70,000 Witnesses (1932) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
6.5 of 10 for inquistive 21st century viewers?
metempsuchosis29 May 2022
Hooray for old, leather helmet football movies. The passage of time has helped this one as entertainment for 21st century old movie fans. I would like to give it a 7 rating. Johnny Mack Brown, a football player acting the part of a football player and Dorothy Jordan playing the role of a loyal co-ed in love are a plus but a 7 rating is too high due to the promenance of a drunkard reporter and novice sports broadcaster. Even Charlie Ruggles is not enough to make that character viable or entertaining (check out the bullet holes in the racoon coat). The 6.5 rating is offered to 21st century old movie fans, instead of a 6, due to the absence of an actress and singer who is not even accorded an "uncredited" status. 21st century old movie fans will perhaps enjoy guessing if that singer and actress is Ruth Etting.

Those who are not familiar with Ruth Etting will find plenty of information available on line. In addition to much more, she appeared in a long series of movie shorts between 1929 and 1936. The movie being rated is from 1932. The viewer may want to take a brief look at her on line in cyber space singing while Eddie Lang plays the guitar in another 1932 movie called A Regular Trouper). There she sings a song called "Without That Man". It was more commonly known as "Without That Gal". In 70,000 Witnesses there is again a change of gender in the lyrics to suit the putative Ruth Etting when she is singing a brief bit of "Don't Tell Him What Happened to Me". Ruth Etting recorded that tune in 1930. It is commonly known at "Don't Tell Her What Happened to Me".

Later in the movie, after the demise of Johnny Mack Brown before 70,000 football fans, the movie goes on to other scenes. One of those involves a character, a criminal bookie, whose name is Slip Buchanan. He is back from the big game and relaxing at home. Is the character who he is shown with Slip buchanan then played by Ruth Etting? She wonders why he did not take her because she likes football. He says he had business to do. She replies that sometimes mixing pleasure with business is "awful nice honey". When a visitor wants to come in the door, she says that perhaps she had better get dressed.

I hope that the reader of this evaluation will enjoy making up his or her own mind about whether it was Ruth Etting appearing in the 1932 movie and agree that 70,000 witnesses deserves a boost for 6. To 6.5.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
And Not One Saw What Happened
boblipton1 May 2022
It's the big college football game and gambler Lew Cody needs an upset to win big. He's got an inside track: no one, he thinks, knows his brother is Phillips Holmes, a key player on the team, and best friend of the quarterback, Johnny Mack Brown. He gives Holmes a vial that he says contains a harmless bromide that will put Brown out of the game. The net day, Brown is running a big play and drops dead on the field; his brain has exploded. It's up to e-New York cop David Landau to figure out what happened, with the help of his pal, drunk reporter Charles Ruggles.

It's a well written programmer; I couldn't figure out what had happened until a couple of minutes before Landau cracked open the case. The film is populated by the great character actors that Paramount threw into their ordinary productions, including J. Farrell MaDonald, Stu Erwin and Mary Gordon.

I found the most interesting factor in the staff behind the camera, many of whom would go on to make superior westerns over the net three decades. Harry Joe Brown is one of the producers, and Joseph Kane is the editor. It's a titled assembled movie that kept me interested throughout.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Ruth Etting? Yes and no.
garyjack512 September 2023
I agree with several of the reviewers here that this film was surprisingly well made.....to a point. How Johnny Mack Brown's character was killed on the field appears to be a foregone conclusion, but then things change and the obvious is much less obvious. My foregone conclusion was erased. However, the actual conclusion is just too slap-dash and contrived. We could have had an 8 star rating here with a better finish.

Some discussion about the appearance of Ruth Etting was enlightening to me. At the 22 minute mark, it appears that the real Ruth Etting is singing as the camera pans across the bar room. However, the lady companion of Lew Cody at the 46 minute mark definitely does not look like Ruth Etting. I am very well versed in 30s actresses but can't place that lady.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Fumbled in the end zone
There's a really brilliant, exciting movie in which a football player drops dead in the middle of a football match, in a stadium filled with witnesses... and it turns out he's been murdered. That brilliant movie is 'The Arsenal Stadium Mystery', a thriller filmed in England in 1939. '70,000 Witnesses', made in Hollywood seven years earlier, uses exactly the same premise ... but this movie is vastly inferior to 'Arsenal'.

A subdivision of mystery fiction is the 'impossible crime' story, in which a crime (usually a murder) is committed under circumstances so baffling that no solution (short of the supernatural) seems possible. The payoff comes with a solution that is totally unexpected, yet plausible ... and all the clues have been laid beforehand for the reader or viewer. The best examples of 'impossible crimes' are the locked-room mysteries by author John Dickson Carr.

