Make a Million (1935) User Reviews

Early Depression days version of "screwball comedy".

[rsoonsa · 5/10 · 27 November 2001]

A pronounced political posture, including a quasi-Marxist theory relating to redistribution of wealth, is woven into this lightweight Depression era comedy. Director Lewis Collins utilizes an interesting cast to bring forward the rather silly script's comedic elements and to make ideological indoctrination a suborning factor, at most. After a university instructor of economics, Professor Smith, played by Charles Starrett, of subsequent "B" Western fame, is placed on a leave of absence without pay due to his radical classroom theorizing, he decides to participate in the capitalist system by becoming a millionaire through an advanced mode of panhandling. His method is to conduct an advertising campaign from which the public is requested to give him, generally by mail, one dollar apiece. The money which he will receive will be in turn given to large manufacturers who will then reward each contributor with an item retailing at three or more dollars, with the businessmen utilizing these funds to return their firms to profitability. Principally as a result of negative newspaper reporting about him, Smith benefits from a sympathetic reaction from the masses, and a great number of dollar bills begin flowing in. Inevitably, the quixotic hero becomes too attractive a target for the evil establishment to let pass, and attempts are made to legally seize his new found wealth. Smith's primary enemy, as always during the Depression, is a lurking banker, whose daughter Irene (Pauline Brooks), while a member of the professor's class, had complained of his visionary concepts, resulting in his being sacked. Brooks performs very well in her role, wherein she quite naturally falls in love with Smith and decides to commit with him in his crusade against his perceived enemies: position and power. Crucial to Smith's success is his panhandling pal Pete (James Burke) who tries to teach the professor the finer points of cadging, and who recruits for him a melange of disreputable derelicts as "board members" of Smith's imaginary World Improvement League. The subsequent proceedings are not entirely predictable, and the work, although a souffle, is well-photographed by Milton Krasner, competently directed, and clearly of historic interest.

A Grade-B Film from the Great Depression

[Uriah43 · 5/10 · 4 February 2024]

Produced during the Great Depression, this film begins with a college professor by the name of "Reginald Q. Jones" (Charles Starrett) lecturing his class on what is wrong with the American financial system. Specifically, he believes that the problem revolves around the wealthy having too much money while everyone else has too little. He further states that this fault lies primarily with the big banks who are making hefty profits while the common person suffers. Not particularly impressed by his economic philosophy, a female student named "Irene Corning" (Pauline Brooks) dares to disagree--which eventually results in her failing that class and not graduating. Needless to say, being quite upset with this decision, Irene complains directly to her father, who happens to be a wealthy banker (played by Guy Usher) and he uses his influences on the college to have Irene's one failing grade to be reversed which allows her to graduate. Not only that, but he also insists that Professor Jones be dismissed from the college as well with the one stipulation being that, if the professor can raise a million dollars on his own, he can be reinstated. Penniless and without a place to live, Professor Jones then goes about trying to raise then goes about while Irene's father does everything he can to thwart his efforts. What Irene's father doesn't realize, however, is that her daughter has fallen in love with Professor Jones--and this causes problems for all concerned. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that in order to appreciate this film one would probably need to know a little bit about the economy at the time it was made and the state of the film industry during that time as well. The financial situation was difficult for just about everyone-other than those already established--and that directly impacted films made in Hollywood. That being said, I don't think this low-budget production was all that bad overall. Admittedly, the acting wasn't top-notch, and the script could have also used a bit of improvement as well. Even so, it seemed to pass the time well enough, and I have rated it accordingly. Average.

This must have played a lot better during the Depression.

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 12 September 2011]

"Make a Million" is an odd little curio from the Depression era. It begins with an annoying professor railing about 'distribution problems' in the economy and suggesting a 90% tax on inheritance. When a rich lady balks at what he says, he basically tells her she's an idiot and fails her in the class. However, her father is an important guy and the school is out for the professor's head. Frankly, both the professor and board of directors are idiots, as neither seem very open to any divergent thought. The professor is told to use his crazy ideas to earn a million dollars--then the school will reinstate him (?????). This plot, so far, made almost no sense at all--nor did the romance that inexplicably develops.

Soon the professor meets a professional beggar and decides that he can make a million by begging. However, instead of begging one person at a time, he suggests running an ad asking the masses for a dollar from each. Soon, a reporter gets the story and publicizes it--and dollars start pouring in to the professor and his 'World Improvement League'. But, the powers of the status quo are worried about this notion--it strikes them as radicalism and they'll stop at nothing to stop him.

This film about socialism versus strict capitalism COULD have been interesting--especially since rich folks were very worried about communism and talk about redistribution of the wealth that were spurred on by widespread unemployment. Sadly, the film WASN'T interesting and the characters all seemed phony. A dumb script and a film that acts like it's being profound about the common man when it really isn't--as I found the movie to be annoying and very, very, very contrived. Don't believe the print from Alpha Video--they call it a screwball comedy. Doesn't a screwball comedy need to be funny?!

The World Improvement League? Nah. It'll never work.

[mark.waltz · 2/10 · 11 January 2024]

Maybe if Robert Riskin (the screenwriter of all those Columbia Frank Capra films) had put pen to paper for this, it would have ended up making some sense, but what results is a convoluted, unbelievable screwball comedy that in spite of some funny performances is a major disappointment. It deals with a disillusioned young college professor (Charles Starrett) who starts a bogus charity to see how long it would take to make a million dollars.

This is a misguided attempt at trying to fool the audience that what they're seeing here is a clever idea and that those who find it ridiculous aren't very smart, when it's the writers who are fooling themselves in thinking that this is what constitutes an intellectual comedy when it's just a bunch of ranting philosophy that makes the characters spouting them come off as delusional. Starrett tries to convince but fails, and Pauline Brooks as the daughter of the college dean who has Starrett fired is completely unlikable.

In supporting roles, only George E. Stone and James Burke come off memorable as they're playing their roles as part of the scam and are filled with enthusiasm. I found this as interesting as a stock market investment report, filled with codes and numbers and ridiculous statistics. After a while, it's just far too noisy and smug, and ultimately forgettable.