Contrary to what most others have stated, this poverty row-looking production was NOT actually produced or made by Universal (so folks can stop criticizing the poor production values on the greatest studio during the classic era of horror). This fairly dull movie (yes...I agree that much with the negative reviews here) was actually made by Scienart Pictures, and only distributed theatrically by Universal, who did NOT produce it. So people can get off Universal's back with their lambasting of the movie...instead blame Scienart Pictures.
20 Reviews
Gee, ain't science swell.
BA_Harrison19 May 2013
Self-absorbed scientist Dr. John Kendrick (Onslow Stevens) becomes so obsessed with realising his dream of bringing the dead back to life that he neglects both his successful medical practice and his loving family, losing his wife and his mind in the process. Rather than face a stint in juvenile hall, Kendrick's son Danny (George P. Breakston) runs away from home and joins a gang in the next neighbourhood, where his lovable mutt Scooter proves popular with the other kids until it is nabbed and gassed to death by the local dog-catcher. A distraught Danny gives his father one last chance to prove his worth: teaming up with old college pals Dr. Louise Stone (Lois Wilson) and Dr. Robert Cornish (played by real life pioneering scientist Robert Cornish), Kendrick performs a revolutionary procedure to bring the mutt back from the dead.
Part heavy-handed drama, part Little Rascals-style kids' adventure, and part scientific curio, this has got to be one of the most unusual films to come out of Universal Studios during the 30s; however, despite its undeniable credentials as a genuinely bizarre obscurity, the film utilising real-life footage of Cornish's experiments on a dead dog during its climax, Life Returns offers very little in the way of real entertainment value, being too dull, depressing, and devoid of genuine entertainment value to be of much interest to anyone but the most avid fan of Universal's output.
Part heavy-handed drama, part Little Rascals-style kids' adventure, and part scientific curio, this has got to be one of the most unusual films to come out of Universal Studios during the 30s; however, despite its undeniable credentials as a genuinely bizarre obscurity, the film utilising real-life footage of Cornish's experiments on a dead dog during its climax, Life Returns offers very little in the way of real entertainment value, being too dull, depressing, and devoid of genuine entertainment value to be of much interest to anyone but the most avid fan of Universal's output.
LIFE RETURNS (Eugene Frenke and, uncredited, James P. Hogan, 1935) **
Bunuel19769 October 2011
The presence in the cast of Onslow Stevens (later the nominal lead in 1945's HOUSE OF Dracula) and Valerie Hobson (who starred in both BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and WEREWOLF OF London that same year) is the only indication that this obscure curio was a product of Universal Studios during their golden age as Hollywood's top purveyors of chills and thrills. However, despite this being (relatively speaking) a "mad doctor with a back-from-the-dead scheme" scenario, the end result is far removed from the entertainment value and artistic quality one usually associates with that celebrated horror cycle. Indeed, the film ends up being closer in feel to a Warner Bros-type of social document crossed with a Hal Roach "Our Gang" flick and directed by exploitationer Dwain Esper! Unfortunately, it plays far less amusingly than that bizarre concoction sounds!
Stevens falls out with his two fellow students (including real-life scientist Dr. Robert E. Cornish, who the previous year had actually accomplished the life-giving experiment that inspired the movie in the first place!) over financing their project and goes to work for a commercial firm which, however, soon drops him when his continuous attempts grow costlier and more fruitless by the day. This rejection makes him give up his well-paying daytime practice of treating elderly socialites of non-existent ailments and his consequent impoverishment drives wife Hobson to an early grave and son George Breakston to a juvenile court! The latter eventually takes to the road with his pet dog and joins a gang of streetwise kids who live on their wiles in procuring whatever food they can from 'providential' neighbors! Needless to say, this situation ends badly with the dog being caught by the authorities and subsequently gassed and one of the kids getting hurt in the attempt to free the mutt.
Distressed by failing his son yet again in curing his wounded friend (claiming to be 'washed-up'), Stevens contrives to set up an operation in which Breakston's dead dog is revived, thus proving his initial theory after all! As silly as it sounds, the footage depicting this is actually authentic and integrated into the storyline by having Stevens narrate the ongoing procedure carried out by Cornish and his colleagues (similarly portraying themselves) to a group of gathered medicos – something which he himself could not accomplish because his ostensible patrons did not want to fork out any more dough on some all-important apparatus! Being a lifelong animal lover, this sequence (showing Cornish giving mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to the dog!) could not fail to stir me and easily emerges as the film's highlight even if LIFE RETURNS itself as a whole proved too amateurish and bland for a Universal horror product! For the record, uncredited co-director James Hogan would later make yet another lesser (but more typical) example along similar 'revivification' lines i.e. THE MAD GHOUL (1943).
Stevens falls out with his two fellow students (including real-life scientist Dr. Robert E. Cornish, who the previous year had actually accomplished the life-giving experiment that inspired the movie in the first place!) over financing their project and goes to work for a commercial firm which, however, soon drops him when his continuous attempts grow costlier and more fruitless by the day. This rejection makes him give up his well-paying daytime practice of treating elderly socialites of non-existent ailments and his consequent impoverishment drives wife Hobson to an early grave and son George Breakston to a juvenile court! The latter eventually takes to the road with his pet dog and joins a gang of streetwise kids who live on their wiles in procuring whatever food they can from 'providential' neighbors! Needless to say, this situation ends badly with the dog being caught by the authorities and subsequently gassed and one of the kids getting hurt in the attempt to free the mutt.
