Fugitive Lovers (1934) User Reviews

An outlandish, absurd plot, but awfully fun to watch.

[Art-22 · 6/10 · 20 April 1999]

There is so many absurd plot elements in this movie it's a wonder it ever got past the writer's room. That it plays much better than it must read is a tribute to director Richard Boleslavsky and the wonderful cast: Robert Montgomery as an escaped convict; Madge Evans as a chorine fleeing from the attentions of a gangster by boarding a cross-country bus; and Nat Pendleton as the gangster, so convinced that Evans is crazy about him that he boards the bus too. You never learn just why Montgomery was in prison, but I rooted for him just the same, sensing he was a good man. Evans sensed this too, helping him even after she learns he was the object of a nationwide manhunt. There is a lot of comedy (Ted Healy and the Three Stooges are on the bus); there is suspense when a bus full of children is buried by a blinding snowstorm; and drama of the chase and attempted rescue, all pleasures to enjoy. There is also the surprise at seeing Akim Tamiroff, Walter Brennan and others in unbilled roles. Much of the movie was shot on the road using two buses as mobile sets.

Maybe not a great picture, but highly interesting.

[George041 · 7/10 · 21 June 2003]

Robert Montgomery, Nat Pendleton, and Madge Evans turn in remarkable performances. Please note the talents of Mr. Pendleton. He could do comedy and serious roles. Also, his background is very interesting (Olympic athelte). The trip through New Jersey and Pennsylvania at the time (1934) shows a sparsely populated countryside. At that time, the George Washington Bridge had only one level and the highways were mostly two lanes. Also, if you're familiar with the George Washington Bridge, the entrance on the New York side was vastly different from what it is today. It's almost like taking a trip aboard a time machine.

Good...but awfully unrealistic.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 22 May 2020]

"Fugitive Lovers" is a very flawed film. But, it also has some very good moments. The ending and Madge Evans' acting are quite nice....and overall it's worth seeing provided you can look past a few poorly written aspects of the movie.

Letty is a chorus girl in a local play. However, the backer of this show is Legs Caffey (Nat Pendleton)...and this gangster only is paying for this show because he's infatuated with Letty. But because Letty is NOT stupid, she wants nothing to do with Caffey...she just wants to do her job. This isn't possible, however, as Caffey goes so far as having one of his goons drag her off stage in order to go to Atlantic City with him for a vacation! Not surprisingly, she soon escapes and boards a bus for Los Angeles...and Legs soon realizes what she's done and joins her...harassing her all the trip long.

In the midst of this cross country trip is a prison break and Paul Porter (Robert Montgomery) manages to make his way to the bus and ends up sitting with Letty. Eventually, they fall in love and you'll have to see the film to know what's next.

There are many problems with the story. What Legs ends up doing to help Letty simply makes no sense based on who he is supposed to be. Additionally, the notion of Letty falling for Paul so quickly is utterly ridiculous...particularly since she then is willing to risk going to prison herself in order to help him!! This makes no sense...and it's a trope used by many filmmakers....even Hitchcock TWICE (in "Young and Innocent" as well as, to a lesser extent, in "The 39 Steps"). But when you think about it...it just makes no sense. Why would a woman who just met an escaped criminal help??? Unless she's clinically insane, it just doesn't make sense.

Overall, the film is a mixed bag. The ending is great...pure and simple. So perhaps it's worth seeing just for the last 15 minutes. Otherwise, it's tough going.

By the way, there is one good reason to watch this film....Ted Healy and the Three Stooges are in it. This is because the quartet were under contract with MGM and the studio simply had no idea what to do with them. You also see them in films like "Dancing Lady"....for no particular reason. But I really like their appearance in "Fugitive Lovers" because they aren't playing it for comedy...and Moe, Curly and Larry (particularly Moe) look very normal.

