Simplicity is the secret to vintage B movies like Lippert's "Arson, Inc.". Watching it almost 75 years after release I wondered the obvious: is there something missing here?
Movies cover a wide range of subjects and are generally designed to entertain and at least provide escape from the mundane, the routine of everyday life. With a B movie, aiming at just an hour or so in length and nothing pretentious in content, the diversion can come from colorful characters, amusing situations or novel plot twists. Of course, exploitation subject matter, whether it be sex, drugs or "forbidden" topics, is a sure-fire way of interesting the viewer.
Too many Bs like "Arson, Inc." are mundane and ordinary, almost reveling in their generic nature. (Sometimes this was on purpose: I remember as a drive-in and grindhouse enthusiast in the '70s watching some features, often dubbed foreign films, that existed as "chasers" -boring junk designed to empty the theater or drive-in parking area as few people would want to sit through them a second time.) I suspect "Arson, Inc." was tolerable when released, as a simple story, easy to follow, and easily consumed, to be forgotten immediately. Decades later there's a tendency to put such simple artifacts on a pedestal, whether for nostalgic reasons or simply to magnify the contrast between the old & standard cultural norm with current gimmicky entertainment. I try not to fall into that trap.
"Arson, Inc." is relentlessly uninteresting, presenting the story of a profession that is dull -basically a fireman acting as a specialized insurance investigator. Watching it, my mind quickly wandered to the current psa commercials broadcast about disability insurance fraud - a real-life problem, but trivialized in the tv pitch of how we should all be vigilant (in the 9/11 style of "if you see something, say something") to report miscreant employers or employees cheating the government and thereby us taxpayers out of many millions of dollars annually. Methinks these psa appeals to the public will not make the slightest dent in the problem.
So stalwart (say, wooden) hero Robert Lowery working undercover is a boring way of introducing the captive viewer to a boring subject. Sure, fires and arson are potentially exciting -as witness the current hit tv series "Fire Country", a procedural broadcast show generating more interest than many a big-deal gimmicky cable miniseries. But with a dependable hack William Berke directing this movie goes nowhere, not even the usual car chase and shootout scene perking things up -soon we're right back to cliches a mile a minute, and nominal villain Douglas Fowley playing "Frederick P. Fender" up to his old dastardly tricks.
More mind-wandering: was it a coincidence that singer Freddy Fender, born in 1937 so the right age to have watched "Arson, Inc." on a Saturday afternoon double feature, came up with that catchy stage name? I hadn't thought of him in ages.
Movies cover a wide range of subjects and are generally designed to entertain and at least provide escape from the mundane, the routine of everyday life. With a B movie, aiming at just an hour or so in length and nothing pretentious in content, the diversion can come from colorful characters, amusing situations or novel plot twists. Of course, exploitation subject matter, whether it be sex, drugs or "forbidden" topics, is a sure-fire way of interesting the viewer.
Too many Bs like "Arson, Inc." are mundane and ordinary, almost reveling in their generic nature. (Sometimes this was on purpose: I remember as a drive-in and grindhouse enthusiast in the '70s watching some features, often dubbed foreign films, that existed as "chasers" -boring junk designed to empty the theater or drive-in parking area as few people would want to sit through them a second time.) I suspect "Arson, Inc." was tolerable when released, as a simple story, easy to follow, and easily consumed, to be forgotten immediately. Decades later there's a tendency to put such simple artifacts on a pedestal, whether for nostalgic reasons or simply to magnify the contrast between the old & standard cultural norm with current gimmicky entertainment. I try not to fall into that trap.
"Arson, Inc." is relentlessly uninteresting, presenting the story of a profession that is dull -basically a fireman acting as a specialized insurance investigator. Watching it, my mind quickly wandered to the current psa commercials broadcast about disability insurance fraud - a real-life problem, but trivialized in the tv pitch of how we should all be vigilant (in the 9/11 style of "if you see something, say something") to report miscreant employers or employees cheating the government and thereby us taxpayers out of many millions of dollars annually. Methinks these psa appeals to the public will not make the slightest dent in the problem.
So stalwart (say, wooden) hero Robert Lowery working undercover is a boring way of introducing the captive viewer to a boring subject. Sure, fires and arson are potentially exciting -as witness the current hit tv series "Fire Country", a procedural broadcast show generating more interest than many a big-deal gimmicky cable miniseries. But with a dependable hack William Berke directing this movie goes nowhere, not even the usual car chase and shootout scene perking things up -soon we're right back to cliches a mile a minute, and nominal villain Douglas Fowley playing "Frederick P. Fender" up to his old dastardly tricks.
More mind-wandering: was it a coincidence that singer Freddy Fender, born in 1937 so the right age to have watched "Arson, Inc." on a Saturday afternoon double feature, came up with that catchy stage name? I hadn't thought of him in ages.