Distressed by failing his son yet again in curing his wounded friend (claiming to be 'washed-up'), Stevens contrives to set up an operation in which Breakston's dead dog is revived, thus proving his initial theory after all! As silly as it sounds, the footage depicting this is actually authentic and integrated into the storyline by having Stevens narrate the ongoing procedure carried out by Cornish and his colleagues (similarly portraying themselves) to a group of gathered medicos – something which he himself could not accomplish because his ostensible patrons did not want to fork out any more dough on some all-important apparatus! Being a lifelong animal lover, this sequence (showing Cornish giving mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to the dog!) could not fail to stir me and easily emerges as the film's highlight even if LIFE RETURNS itself as a whole proved too amateurish and bland for a Universal horror product! For the record, uncredited co-director James Hogan would later make yet another lesser (but more typical) example along similar 'revivification' lines i.e. THE MAD GHOUL (1943).
Life Returns (1935) *
JoeKarlosi29 August 2006
Arguably one of the most baffling movies ever, and probably THE single worst thing Universal Studios was ever involved with during their golden "horror cycle". LIFE RETURNS is a rare curio which features Onslow Stevens (Dr. Edelmann from HOUSE OF Dracula), Valerie Hobson (BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN) and even Frank Reicher (KING KONG). In the excellent MacFarland book UNIVERSAL HORRORS I had read that this was one of those obscure films that fans love to try and locate, only to be bitterly disappointed once they track it down. I remember a quote which concluded that "LIFE RETURNS deserves its ongoing obscurity", or something. Well....the risk is yours! So what is this, then? One guess is that it's possibly a story about a doctor (Stevens) trying to develop a formula for bringing dead people back to life, though it's certainly not a horror film. This also echoes the vibe of an "Our Gang" two-reeler minus the comedy: the doc has a young son who becomes involved with a gang of kids and has a pet dog which ultimately becomes a participant in dad's experiment. Footage in here was taken straight from an actual medical procedure trying to revive a dog, spliced in to make it appear part of the movie! * out of ****
What the....?!
planktonrules4 June 2010
This is a truly bizarre little film that really baffled me--so much so that I tried to research a bit about the odd work of Robert E. Cornish and would like to know what made this odd man tick. Apparently in the early 1930s, this odd man was interested in reviving the dead--though the practicality of such work is rather dubious. Apparently he'd hoped to use this technique on humans but why is beyond me. His work, thankfully, was restricted to dogs. First, they'd euthanize a dog. Then using a combination of stimulants, artificial respiration and a teeter-totter-like device, they were able to BRIEFLY revive a couple dogs...who died PERMANENTLY soon after!!! So what possible use is this procedure?! Well, I guess if a person would be euthanized, you MIGHT be to bring him or her back BRIEFLY--and then they'll die! Wow, no wonder this guy never became all that famous! Apparently, the film makers who brought us this film decided to make use of film footage they had of one of Dr. Cornish's dog revivals. BUT, they had to create a story in which to insert this footage. As for the story, it's pretty dull and is great if you like bad 'boy and his dog' films. Ultimately, the film is sunk because this story and the footage really aren't integrated well together. First, the dog in the experiment is NOT the same one they used as an actor in the film. Second, the stuff is pretty cloying and has a crappy low-budget look and feel to it. The overall effect is poor but not bad enough to make it funny or entertaining as kitsch.
Dreadful and Cheap
utgard1413 January 2012
I'm a huge fan of the classic horror & sci-fi films of the 1930s and 1940s, particularly those of Universal. So when I came across this obscure title, starring Onslow Stevens and Valerie Hobson (both of much better Universal titles), I thought I'd struck paydirt. Unfortunately, I struck just plain old ordinary dirt. For starters, this movie looks cheap. If you're expecting any of the Universal polish that you find in most of their classic films, forget it. This looks like the kind of Poverty Row cheapie Bela Lugosi would be doing in years to come. The story is basically about bringing dead dogs back to life.
The main selling point is supposedly this guy Robert Cornish, who appears in the movie but hardly speaks and rarely has the camera focused on his face when he does. Apparently for about 5 minutes back in the day he made headlines for bringing a dog back to life. The actual footage of that is crammed into this movie and it's about as cheap and bland as you might expect. Although seeing the guy give the dog mouth-to-mouth is worth a gander. However, despite this movie basically only being made because of Mr. Cornish, he's not the real star of it. The star is Onslow Stevens, turning in a dreary performance as Dr. John Kendrick. He staggers around in a daze for most of the picture (when he's not acting crazy, that is). But it's not entirely his fault. The character is written so unlikeable that you can't root for him even though the movie's objective is to make you do just that. After suffering ONE setback, Dr. Kendrick turns into a total loser wandering around like he's lost and looking disheveled. The guy lets his practice go to ruin, lets his wife die and kid live on the street, all the while whining and moping. He's a mess. Speaking of the kid, he's very annoying and the actor playing him is awful ("Scoota! Scoota!").
Anyway, the best part of this whole movie to me was a minor tidbit. When they show the newspaper article announcing Kendrick's engagement, the headline below that reads "Dog Saves Lad From Wasps." That would have made for a much more interesting film, I think. I was pretty disappointed in this movie and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody but Universal completists and people who like movies they can make fun of.