'70,000 Witnesses' whets our appetite by setting up an 'impossible' crime which seemingly has no solution. We know that the case will be solved, and we eagerly anticipate a brilliantly unexpected resolution ... while at the same time we pay close attention for clues. It pains me to report that, after a first-rate set-up of the suspects, motivations, and so forth, '70,000 Witnesses' simply doesn't play fair with the audience. The identity of the murderer seems to be randomly chosen, and as for **how** the murderer pulled off this impossible crime ... well, the guy who wrote this thing just got lazy.

The opening scene is a football match between State and University. (Ah, those generic names! Does the winning team go on to play Tech?) We see the State players in their changing-room, putting on their uniforms and gear. The star player for State is Wally Clark, well-played by the underrated Johnny Mack Brown. Also on the team is Buck Buchanan ... unfortunately played by Phillips Holmes, a pretty-boy actor who usually portrayed characters with weak morals.

Time out for some clumsy exposition. Buck has a brother named Slip (their mother must have been very creative). Slip Buchanan, well-played by Lew Cody, is a spiv and a crooked gambler: he's wagered the astonishing sum of $350,000 (in Depression dollars) on University to win the game. (Hmm, in this movie it works out to $5 per witness.) To ensure that University's side will win the match, Slip pressures his younger brother Buck to slip some poison to Wally. Buck doesn't want to commit murder (apparently because it would make his own team lose the football match), but he doesn't want to argue with his brother. To placate Slip, Buck accepts the poison and agrees to murder Wally ... but we know he's planning not to comply. (Phillips Holmes looks and acts like someone who's just too gutless to commit a murder.)

At the climax of the game, Wally is running for a thrilling touchdown that will give State the victory ... when he suddenly keels over on the one-yard line. Dead! Did Buck kill him after all?

The coarse and deep-voiced character actor David Landau (whom I've disliked in nearly all his many roles) takes over the movie as the police detective investigating Wally's death. To solve the murder, he orders both football teams to re-enact the final play. (Surely the murderer will do something different this time, so as not to get caught, yes?) After an interesting set-up, this movie drops the ball. Fumble!

There's some of that hardboiled thick-ear dialogue that American movies of the 1930s achieve so delightfully. Some stock footage is very obviously inserted during the action sequences. Gruff actor J. Farrell MacDonald is effective and convincing as the State team's coach. Charlie Ruggles (whose popularity quite eludes me) receives bigger billing than he deserves in a comedy-relief role that's annoying and unfunny. I'd like to rate the first half of '70,000 Witnesses' as 9 out of 10, and the last reel an absolute zero. Split the difference and call this movie a 4 out of 10.
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What is this, a football story, or a Charlie Ruggles comedy sketch?
mark.waltz30 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
What really could have been an interesting expose on what goes on behind the scenes regarding college football teams and the men who bet on who will win the big games turns into a meaningless series of scenes where character actor Charlie Ruggles shamelessly overacts in several drunk scenes.

The setup of the film is quite good; one of the college star football players, Phillips Holmes, is asked by his brother to slip a drug to fellow teammate and best friend so they can lose the game. Holmes of course refuses, aghast at the suggestion. But after his brother continues to badger him, he takes the pill simply to pacify his brother and obviously not use it.

However, Holmes' brother is too smart and crooked to text a chance, and has the fellow player drug irregardless, leading to his collapse on the football field and sudden death from heart failure. This leads to Holmes being questioned and some truly gripping scenes of his trying to defend himself without pinning it on his brother. Ruggles plays the rather aggressive announcer, and during the game actually is very convincing.

But all of a sudden, it goes from a tale of crooked sports betting, sinister manipulation of the game, and a deal gone wrong, turning into the Charlie Ruggles show, and by that time is way off track, never to return. The lack of continuity in its writing is to blame, not the dependable scene stealer Ruggles who is simply doing his job as directed.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Dirty Work Between the Goal Posts!!
kidboots3 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Phillips Holmes, when everything was going right (good screenplay, good director etc) was able to give sensitive, insightful performances but he couldn't do it on his own. When the film was not good he couldn't seem to rise above it and his performances were shallow and one dimensional as he found out when he signed with MGM. They didn't really care enough about him to foster his talent so by "Stage Mother" (1933) his billing was prominent but his role was scarcely more than a bit. "70,000 Witnesses" was his last film under his Paramount contract and was a pretty involved story but at least Paramount had tried with him. College movies had a long vogue - and this film looked at the world of college football with a different twist!! Just love Charlie Ruggles, love his chortling laugh and the fact that he sounds as though he would have been just as jolly in real life!!! He makes his appearance as Moran, a sports broadcaster, who is trying to convince old pal (David Landau), an ex-FBI man that football is one sport that is completely on the level!!!

