Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

JohnHowardReid Mischa Auer (Swami Yomurda), Phyllis Barrington (Clare Walton), Ralph Lewis (John Walton), Earl McCarty (Jimmy Reeves), Fletcher Norton (Dan Lukes), Mae Busch (Mame), Kit Guard (janitor in the editor's office), J. Frank Glendon (Meehan), Al Bridge (Hunter), Mona Lisa (the "princess"), Anita Faye (Angel-face).Directors: MELVILLE SHYER, DOROTHY REID. Original story and screenplay: Willis Kent. Photography: James Diamond. Film editor: S. Roy Luby. Settings by Republic Studios. Assistant director: Harry Crist. Sound by International Recording Engineers. Producer: Willis Kent. A True Life Photoplay by Willis Kent Productions.Copyright 30 March 1933 by Willis Kent. New York opening at the Globe: 6 April 1933. U.S. release through Progressive Pictures: 5 April 1933. Never theatrically released in Australia. 8 reels. 70 minutes. U.K. release title: VICTIMS OF THE BEYOND.NOTES: The crusading widow of silent star, Wallace Reid, turns her attention from drug abuse to another social menace: A reporter goes undercover to expose a fake psychic racket.COMMENT: A really extraordinary "B"-movie, deserving of the highest commendation in all departments, particularly in its fine acting, suspenseful script, inventive direction, moody photography, make-up and film editing. As the vicious charlatan, Auer gives a most forcefully striking performance. Mae Busch is also an absolute stand-out, but the player who grabbed my eye was personable Earl McCarty in a difficult role which he plays with such panache — admittedly assisted by superb photography which turns his "stage" make-up into a stunning grotesque — we wonder why his films were so few.

dougdoepke A crew of phony spiritualist scammers hooks a big bucks sucker, but things get complicated when an undercover reporter joins the crew.It's hard to do a spiritualist scam movie without getting hokey, especially with the lesser technology of the 30's. Nope, no digital wonders here, just costumed characters, back- projection screens, and fateful voices. Do the suckers fall for the phony theatre. Of course, they do, and for big money, too. I guess the pigeon here is smart enough to be a big-time investor, but dumb enough to be taken in by dime-store theatrics. Anyway, if you can get past the stumbling narrative and the awkward staging, there are a few compensations. Actress Busch conveys a sassy sense of reality that may not fit with the rest, but lends needed spark to the flat direction (two directors, which probably didn't help). Looks like she should be trading barbs with other street-smart types like Joan Blondell. Auer's got the face of a supernatural type, but rather surprisingly, doesn't play it up, thus weakening a pervasive sense of evil. And, I may be alone, but actor McCarthy could pass for an earlier edition of Paul Newman, at least in some shots. Too bad he died so young. And those two hulking black door guards amount to a note of visual inspiration, even if their dialog amounts to Amos and Andy.Overall, the movie's not bad enough for camp. In fact, it might even suffice for old movie junkies, like myself.

Rainey Dawn The Amazing Mr. X (1948) - watch that one for a fairly good film on the subject of a scamming swami it's in the same vein of Sucker Money. The Amazing Mr. X (1948) really is far superior to Sucker Money - it's not as cheesy and a much darker film. Sucker Money isn't a great script, it's bad really, but it's a fun film. Lots of hogwash, bologna and cheese - lots and lots of cheese. I enjoyed the film to a degree because I take it all in fun. It's just a film to watch if you want to see a swami on film in a mildly entertaining bad story. I really don't recommend Sucker Money to most people - but it is a film for people who are interested in occult topics and scams as well as enjoys the older films. 5/10

mark.waltz It's obvious from the get-go that this Z-grade programmer is formula from start to finish, standard stuff that never gives any surprises even if it has a few bright ideas along the way. You've got all the cardboard cut-out characters, from the con-artist fleecing the rich, the good-hearted tough dame, the wise-cracking stage manager, the dumb businessman, the fragile heroine and the handsome hero. It is also obvious that the good guys will prevail, the bad guys will pay and there will be a few innocent victims along the way. The usually over-the-top Mischa Auer takes it back a few notches to be subtle as he underplays his crooked swami (how I love ya, how I love ya...) to the point of actually making him boring. It is also obvious that when the hard-as-nails tough broad (the one with the heart of gold and liver of gin) puts on an old lady wig, she will instantly convince the heroine that she's her granny and another actor amongst the troop is her dear old dad. All this to get the rich people to invest in phony stocks (at the height of the depression, no less...) and this results in a botched kidnapping and furious chase sequence at the end. All this would be palatable if the quality of the camera work and sound wasn't so shoddy and the acting so melodramatically lame. This was done so much better years later with the campy "You'll Find Out" where Bela Lugosi had a lot of interesting gadgets as well as Karloff and Lorre and the music of Kay Kyser to basically do the same plot, but with more quality.