The main selling point is supposedly this guy Robert Cornish, who appears in the movie but hardly speaks and rarely has the camera focused on his face when he does. Apparently for about 5 minutes back in the day he made headlines for bringing a dog back to life. The actual footage of that is crammed into this movie and it's about as cheap and bland as you might expect. Although seeing the guy give the dog mouth-to-mouth is worth a gander. However, despite this movie basically only being made because of Mr. Cornish, he's not the real star of it. The star is Onslow Stevens, turning in a dreary performance as Dr. John Kendrick. He staggers around in a daze for most of the picture (when he's not acting crazy, that is). But it's not entirely his fault. The character is written so unlikeable that you can't root for him even though the movie's objective is to make you do just that. After suffering ONE setback, Dr. Kendrick turns into a total loser wandering around like he's lost and looking disheveled. The guy lets his practice go to ruin, lets his wife die and kid live on the street, all the while whining and moping. He's a mess. Speaking of the kid, he's very annoying and the actor playing him is awful ("Scoota! Scoota!").
Anyway, the best part of this whole movie to me was a minor tidbit. When they show the newspaper article announcing Kendrick's engagement, the headline below that reads "Dog Saves Lad From Wasps." That would have made for a much more interesting film, I think. I was pretty disappointed in this movie and I wouldn't recommend it to anybody but Universal completists and people who like movies they can make fun of.
Surprisingly Good
sbibb127 January 2004
Surprisingly good and well acted film about a scientist (Onslow Stevens) who spends years of his life working on a formula to bring the dead back to life. His goal overshadows other important things in his life, like his wife, job and son (George Breakston).
The film was made in 1935, but was not released until 1937. The footage of the operation is actual footage performed by Dr. Robert E. Cornish, in which he brings a dead dog back to life. One is left to think today that if the experiment had really been successful that Dr. Cornish would have gone down in history.
Valerie Hobson plays the doctors friend. This is years before her later humiliation, when her husband, John Profumo, an elected British official, had an affair with a chorus girl.
The film was made in 1935, but was not released until 1937. The footage of the operation is actual footage performed by Dr. Robert E. Cornish, in which he brings a dead dog back to life. One is left to think today that if the experiment had really been successful that Dr. Cornish would have gone down in history.
Valerie Hobson plays the doctors friend. This is years before her later humiliation, when her husband, John Profumo, an elected British official, had an affair with a chorus girl.
Why Isn't This About Robert Cornish...?
brando64726 June 2016
The tale of LIFE RETURNS is more interesting in what they're not showing you, rather than what they are. I was intrigued by the title card preceding the movie proclaiming, "This part of the picture was originally taken to retain a permanent scientific record of our experiment" and "Everything shown is absolutely real." It was presented as a sort of letter to the audience and it closed with the name Robert E. Cornish. Then it continues with yet more text, this time a scrawl that dedicated this "unusual screen play" to the "determination and genius of those men who have unselfishly devoted their lives to the service of humanity." So it's got a nice pro-science message, as opposed to the usual doom and gloom sci-fi morality tales. We then join three friends in college: Louise Stone (Lois Wilson), Robert Cornish, and John Kendrick (Onslow Stevens). For the record, Cornish actually plays himself for this movie. This matters little because, once our three friends graduate college with their doctorates following a brief montage, Kendrick breaks off from the trio to pursue the chance of performing his research at the Arnold Research laboratories. Rather than follow Cornish, who wrote us that nice letter for the opening and referenced his own experiments, we go along with Kendrick to his new life at Arnold Research. So Kendrick's our main character? All right, then. We're treated to some more quick glimpses of life moving along with news that Kendrick has married a socialite and had a son.
Life seems to be going smoothly for Kendrick for a while, practicing medicine while also continuing his research. What's his research involve? Oh, that's right: returning people from the dead. Not like zombies unfortunately; that'd be too fun. It's the ability to revive people from recent death due to accidents or illness. It's all going swell until the big boss pays a visit to the office and not only refuses a requisition order for new equipment but also shuts down Kendrick's research entirely. He wants him to focus on more important things in life, such as nail polish and assorted ointments. Then Kendrick's wife dies (incredibly suddenly) from an undefined illness. It's all going to crap now, and Kendrick is left to tend to his young son Danny (played by future director of THE MANSTER, George Breakston). Sadly, Kendrick can't keep it together. He's quit his work at Arnold Research (he wasn't interested in shifting his research to creating the ultimate hair-restoring brush), ditches his medical practice, and now the county has decided to take his son away. Honestly, it's probably for the best. Danny is to be placed in the county's juvenile hall since Kendrick isn't a fit father. Which is true; he's a total wreck at this point. Danny won't have any of it, and escapes with his dog Scooter to live among street hooligans in their makeshift clubhouse. The entire second half of the movie deals with Danny's new street life with his rascally friends and his attempts to pull his dad out of his rut.
Now back to what I said at the beginning. LIFE RETURNS is more interesting in what it's not showing you versus what it is. We waste an entire hour-long movie following the sorry luck of Kendrick and his son's street adventures with plucky 1930's street kids, but why aren't we following Cornish? This movie is (vaguely) about his true-to-life experiments in reviving the dead. Google him. He's a real dude. So why isn't this movie about him? When the trio of new doctors split, we should go with Cornish and see where his life goes. Instead we reconnect with him in the last ten minutes of the movie for the big experiment we were promised in the opening text. I had the thought that the surgical footage looked a little too real and I noticed the reaction shots from Dr. Stone and Danny seemed tagged on. Sure enough, it was and they were. The final ten minutes of this movie is one of Dr. Cornish's actual surgical procedures to return a being to life after death. So that's cool, I guess. I can't help but feel kind of bad for Cornish though because a lot of the victory goes to Kendrick because he needs his big win to end the movie on a high note. Cornish is performing the procedure, but the movie sort of gives Kendrick credit. It's a bummer for Cornish, and it's a bummer for us having had to sit through an hour of family drama and one man's total breakdown when we could've been following Cornish's tale the entire time. From the little bit I read about him on Wikipedia, I can guarantee it would've been way, way more interesting.