Apart from the fact that he looks nothing like a footballer, Phillips Holmes gives a terrific performance as Buck Buchanan, one of the shining stars of the State Football team. His best friend is Clark (John Mack Brown) star quarter back and he is "almost" engaged to Dorothy, Clark's sister (Dorothy Jordan is her usual sweet, charming Southern self), although he is hesitant to tell her of his family background. That's because he has something to hide - like his brother (Lew Cody) who is the head of a syndicate organization but he is forced to confront his past when big brother wants a big favour. Buck is asked to keep Clark out of Saturday's big game so the other team (University) can win. Holmes gives everything to his role - even though he returns to the dormitory with a powerful sedative he has no intention of giving it to Clark but in the end it doesn't matter because by the game's end Clark is dead and suspicion is pointing to Buck!!!

This is a well made movie very evenly paced - Ruggles is funny and doesn't wear out his welcome. It's nice to see David Landau playing a regular, decent guy instead of Mr. Nasty!! For keen viewers of early thirties movies, it's not hard to figure out who the villain is. Holmes is ruled out pretty quickly - he is so earnest to find the real killer and falls in with the detective's determination to replay the game!! Even Lew Cody is shocked - sure, he wanted the likable Clark out of the game but to resort to foul play - Never!!!

Highly Recommended.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Antique Athletes
GManfred27 September 2016
"70,000 Witnesses" is an extremely old football movie with stars who are long gone. It is a murder mystery which works until the murder and murderer are uncovered by Det. David Landau, one of my old time favorites. Johnny Mack Brown is the murdered player, and Philips Holmes is the leading man of the piece.

Much footage is shot in the Los Angeles Coliseum and some stock footage of games is used. This, as reviewers have noted, is supposed to be the big game between State and University, a clever use of school names. All goes well until the last half hour. Then takes place one of the most labored and preposterously contrived solutions to a murder in modern forensic science, which I thought was an anticlimax to a fairly good mystery up to that time. I was surprised to learn that it was a hit in its time, which just goes to show that you can fool some of the people some of the time - especially if it's a depression era audience.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
David Landau Shines Again
JohnHowardReid2 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Director: RALPH MURPHY. Screenplay: Garrettt Fort and Robert N. Lee. Additional dialogue: Allen Rivkin, P.J. Wolfson. Based on the 1931 novel by Cortland Fitzsimmons. Photography: Henry Sharp. Film editor: Joseph Kane. Art director: David S. Garber. Music: Harold C. Lewis. Production manager: Val Paul. A Charles R. Rogers Production. Associate producer: Harry Joe Brown.

Copyright 1 September 1932 by Paramount Publix Corp. New York opening at both the Times Square Paramount and the Brooklyn Paramount: 2 September 1932. 8 reels. 72 minutes.

SYNOPSIS: During the championship match between State and University, the number one football player keels over and dies in mysterious circumstances on the field.

COMMENT: Not surprisingly, this was a very popular picture in its day. A fast-moving story, crowded with an interesting group of characters, directed with style, pace and panache, and produced on a really top budget with realistically milling mobs of extras, deserved to succeed even before the main roles were filled with charismatic players like David Landau, J. Farrell McDonald and Charlie Ruggles. I'll admit that Landau is one of my favorite actors. I just love the way he can still dominate a scene even with his back to the camera and even if placed in another player's shadow. Although laced with obvious newsreel shots of an actual game, the editing is so skillful and the direction so astringently focused, we don't really care. The players, the crowds, the train travelers, the speak easy patrons, all seem so genuine, we can't help but thrill to the hero's dilemma, even when that hero is played by the less than charismatic Phillips Holmes. Admittedly the character is supposed to be made of less sterner stuff, but Holmes seems a little too pliable for a team member of the country's top group of footballers. The camera also focuses a little too much on Charlie Ruggles who, despite his obvious charisma, contrives to make his comic relief a little too drawn out and repetitious. Nevertheless, the movie holds the interest amazingly well right up to the climax when, alas, it starts to come apart – not enough to ruin the movie but just enough to put the last few minutes off balance.

The DVD is of very good quality.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed