I love this movie so much

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Absolutely the worst movie.

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.

Back in 1930, the studios thought that audiences wanted operettas and more operettas. They didn't. So, by the end of 1930, movies that were operettas were quickly converted into regular movies, without the singing. Judging by the plot, and the actual existence of a fairly decent musical score (not common in early 30s Warners pictures), this would appear to be one of those quickly converted movies.Without the songs, the movie is both rather short and horrible. There really is only one good scene: the very pretty Fay Wray makes her entrance in a slip, because the daring bandit Captain Thunder, upon robbing her stagecoach, stole everyone's clothes. (There was some reason given, but I just don't remember it.) Wray, herself, plays a Mexican senorita with the expected amount of hot-bloodedness. Captain Thunder, alas, being middle aged with a receding hairline and advancing second chin, has far less sex appeal than King Kong. Thunder, himself, overacts unamusingly, and is only surpassed in this by the bad actor playing the commandante who never can seem to capture Thunder. Talking scenes go on and on and on and are filled with overwritten attempted comedy, or the sort of dialog that only a Lena Lamont could do justice to. If there were any action scenes, I must have slept through them.Don't be tempted by the Fay Wray starring role. Avoid this, and save the hour and a half in your life for a second viewing of King Kong.

A delightful museum piece with lots of uproariously phony Spanish talk and inane chatter, accompanied by an appropriately wheezy music score. All the acting is marvelously hammy. Mind you, Mr Varconi does tend to out-stay his limited welcome to the point where he starts to get on your nerves, but no-one will complain about Fay Wray. Admittedly, she can't act for toffee, but she is a fine figure of a young lady, and she does makes a gorgeous entrance in her slip.And would believe this tosh is directed by the great silent metteur en scene, Alan Crosland? He gets few opportunities here for pictorial scope, though admittedly there are some nice visual touches. As for the story, it's all that you might expect from an imitation Cisco Kid, with a plot twist that would certainly do credit to O. Henry himself.Nonetheless, Crosland's overall contribution does not exactly shine. He had not lost his touch, but was doubtless overawed by the technical requirements of early sound recording. One suspects that this film was actually made before and not after "Viennese Nights", which is a much more accomplished (and far more expensive and expansive) production.

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.