and the Baby (1915), The Three Godfathers (1916), Marked Men (1919), Three Godfathers (1936), 3 Godfathers (1948) and The Godchild (1974) according to IMDb. I think it's time they stopped remaking this film--and fortunately, this has been the case for the past 35 years. While I am a fan of John Wayne, I really think his 1948 version is far from the best.One of the first things you may notice about this 1930 version is its absence of incidental music. Like all the films from 1929-1931 (give or take), they still hadn't perfected how to do this. In many of these films, to have this music meant having an orchestra just off camera! And, since this is an outdoor film AND most of these early films only used music sparingly, you will notice how quiet the film is. However, it is fortunate that otherwise the sound is very good--and it's easy to understand the voices in the film--something that isn't always the case.The plot is pretty much the same as the other films. Three bandits rob a bank and make a getaway. On their trek across the desert, they stumble upon a lone wagon without an animal to pull it. Inside is a pregnant lady about to give birth. These desperate criminals find it within themselves to help the lady and even take the child with them back to civilization after she dies. This is even at the possible cost of being caught and having to share what little water they have to get the kid to safety. Their selflessness is a sharp contrast to who they were when the film began and the story is all about hope and redemption.Overall, it's a very good story and of the three versions I have seen, I still think the 1936 version with Lewis Stone is the best and the 1930 version comes next. The 1936 film lacks the sappy sentimentality of the later John Wayne version and the acting is simply better than this 1930 version. I think because sound was such a new medium, the actors in the 1930 film tended to over-annunciate their lines and tended to sound a bit fake. This stiffness undoes some of the impact of the movie. My choice for the best of these is pretty funny, actually, considering that two great directors made the versions I liked less--John Ford (1919 and 1948) and William Wyler (1930). Lowly Richard Boleslawski made the 1936 remake! Go figure.So, if you are a film nut like me, try seeing them all! But, if you are a normal and well-adjusted person, you'll probably only want to see one--make it the '36 film. It has a great cast and delivers the best punch.

Michael_Elliott Hell's Heroes (1930)*** 1/2 (out of 4) This early talkie from Universal is the first sound version of "Three Godfathers", which would eventually be remade in 1936 with Chester Morris and again in 1948 by John Ford with John Wayne in this lead. The story here is the same as three ruthless outlaws (Charles Bickford, Raymond Hatton, Fred Kohler) rob a bank and then head out into the desert before losing their horses during a major wind storm. Soon afterwards they stumble onto a baby and the men must decide to let it die or try to walk it back to the town they were just running from. I've ended up watching these sound versions in reverse order as I started off with the Ford one many years ago and then just recently saw the Morris version, which was the better of the two. This one here is clearly the leader of the trio because of how raw it is. This movie is pretty mean spirited from the start up until the end and I really love that Wyler didn't pull any punches. Being the pre-code era we get a few things not available in future versions and that includes one sequence where the men argue about who's going to "take" the mother first. We also get a fairly violent scene involving a suicide, which is shown in a long shot. A lot of people bash American westerns saying they aren't ugly enough but that's not true here. The dirt, grease and ugliness of the characters are all over them and their unshaven faces make them look exactly like what their characters would look like. The three leads turn in wonderful performances but to me it was Hatton who steals the show as the big goon who quickly turns into a softy after finding the baby. Bickford is equally impressive and the final vision of him is quiet haunting and will certainly stay with you for a long time. The film runs a fairly short 68-minutes but there's enough heart and soul in this thing for two movies. Another impressive thing is that this was an early talkie yet you really can't tell as everything is recorded very well and it actually sounded a lot better than the same studio's Dracula and FRANKENSTEIN, which would follow the next year.

arthursward There is a production still photo (reprinted recently in Scott Eyeman's 'The Speed Of Sound') that has haunted me ever since I first came across it in 1968. It was in a humanities class text. We had studied von Stroheim's "Greed" and upturned the story of how. while shooting on location in the Mojave Desert, the cameras had to be iced against the heat while the crew's cook died from the solar furnace. And here, four years later in the Panamint Hills, is a black and white of a sound film crew out in the desert. A long black cable in the sand leading up to an airtight meat locker housing the camera and its operator. The sun blazing down, I wondered, what kind of a film could get done under these conditions? Further research heightened my frustration as William Wyler was listed as the director (must be a good film), but it was for Universal, already notorious for keeping their early talkies tightly vaulted.Flash forward 34 years (and a big Thank You Ted Turner and TCM). It is 2:30 AM and I can't sleep. In the next room, a VCR awaits its task of making sure I don't miss this. But I'm pacing the floor for an hour and a half, heart pounding with anticipation. "I can't be very good", I tell myself, "Bickford isn't Gable". Fade up, dozens of bat-wing parchments of nitrate flap before some lamp and credits roll, I'M FINALLY SEEING IT! The camera's lens prowls back and forth across barren landscape, as though it was looking for something. Three riders appear on horseback. The dialogue begins and it's good, the camera moves right along with the riders. The lighting is remarkable as the faces well-saturate the negative [something anyone who has attempted photography in bright sunlight will appreciate]. In town, this gang's leader is in the saloon making time with the ladies. Bickford establishes his character in this sequence as one who is harder and more heartless than anyone else in westerns. He'll tell the sheriff he's going to rob the bank (across the street). A high establishing shot shows the whole town, then a shot tracks with Bickford approaching the bank as his gang rides up. This is cinema, a montage of perceptions that completely fill the viewer's consciousness. This film is very, very good.George Robinson's photography is extraordinary, with fine compositions and contrasts. His vistas are jam packed and firmly place the viewer into this nothingness. The actors' beards progress with the time frame, and the place is so dirty you'll run for the Pledge.It's filled with those two second throwaways that tell so much about the characters but do nothing to advance the plot. Such as when the gang leans on the teller's counter, one cowboy's boot scuffs at the bottom for a bar rail. At the saloon, a short skirted woman dances for the patrons, a low angle shot gives a glimpse of garter. The sheriff, seated nearby, drops something and pretends to pick it up. He stares lecherously at the dancing knees. Yet, a moment later, when Bickford invites him to drink, the sheriff's back on his moral high horse. Bickford bites and slaps the girl, after all this is pre-code.The characters are complex and juxtaposed images abound. Charles Bickford's portrayal is unforgettable. Here is a picture that deserves recognition as one of the classics, a film that transcends its primitive equipment. Makes one wonder what else is locked up in the vaults of the Big U.