Roar of the Dragon (1932)

hyped garbage

Good concept, poorly executed.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

"Roar of the Dragon" (1932) and "Barricade" (1939) have essentially the same plots (as well as length). In China in the 1930s, Mongol raiders corner westerners in a building. It is in a hotel in the former; it is in the US embassy in the latter. They are refugees from a riverboat in the former; they are refugees from a train in the latter. The leading man in the former is an alcoholic riverboat captain; the leading man in the latter is an alcoholic reporter.The IMDb rating for the former is 6.5; the rating for the latter is 5.7. Those ratings, in my opinion, should be reversed. The "Roar of the Dragon" lacks memorable scenes, while, despite its many production problems, "Barricade" has several (such as Baxter and Faye fleeing across a wheat field while the raiders try to burn them out).Additionally, the "Roar of the Dragon" suffers from numerous problems. And it is hard not to have them detract from one's enjoyment. There are plot problems. No one suggests boarding-up the hotel's windows and doors, and, as a result, one person is killed and another kidnapped. The raiders make no attempt to destroy the refugee's only means of escape, the riverboat, even though it is docked nearby and virtually undefended. There are stupidity problems. The hero makes no attempt to ferret out the spies he has been informed lurk within the hotel, or even to exercise caution by having guards protect his limited water supplies. There are coincidence problems. A main character is killed when the hero's machine gun jams just as the other is being attacked. On the other hand, other than the question of "who put the rug over the trap door?" when the embassy refugees retreat into the cellar, the actions in "Barricade" proceed quite logically, given the situation cast members are said to be in.So my advice, therefore, is to skip "Roar of the Dragon" and watch "Barricade" instead

The most interesting thing about this movie is the collection of could have, should have moments that under the right direction and with the right script would have resulted in a much better adventure. A bit reminiscent of "The Sand Pebbles", the story has much potential which the dialog fails to deliver. Character development is all but nonexistent for a group of interesting individuals. And don't get me started on the pitiful editing. But what makes it worth a look is the collection of actors chosen for this turkey. Gwili Andre, the tragic Dane who chose fame by immolation, Arlene Judge, famous for her eight marriages, Edward Everett Horton in his most woefully miscast role. His wild-eyed intensity just doesn't translate well into heroic action. He just looks ridiculous. As for Andre, she had the looks but not the talent. The veterans, Richard Dix, Zazu Pitts, and C. Henry Gordon acquit themselves well as the true professionals they were despite the poor material they were given to work with. So there you have it. A pretty bad movie that's nonetheless worth a look.

Almost everything else I planned to say has been said by someone else here-- this is unusually zippy for a movie by the normally mediocre Wesley Ruggles, that big lummox Richard Dix is unusually animated and even amusing at times, the production design and cinematography are very handsome (and female leads Andre and Judge ain't bad to look at either), it's probably the only movie in which Edward Everett Horton handles a machine gun (although he does prove pretty handy with a pistol in 1938's Wild Money), and while the movie seems a bit underwritten (or more likely written in 3 days), it's pretty everything you could want from a 68-minute pre-Code B movie. The other interesting thing I would note is that it could have inspired bits in two much more famous movies-- the whole opening, in which news of a bandit's rampage is conveyed by telegraph until the moment that the bandit's men chop down the telegraph pole, plays like a dry run for the much more famous and accomplished opening of Stagecoach-- and it's hard to think that's an accident when you know that co-writer, and RKO producer during this time, Merian C. Cooper (of King Kong fame) would soon work with John Ford on The Lost Patrol (as well as on most of his immediate postwar work). The connection with Howard Hawks is less obvious, but when you consider the situation (tough guy Dix surrounded in compound with a bunch of people whose ability to defend themselves is doubtful), and then hear him refer to Arline Judge by a nickname-- the town she was from ("Bridgeport")-- and hear her answer in a deep, insolent Betty Bacall-Angie Dickinson drawl, there's a definite whiff of the much later Rio Bravo, in which John Wayne is holed up with a bunch of questionable help and a girl called Feathers.

Richard Dix was excellent in this movie. I don't know if it was the direction or the fact that his character was drunk most of the time, but the improvement over the Secret Service a yr. earlier was very pronounced. He had subtlety, complexity and nuance here. In the earlier, he was very stagy. Never heard of Gwili Andre before (or since) but she was extraordinarily beautiful and she could act. She must have been a model. The whole cast was very good.