Life seems to be going smoothly for Kendrick for a while, practicing medicine while also continuing his research. What's his research involve? Oh, that's right: returning people from the dead. Not like zombies unfortunately; that'd be too fun. It's the ability to revive people from recent death due to accidents or illness. It's all going swell until the big boss pays a visit to the office and not only refuses a requisition order for new equipment but also shuts down Kendrick's research entirely. He wants him to focus on more important things in life, such as nail polish and assorted ointments. Then Kendrick's wife dies (incredibly suddenly) from an undefined illness. It's all going to crap now, and Kendrick is left to tend to his young son Danny (played by future director of THE MANSTER, George Breakston). Sadly, Kendrick can't keep it together. He's quit his work at Arnold Research (he wasn't interested in shifting his research to creating the ultimate hair-restoring brush), ditches his medical practice, and now the county has decided to take his son away. Honestly, it's probably for the best. Danny is to be placed in the county's juvenile hall since Kendrick isn't a fit father. Which is true; he's a total wreck at this point. Danny won't have any of it, and escapes with his dog Scooter to live among street hooligans in their makeshift clubhouse. The entire second half of the movie deals with Danny's new street life with his rascally friends and his attempts to pull his dad out of his rut.
Now back to what I said at the beginning. LIFE RETURNS is more interesting in what it's not showing you versus what it is. We waste an entire hour-long movie following the sorry luck of Kendrick and his son's street adventures with plucky 1930's street kids, but why aren't we following Cornish? This movie is (vaguely) about his true-to-life experiments in reviving the dead. Google him. He's a real dude. So why isn't this movie about him? When the trio of new doctors split, we should go with Cornish and see where his life goes. Instead we reconnect with him in the last ten minutes of the movie for the big experiment we were promised in the opening text. I had the thought that the surgical footage looked a little too real and I noticed the reaction shots from Dr. Stone and Danny seemed tagged on. Sure enough, it was and they were. The final ten minutes of this movie is one of Dr. Cornish's actual surgical procedures to return a being to life after death. So that's cool, I guess. I can't help but feel kind of bad for Cornish though because a lot of the victory goes to Kendrick because he needs his big win to end the movie on a high note. Cornish is performing the procedure, but the movie sort of gives Kendrick credit. It's a bummer for Cornish, and it's a bummer for us having had to sit through an hour of family drama and one man's total breakdown when we could've been following Cornish's tale the entire time. From the little bit I read about him on Wikipedia, I can guarantee it would've been way, way more interesting.
Dire mush
Woodyanders18 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Struggling scientist Dr. John Kendrick (an embarrassingly overwrought performance by Onslow Stevens) creates an experimental serum that can restore life. However, he can't get the necessary funds to continue with his research. In addition, Kendrick gets so caught up in his work that he neglects his son Danny (a supremely annoying portrayal by George Breakston). Flatly directed by Eugene Frenke and James P. Hogan, with a very sappy and talky script by L. Wolfe Gilbert and John F. Goodrich, a sluggish pace, too much goopy sentiment (the maudlin ending in particular is enough to make one puke thanks to its sickening bathos), a rambling narrative that spends a majority of screen time on a gang of obnoxious little kids instead of focusing on the more interesting serum premise, two unappealing central characters, and a slushy score by Oliver Wallace and Clifford Vaughan, this picture alas turns out to be quite the arduous chore to endure. On the plus side, Lois Wilson provides a little much needed (and appreciated) spark as the sunny Dr. Louise Stone and Robert H. Planck's black and white cinematography boasts neat use of fades and dissolves. But overall this clunker still rates as a real wash-out.
Fairly mediocre medical melodrama
Red-Barracuda24 August 2014
I was surprised to learn that this was a product of Universal Studios because it looked very much more like a product of Poverty Row. Despite what you could reasonably expect, it isn't one of Universal's horror cycle though, it's barely even sci-fi either and is mostly a melodrama. It's about a doctor who continues to try and develop a formula that will re-animate the dead. He eventually succeeds in bringing his son's dog back to life.
The film tries to suggest that we will witness footage from an operation that indeed did bring a dog back from the dead. Apparently a Dr. Cornish devised this procedure and tested it successfully. He stars in this one and it's footage of his surgery we see in the finale. In reality the dog may have been briefly resuscitated but it died very soon afterwards. Of course the movie doesn't show this! On the whole this is an okay medical drama that could probably have been told in a more exciting manner. On a side note, I did find it quite amusing that the paperboy in the film used his dog to carry his newspapers in a little dog cart, the lazy little git.
The film tries to suggest that we will witness footage from an operation that indeed did bring a dog back from the dead. Apparently a Dr. Cornish devised this procedure and tested it successfully. He stars in this one and it's footage of his surgery we see in the finale. In reality the dog may have been briefly resuscitated but it died very soon afterwards. Of course the movie doesn't show this! On the whole this is an okay medical drama that could probably have been told in a more exciting manner. On a side note, I did find it quite amusing that the paperboy in the film used his dog to carry his newspapers in a little dog cart, the lazy little git.