Ted Healy and his Stooges

[Traj · 6/10 · 24 May 2006]

An interesting mix of comedy and drama. I found it interesting that the Three Stooges along with Ted Healy had parts in the movie. This was made the year that the Stooges made their split with Healy. Moe, Larry and Curly were not exactly in character here and while their screen time was limited, it was great to see them. While Healy was in the movie with the Stooges, they did not appear to be together. Healy clearly had a larger part in the movie, interacting with Robert Montgomery. Moe and Curly had more screen time than Larry. There was no "leader" in the group. There was no slapping and poking as they later became famous for. They did however harmonize a tune that later would show up in one of their shorts. I wish they had more screen time! This movie was made the same year that the Three Stooges made their debut in the Columbia short "Women Haters".

B. Montgomery & 3 stooges.

[ksf-2 · 6/10 · 14 August 2020]

Nat Pendleton is Caffey, producer, who tries to pick up Letty (Madge Evans). there's a jail break, and here comes Blaine (Robert Montgomery), who joins Caffey and Letty on long a bus trip. Caffey figgers out who Blaine is, and tries to give him a break if he exits now, but Blaine won't leave. co-stars the Three Stooges, although here, they are called the Three Julians. in much more low key roles than they ever had before! un-credited appearance by Milton Kibbee... had TONS of small parts, but older brother Guy was so much better known. and the awesome Walter Brennan is a bus driver. everybody starts closing in on Blaine, but he seems to get away every time. it's all pretty light weight. some fun characters on that bus ride! and then things start to snowball. literally. in the snow! Directed by Richard Boleslawski. he died so young a couple years later, during the filming of Mrs Cheyney.

Little-known gem

[JimB-4 · 9/10 · 16 June 2006]

I watched this film merely because of the opportunity to see the Three Stooges in one of their early features. I was surprised (pleasantly) by their appearance, as they actually played real characters, pretty much, and not outrageous clowns. And although their former honcho Ted Healy is in the film, they don't really interact with him. But the true surprise was how wonderfully entertaining and brilliantly shot the whole thing is. Richard Boleslawsky and Ted Tatzleff, the cinematographer, created a visual sense to this film unmatched by anything I remember seeing from the period. And the pacing, both in cutting and in dialog, manages to be rapid-fire and eloquent at the same time. So much has been made about the development of deep-focus photography in the years following this film, it's often forgotten that short focus can be fabulous to look at as well. Inside the bus that provides much of the setting for this film, there is always a sense of constant life going on in the background even though the foreground faces are the only things in sharp focus. I loved the look of this movie. Faces are given immense importance, even when the character who owns the face is not so important to the plot. And even the minor characters have minutely detailed physical, facial, and emotional detail of expression, bringing each of them to vivid life, often in a few seconds or less. Technically, I think this movie represents an amazing accomplishment. The plot and the performances are neither unfamiliar nor astonishing, but the execution in virtually every department is smashing. I wish I'd known about this little gem years ago.

How Not To Make A Road Movie

[malcolmgsw · 4/10 · 30 November 2010]

When i started to watch this film it started to feel suspiciously like "It Happened One Night".The interesting thing is that this film was released just 6 weeks before "IHON.So i wonder who stole what from whom.Anyway whereas IHOO is still funny and famous this film is justly forgotten.It seems to have had the fingerprints of many writers on it,6 are credited ,but how many more actually worked on it i wonder.It starts out OK enlivened by Healy and the 3 stooges.However once they disappear and the dramatic plot takes over this film goes into freefall.It is the epitome of poor writing and plot development and to say it is unbelievable and formulaic is just to understate the case.Even Nat Pendleton with his overacting in the early part of the film was preferable to the miscast Robert Montgomery and the dreadful tear jerking 4 hankie stuff at the conclusion.My best advice is that if you are determined to watch this film then turn it off when Healy and the Stooges leave.Then you will feel that you have seen a reasonable film.

silk purse from a sow's ear

[westerfield · 8/10 · 13 September 2005]

This film is a perfect example of how to turn a pot-boiler into an art form. Each shot is expertly staged, lit and photographed - a stunning example of what a major studio can do with behind-the-scenes-talent in all fields with a minor script. The director is not well known but some of his films, notably Les Miserables, are well loved. The kind of quality he brought to such major films is here just as clearly in a minor one. Each person photographed on the bus could well be a Steichen portrait. The snow scenes have a beauty seldom captured, particularly on a studio set. I recommend everyone record this film on DVD the next time it's on TCM. After seeing it you'll want to go back and study individual frames.