Cult Review
Senior Film Conservator

Honestly, only if you are deep into the weeds of early cinema or just really, really like old-school horse track shenanigans. It is short, which is its best feature, but don't expect a masterpiece. If you get bored by guys in suits whispering in corners, skip it.
The whole thing feels like a dusty relic pulled out of a shoebox. Tom and George are our leads, and they spend half the movie looking genuinely confused by their own plot. They decide to help this Southern colonel character—who is basically just a walking debt pile—by betting on horses they know nothing about.
Why do they trust the touts? I have no idea. It feels like they just wanted an excuse to stand around at the track and look worried.
There is a scene near the middle where they lose a chunk of cash, and the way they stare at the camera is just… something. It’s not acting so much as it is them waiting for a cue that never came. It reminded me a bit of the frantic energy in The Adventurer, but without the slapstick brilliance.
The colonel is a hoot. He wears that title like it’s a suit of armor, even though he clearly hasn't seen a battlefield in years. You can tell the actor was having a blast playing the part, even if the script didn't give him much to do besides look panicked.
By the time the tout gets caught, I had already forgotten why I was rooting for them in the first place. It is just a quick shuffle of money and a sudden ending. It lacks the polish you see in stuff like Tol'able David, but it’s not trying to be that, so I guess that’s fine.
It’s fine. It’s just fine. Sometimes you watch a movie, and you move on immediately. 🐎
IMDb Rating
—

Editorial
Deciphering the legacy of transgressive cult cinema.
Community
Log in to comment.