One of the Most Hackneyed Melodramas I Have Ever Seen
LanceBrave1 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
"Life Returns" is another example of a film Universal produced during their horror golden age that, despite sometimes being included among those classics, is not actually a horror film. Instead, it's a maudlin drama with only the slightest science fiction trappings.
This film is loosely based (Very loosely based) on a real life incident where scientist revived a dead dog. The filmmakers, for some reason, choose to build one of the most hackneyed melodramas I have ever seen around that premise. You've got a young, ambitious scientist who's dreams of reviving the dead are crushed by the cold harsh realities of corporate commercialism. His wife dies of reasons never further elaborate on. His young son can't sell newspapers and is constantly threatened with "Juvenile Hall," as if that was the worse fate imaginable. Soon, the kid meets up with a gang of young rapscallions, right out of friggin' Little Rascals. After the kind of mean, sadistic dog catcher that only exists in lousy movies like this steals his beloved pet, the kids do a daring escape and release all the dogs from the pound. Meanwhile, Little Jimmy's Dad kind of sits around, getting more depressed. Eventually, the beloved dog is killed and we finally get to the central gimmick the whole movie is built around. Instead of recreating the actual experiment, the characters in the film look just off-screen at the actual stock footage of real scientist doing their thing.
I'm sure in real life the scientists just killed a dog for the expressed purpose of reviving it. And I'm fairly certain, after they brought the animal back to life, the beloved owner didn't kneel before the operating table and cuddle. The movie's in the public domain and is widely available on Youtube. Turning the hilariously incoherent self-generated close captioning on actually makes the film somewhat entertaining. Somewhat.
This film is loosely based (Very loosely based) on a real life incident where scientist revived a dead dog. The filmmakers, for some reason, choose to build one of the most hackneyed melodramas I have ever seen around that premise. You've got a young, ambitious scientist who's dreams of reviving the dead are crushed by the cold harsh realities of corporate commercialism. His wife dies of reasons never further elaborate on. His young son can't sell newspapers and is constantly threatened with "Juvenile Hall," as if that was the worse fate imaginable. Soon, the kid meets up with a gang of young rapscallions, right out of friggin' Little Rascals. After the kind of mean, sadistic dog catcher that only exists in lousy movies like this steals his beloved pet, the kids do a daring escape and release all the dogs from the pound. Meanwhile, Little Jimmy's Dad kind of sits around, getting more depressed. Eventually, the beloved dog is killed and we finally get to the central gimmick the whole movie is built around. Instead of recreating the actual experiment, the characters in the film look just off-screen at the actual stock footage of real scientist doing their thing.
I'm sure in real life the scientists just killed a dog for the expressed purpose of reviving it. And I'm fairly certain, after they brought the animal back to life, the beloved owner didn't kneel before the operating table and cuddle. The movie's in the public domain and is widely available on Youtube. Turning the hilariously incoherent self-generated close captioning on actually makes the film somewhat entertaining. Somewhat.
A Film Rarely Seen!
whpratt13 October 2004
Universal created this picture with a horror theme that was too upsetting for the British and it was censored. "Life Returns" was fiction and created by director Eugene Frenke and his writers James Hogan, John Goodrich, Arthur Homan, Wolfe Gilbert and Mary McCarthy. Onslow Stevens, formerly the invisible scientist of Universal's science-fiction serial "The Vanishing Shadow",'34, played John Kendrick, a doctor devoted to seeking a formula to restore life after death. He succeeds when his son's pet, called Lazarus is gassed by the dog-catcher. It was surprising to see Valerie Hobson playing the faithful doctor's wife. Great Film for 1935!
The Lazarus Effect
sol-kay30 December 2004
Not to be taken at face value, a cheap exploitation flick,"Life Returns" is a truly penetrating movie that has to do with bringing the dead back to life.
You cease to laugh at the movie before the opening credits when we see a statement by Robert E. Cornish. Telling the audience that what we are about to see in the movie regarding the operation of the dog who was brought back to life. What were told is not only real but the footage of the operation is that of the actual operation preformed by Dr. Cornish and his staff at the Berkeley Medical Facility in Calif. on March 22, 1934; now how's that for realism.
The story leading up to the actual amazing life saving, or life restoring, operation is obviously fiction. It's about a man who's obsessed with bringing back the dead who can't get the financial support. That he needs to develop a serum that would cause the blood of dead people or animals to start circulating and thus bring that back to life.
Working together with Dr. Cornish and Dr. Stone,Lois Wilson, on this theory Dr. Kendrick, Onslow Stevens, is frustrated by the lack of interest in his idea by big business. As well as the medical profession who look at him as being cracked and out of his mind. Going it alone with both Both Dr. Cornish & Stone giving up the idea, due to lack of funds. Dr. Kendricks loses his practice his wife, who passed away, and is in danger of having his young son Danny, George P. Breakstone, to be taken away from him by the state and put into the local Juvenile Hall because he can't provide for him. Danny runs away from home with his pet dog Scooter, to prevent the authorities from taking him away from his father. And goes and hides in a clubhouse that his friends, the neighbor kids, let him live in.
One afternoon Scooter is caught by the dog-catcher and is later put to sleep because Danny couldn't come up with the $3.00 that he needed to get Scooter free. As his dad was too out of it and broke to do anything to save the poor animals life. Dr. Kendrick finally comes to his senses when Danny loses all respect for him for doing nothing to save Scooter. Dr. Kendrick then gets in touch with his old friend Dr. Cornish who later preforms the operation. Dr. Cornish together with the help of Dr. Kendrick's serum miraculously brings Scooter back to life, to the tears of joy of Danny. And with the resurrection of Scooter the restoration of Dr. Kendrick's reputation as a far-seeing and inventive man of medicine.
