Photoplay reviews the springtime releases of 1944

This post is a part of TMP’s “Historical Context” series, in which I share excerpts from my collection of vintage publications. Today’s tidbits come from the June 1944 combined issue of Photoplay and Movie Mirror.

From my collection; Photographed for TMP
From my collection; Photographed for TMP

The June 1944 Photoplay/Movie Mirror combined issue is one of my favorites from my entire collection. A beautiful photo of Olivia de Havilland by Paul Hesse adorns the cover, and the issue has some of the most fun articles I’ve ever seen in a movie magazine, such as Dorothy Kilgallen listing off all the Hollywood men she’d love to marry if she was single.

I will be sharing a lot of fun content from this issue in the future, but today I’ve decided to take a look at the magazine’s film reviews of the month. Since the June issue would have been released on May 1, 1944, it features reviews of films that were released in April and May of that year.

The reviews are broken down into four categories. Three check marks denotes an “outstanding” picture. Two check marks are given to “very good” flicks. One check mark is given to “good,” entertaining but not phenomenal films. If a review is completely free of check marks, the film is not recommended in the least.

The best pictures of the month are listed as White Cliffs of Dover, Days of Glory and Follow the Boys. None of these films are marked “outstanding.” The highest check-mark value given in the June issue is two. These “very good” flicks certainly did impress the reviewers, though; Irene Dunne and Alan Marshall picked up “best performance of the month” accolades for White Cliffs, as did Gregory Peck and Tamara Toumanova for Days of Glory. White Cliffs of Dover is praised for maintaining the “charm and dignity” of the poem on which it was based; Days of Glory is praised for its performers outshining the familiar themes of the script; Follow the Boys is pointed to as the definition of a “colossal” film, packed with stars and “nostalgic numbers.”

(Image via Doctor Macro)
Days of Glory was crowned one of the best films of the month, featuring two of the best performances of the month, in the June 1944 Photoplay/Movie Mirror combined issue. (Image via Doctor Macro)

A couple more films were given the “very good” distinction by the mag: Broadway Rhythm and Buffalo Bill. Photoplay criticizes Broadway Rhythm as needing “a little more story and a few less people,” but praises the performances of the entire cast. As for Buffalo Bill, the mag describes the film as “A magnificent Western with color emphasizing the beauty of the great West.”

Quite a few films were classified as “good” by the June issue’s reviewers. Action in Arabia, Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves, Casanova in Burlesque, Chip Off the Old Block, Ladies Courageous, Nine Girls, Four Jills and a Jeep, Up in Mabel’s Room and Shine On Harvest Moon were all given one check mark. Reasons for the lowered score range from the film seeming like it “must have been made just for the fun of it” (Ali Baba) to not staying true enough to the source material (Shine On Harvest Moon).

(Image via Doctor Macro)
Shine On Harvest Moon: a “good” film, according to Photoplay/Movie Mirror (Image via Doctor Macro)

A whopping twelve films earn the infamous distinction of a zero-check-mark score: The Bridge of San Luis Ray, Career Girl, Charlie Chan and the Secret Service, My Best Gal, The Falcon Out West, Detective Kitty O’Day, Hat Check Honey, The Whistler, The Chinese Cat, Hi Good Lookin’, The Lady and the Monster and The Monster Maker. Unsurprisingly, most of these are B-level flicks which have since fallen into the vortex that is known as the public domain. I agree with some of Photoplay’s choices for the stinkers of Spring 1944; Detective Kitty O’Day did not impress me when I reviewed it last year. Some films, our views don’t quite align on. I would have given a check mark to Career Girl, which I reviewed on this blog with a 3/5 score in my Mill Creek Musings series.

What would you rate these films from 1944 on the check mark grading scale? Share ’em in the comments section!

A note from Lindsey: Old fan magazines fascinate me because I love to see what people were saying about these films and stars decades ago, long before I discovered them (or long before I was even born!). I hope you’ve enjoyed this post as much as I enjoyed researching it. Let me know if you’d like to see more posts of this type — I have over 100 mags that I can share from!

7 thoughts on “Photoplay reviews the springtime releases of 1944

  1. I’ve seen very few of these movies, but I did just see “Career Girl” which I’ll be blogging about this week. Would you mind if I linked to your review so folks can get a “second opinion”?

    These magazines look like so much fun to peruse!


    1. Sure, you can link my review!

      The mags are tons of fun. This issue is a particular favorite because there’s so much WWII content in it — ads for joining the military and contributing to the war effort, glowing features on war films, and even an advice column in which Claudette Colbert gives advice to a lovelorn soldier!


  2. Sadly, I have not seen one film from those listed above…so, because I feel compelled to give a rating somewhere, I’ll give two check-marks to ‘Shine on Harvest Moon’, simply because I like Ann Sheridan, and she looks fairly hot in that lobby card!

    And yes, please continue spotlighting this magazine collection of yours…I too love to see and read about the film world in the 1940s and 1950s, and find your Historical Context series fun and fascinating!


    1. I’ve seen shockingly few of the films from this issue. Until I started reading old magazines I never realized just how many films were out there for me to discover and how much I’m missing out on even with my obsessive viewing habits, haha. A mag like this, where big Hollywood releases and B-levels are covered, drives that point home even more. It appears that no matter how many midcentury films you think you’ve seen, you’ve barely scratched the tip of the iceberg!

      I find the Historical Context series fun and fascinating to research, so I’m glad to hear you enjoy it. :) These posts don’t seem to attract as many readers as my standard reviews but they’re interesting to me, so I’m gonna keep ’em coming.


      1. That’s what I loved about Turner Classic Movies back in the glory days when I had cable: I had the opportunity (daily!) to watch these obscure B-films from the past that I’d never heard of…and enjoy watching them!

        And about the Historical Context series: you have ONE reader out here who likes ’em, so that means you HAVE to continue posting them! So there!


Share your thoughts! (Note: Comments close 90 days after publication.)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.