The operation that brought Scooter back to life was something straight out of the bible! And as unbelievable as it was it was the one thing in the movie "Life Returns" that was fact and not fiction!
You cease to laugh at the movie before the opening credits when we see a statement by Robert E. Cornish. Telling the audience that what we are about to see in the movie regarding the operation of the dog who was brought back to life. What were told is not only real but the footage of the operation is that of the actual operation preformed by Dr. Cornish and his staff at the Berkeley Medical Facility in Calif. on March 22, 1934; now how's that for realism.
The story leading up to the actual amazing life saving, or life restoring, operation is obviously fiction. It's about a man who's obsessed with bringing back the dead who can't get the financial support. That he needs to develop a serum that would cause the blood of dead people or animals to start circulating and thus bring that back to life.
Working together with Dr. Cornish and Dr. Stone,Lois Wilson, on this theory Dr. Kendrick, Onslow Stevens, is frustrated by the lack of interest in his idea by big business. As well as the medical profession who look at him as being cracked and out of his mind. Going it alone with both Both Dr. Cornish & Stone giving up the idea, due to lack of funds. Dr. Kendricks loses his practice his wife, who passed away, and is in danger of having his young son Danny, George P. Breakstone, to be taken away from him by the state and put into the local Juvenile Hall because he can't provide for him. Danny runs away from home with his pet dog Scooter, to prevent the authorities from taking him away from his father. And goes and hides in a clubhouse that his friends, the neighbor kids, let him live in.
One afternoon Scooter is caught by the dog-catcher and is later put to sleep because Danny couldn't come up with the $3.00 that he needed to get Scooter free. As his dad was too out of it and broke to do anything to save the poor animals life. Dr. Kendrick finally comes to his senses when Danny loses all respect for him for doing nothing to save Scooter. Dr. Kendrick then gets in touch with his old friend Dr. Cornish who later preforms the operation. Dr. Cornish together with the help of Dr. Kendrick's serum miraculously brings Scooter back to life, to the tears of joy of Danny. And with the resurrection of Scooter the restoration of Dr. Kendrick's reputation as a far-seeing and inventive man of medicine.
The operation that brought Scooter back to life was something straight out of the bible! And as unbelievable as it was it was the one thing in the movie "Life Returns" that was fact and not fiction!
Kid's adventure movie with a Frankenstein-style experiment
Leofwine_draca26 February 2017
Warning: Spoilers
LIFE RETURNS is an odd mix of would-be sci-fi/horror effort and children's adventure film. The subject matter, about the revival of a dead dog by scientists working beyond the remit of the known laws of biology, is based on a supposedly true story and was graphic and controversial enough to see this film banned in Britain on release. Seeing it today, it's a very dated and genteel effort, although not without interest.
The film suffers from having a very poor quality print which saps it of life, but the tale itself is good enough. Onslow Stevens, a familiar face from B-movie fare, plays a scientist ostracised by his peers for his unorthodox experiments on test subjects. A casting surprise is Valerie Hobson, of THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN fame, playing his wife. The film feels like a low key version of FRANKENSTEIN in places, and taps in to some of the same sensationalist attitude.
Elsewhere, we have some cute dog moments involving the film's child star. Scenes of him and his gang of buddies battling against a vengeful dog catcher make this feel like an OUR GANG movie at times although that's no bad thing. As a whole, LIFE RETURNS is unusual enough to be worth a look, although far from perfect.
The film suffers from having a very poor quality print which saps it of life, but the tale itself is good enough. Onslow Stevens, a familiar face from B-movie fare, plays a scientist ostracised by his peers for his unorthodox experiments on test subjects. A casting surprise is Valerie Hobson, of THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN fame, playing his wife. The film feels like a low key version of FRANKENSTEIN in places, and taps in to some of the same sensationalist attitude.
Elsewhere, we have some cute dog moments involving the film's child star. Scenes of him and his gang of buddies battling against a vengeful dog catcher make this feel like an OUR GANG movie at times although that's no bad thing. As a whole, LIFE RETURNS is unusual enough to be worth a look, although far from perfect.
Weird Melodrama to Say the Least
Michael_Elliott10 October 2016
Life Returns (1935)
** (out of 4)
Dr. John Kendrick (Onslow Stevens) is obsessed with bringing the dead back to life but everyone laughs at him. This pretty much forces him out of the profession and before long his wife dies and his young son ends up in a gang where his life goes all wrong. Pretty soon a chance comes along and the doctor can prove his scientific theories.
LIFE RETURNS is often confused as to being a Universal horror movie but that's not the case. Thsi was just distributed by Universal for some reason but it wasn't actually produced by them. Another bit of confusion is that Valerie Hobson has a brief role here and we know she appeared in Universal's BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and WEREWOLF IN London the same year. If you're expecting a flat out horror film then you'll certainly be disappointed as this is more family drama mixed with science fiction.
The weirdest thing about this ultra weird movie is the fact that it tries to do so many things yet it isn't successful at any of them. For starters, this is a personal drama dealing with the doctor losing everything while he battles to try and prove himself. The film also rips off the Our Gang shorts with the story of the son who falls in with a group of misfits. I'm really not sure why Universal would want to distribute this film because even for a "C" studio this thing would be pretty embarrassing.
Onslow, who would eventually appear in HOUSE OF DRAULA, at least manages a decent performance and I'd also argue that Hobson is better here than in the two Universal horror movies she appeared in. The problem is that there's just nothing overly interesting here. This was based on the life of Robert E. Cornish but I'll let you look up what he did and how. As far as the film goes, LIFE RETURNS briefly hits the "horror" genre with the doctor trying to bring life back to a dog but the weirdness level of the picture keeps it somewhat entertaining.
** (out of 4)
Dr. John Kendrick (Onslow Stevens) is obsessed with bringing the dead back to life but everyone laughs at him. This pretty much forces him out of the profession and before long his wife dies and his young son ends up in a gang where his life goes all wrong. Pretty soon a chance comes along and the doctor can prove his scientific theories.
LIFE RETURNS is often confused as to being a Universal horror movie but that's not the case. Thsi was just distributed by Universal for some reason but it wasn't actually produced by them. Another bit of confusion is that Valerie Hobson has a brief role here and we know she appeared in Universal's BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and WEREWOLF IN London the same year. If you're expecting a flat out horror film then you'll certainly be disappointed as this is more family drama mixed with science fiction.
The weirdest thing about this ultra weird movie is the fact that it tries to do so many things yet it isn't successful at any of them. For starters, this is a personal drama dealing with the doctor losing everything while he battles to try and prove himself. The film also rips off the Our Gang shorts with the story of the son who falls in with a group of misfits. I'm really not sure why Universal would want to distribute this film because even for a "C" studio this thing would be pretty embarrassing.
Onslow, who would eventually appear in HOUSE OF DRAULA, at least manages a decent performance and I'd also argue that Hobson is better here than in the two Universal horror movies she appeared in. The problem is that there's just nothing overly interesting here. This was based on the life of Robert E. Cornish but I'll let you look up what he did and how. As far as the film goes, LIFE RETURNS briefly hits the "horror" genre with the doctor trying to bring life back to a dog but the weirdness level of the picture keeps it somewhat entertaining.
You wouldn't want to be Danny!
Bezenby7 October 2014
This film shows you that you can be the worst parent in the world and everything turns out okay as long as you can brings your kid's pets back to life. But not his mother.
After a head scratching beginning which goes on about some guy who brought a dog back to life, we get so see smug graduate Kendrick ditching his mates in order to join some corporation whom he believes will give him the dough in order for him to realise his life's dream, and that dream is conquering death. The thing is, business is business and when the company ditch him for spending too much (they offer him a job making hair restoring brushes instead) he goes a bit nuts, stops practising medicine, then sits around all day feeling sorry for himself.
You the audience instead should be feeling sorry for his son Danny. Now, Danny's a bright kid with a dog sidekick but when his mum kicks the bucket, his dad can't be bothered getting a job and therefore Danny's headed for the kid's home. He escapes and joins up with some kids, but life ain't going to be getting any better for Danny any time soon.
This film is bizarrely depressing due to Danny. His dad really thinks he's above any jobs and any time someone starts chewing his ears about facing reality he stares into space and goes on about conquering death (at one point referring to those gassed in the trenches in WW1 – just wait a few years film!). So his dad lies about doing nothing while Danny is chased by the cops, has his dog arrested, and let's not forget he lost his mum. Where's the light? The end, as you'd imagine, is utterly ridiculous, and seems to involve real footage of some operation integrated into the film proper (Godfrey Ho must have watched this as a kid!).
After a head scratching beginning which goes on about some guy who brought a dog back to life, we get so see smug graduate Kendrick ditching his mates in order to join some corporation whom he believes will give him the dough in order for him to realise his life's dream, and that dream is conquering death. The thing is, business is business and when the company ditch him for spending too much (they offer him a job making hair restoring brushes instead) he goes a bit nuts, stops practising medicine, then sits around all day feeling sorry for himself.
You the audience instead should be feeling sorry for his son Danny. Now, Danny's a bright kid with a dog sidekick but when his mum kicks the bucket, his dad can't be bothered getting a job and therefore Danny's headed for the kid's home. He escapes and joins up with some kids, but life ain't going to be getting any better for Danny any time soon.
This film is bizarrely depressing due to Danny. His dad really thinks he's above any jobs and any time someone starts chewing his ears about facing reality he stares into space and goes on about conquering death (at one point referring to those gassed in the trenches in WW1 – just wait a few years film!). So his dad lies about doing nothing while Danny is chased by the cops, has his dog arrested, and let's not forget he lost his mum. Where's the light? The end, as you'd imagine, is utterly ridiculous, and seems to involve real footage of some operation integrated into the film proper (Godfrey Ho must have watched this as a kid!).
Golly, That Was Not Good
Rainey-Dawn14 November 2016
Nothing to see here unless you want to watch Onslow Stevens mope on screen for an hour looking like a bum and a group of kids doing Our Gang style of stuff. In the end of the film, you can watch the "real film" of the guy bringing dog back to life (but I don't think that was real).
This is a very slow, pretty boring film for the most part. It seem they threw the Our Gang stuff into the movie as a time filler - really served no purpose. You would think the film would revolve around a man coming up with his scientific discovery and maybe failing a couple of times then succeeding in the end but the film is not like that at all. As I said, the film flips from Onslow Stevens moping on screen to Our Gang then back to more moping by Stevens.
You'd do well by skipping this film and finding something else to watch.
2/10
This is a very slow, pretty boring film for the most part. It seem they threw the Our Gang stuff into the movie as a time filler - really served no purpose. You would think the film would revolve around a man coming up with his scientific discovery and maybe failing a couple of times then succeeding in the end but the film is not like that at all. As I said, the film flips from Onslow Stevens moping on screen to Our Gang then back to more moping by Stevens.
You'd do well by skipping this film and finding something else to watch.
2/10
Yes, a dog comes back to life
BandSAboutMovies16 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Eugene Frenke wrote and directed this film, and his Hollywood career is pretty strange. Born in Russia, he'd direct three more films (Girl in the Case, Two Who Dared and Miss Robin Crusoe), with eighteen years between his last two movies. He also produced Lady in the Iron Mask, The Barbarian and the Geisha and more films, as well as acting as a production assistant on 1971's Johnny Got His Gun.
Following a preview screening of the film, Universal pulled the film from general release and said that it was a "freak picture, not suitable for the regular Universal program." In 1937, Frenke won a lawsuit and got his film back, re-releasing it through Scienart Pictures a year later.
On May 22, 1934 at the University of Southern California, scientist Robert E. Cornish - who appears in the film playing himself - surgically and chemically restored life to a dead dog. Frenke filmed this operation and included it in this film, if you can believe that!
Cornish even provided a note that is in the credits: "TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The actual experiment of bringing the dead back to life, which is part of the motion picture "Life Returns" was performed by myself and staff on May 22, 1934 at 11:45 P.M. in Berkeley, California. This part of the picture was originally taken to retain a permanent scientific record of our experiment. Everything shown is absolutely real. The animal was unquestionably and actually dead, and was brought back to life. May I offer my thanks to my assistants, Mario Margutti, William Black, Ralph Celmer and Roderic Kneder, who are shown carrying out their respective parts. Respectfully submitted, Dr. Robert E. Cornish."
Frenke was married to the Russian star Anna Sten, who Samuel Goldwyn hyped as "The Passionate Peasant" and tried to transform into a big star across the movies Nana, We Live Again and The Wedding Night. Her failure was so big that Cole Porter's "Anything Goes" refers to her: "When Sam Goldwyn can with great conviction / instruct Anna Sten in diction / Then Anna shows / anything goes."
After this, the auteur wanted to make another film where a drowning man was brought back to life. After being sued by Frenke, one wonders why he'd come back to Universal. But he sure did and they turned him down.
Following a preview screening of the film, Universal pulled the film from general release and said that it was a "freak picture, not suitable for the regular Universal program." In 1937, Frenke won a lawsuit and got his film back, re-releasing it through Scienart Pictures a year later.
On May 22, 1934 at the University of Southern California, scientist Robert E. Cornish - who appears in the film playing himself - surgically and chemically restored life to a dead dog. Frenke filmed this operation and included it in this film, if you can believe that!
Cornish even provided a note that is in the credits: "TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The actual experiment of bringing the dead back to life, which is part of the motion picture "Life Returns" was performed by myself and staff on May 22, 1934 at 11:45 P.M. in Berkeley, California. This part of the picture was originally taken to retain a permanent scientific record of our experiment. Everything shown is absolutely real. The animal was unquestionably and actually dead, and was brought back to life. May I offer my thanks to my assistants, Mario Margutti, William Black, Ralph Celmer and Roderic Kneder, who are shown carrying out their respective parts. Respectfully submitted, Dr. Robert E. Cornish."
Frenke was married to the Russian star Anna Sten, who Samuel Goldwyn hyped as "The Passionate Peasant" and tried to transform into a big star across the movies Nana, We Live Again and The Wedding Night. Her failure was so big that Cole Porter's "Anything Goes" refers to her: "When Sam Goldwyn can with great conviction / instruct Anna Sten in diction / Then Anna shows / anything goes."
After this, the auteur wanted to make another film where a drowning man was brought back to life. After being sued by Frenke, one wonders why he'd come back to Universal. But he sure did and they turned him down.
Has some high ambitions
bkoganbing28 October 2020
Onslow Stevens is a doctor with some very high ambitions. He wants to bring
the dead ack to life. Stevens says he can do it providing there's not a lot of tissue
damage to the deceased.
But he goes bankrupt and after his wife Valerie Hobson dies he can't take care of his son and can't get a job in the medical profession. His son George Breakston believes in him and the kid's pet dog is the laboratory experiment.
Interesting that this film came from Universal studio, the studio that dealt with resurrection of a sort in its Frankenstein series. This film got the short shrift in production values and direction. And the character Stevens just isn't all that interesting.
I'm not sure Life Returns would make it as a children's bog/dog film.
But he goes bankrupt and after his wife Valerie Hobson dies he can't take care of his son and can't get a job in the medical profession. His son George Breakston believes in him and the kid's pet dog is the laboratory experiment.
Interesting that this film came from Universal studio, the studio that dealt with resurrection of a sort in its Frankenstein series. This film got the short shrift in production values and direction. And the character Stevens just isn't all that interesting.
I'm not sure Life Returns would make it as a children's bog/dog film.
Grim family drama
NuttyBaby23 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
A film from the 1930's in black and white, with few special effects and no gore. This is a nice but dark family film about a depressed doctor who loses his wife to an illness, and seems to give up on everything. He nearly loses custody of his son and then things get worse and worse. The pet dog is kidnapped and sent to a pound where it dies, and the grieving boy with help from his friends, rescues all of the dogs. There is an actual clip of scientists reviving a deceased dog but I think this was woven into the story. A time when life was simple and everyone was friendly and stylish. This was a moving film and had me in tears. I like it very much.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
