# Pre-Code Movies, so hard-boiled ya could roll 'em on the White House lawn **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 23, 2012, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416 "2012-01-23T18:13:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/21 "2012-01-25T02:27:40Z")
> [@SeamusMcCool](#): > > I saw one full frontal nudity silent film involving an outdoor glory hole. On a dirt road there was a wall separating the men from the women. The man thought he was having sex with a woman, but when the camera switched to the other side, he was actually nailing a goat. The three naked ladies giggle at their practical joke. 🙂 I have seen that one, and I had the distinct impression that, rather than a mainstream film, it was what was termed then a “smoker” – something shown as a 16-mm print in the back of the volunteer firehouse. The whole thing only lasts about ten-minutes. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/22 "2012-01-25T04:56:50Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > I have seen that one, and I had the distinct impression that, rather than a mainstream film, it was what was termed then a “smoker” – something shown as a 16-mm print in the back of the volunteer firehouse. The whole thing only lasts about ten-minutes. It was a smoker, I saw it in one of those Katie Morgan HBO shows on the history of porn. The thing that made it “different” from modern porn is that the male lead was a fairly successful mainstream comedy star … he apparently didn’t suffer in his mainstream career for appearing in a smoker. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/23 "2012-01-25T05:00:48Z")
> [@Beware\_of\_Doug](#): > > The depiction of independent women was probably the biggest impetus for the Catholic Church to get behind the Code. They weren’t nearly so interested in gambling-and-girlie-show type raciness. Their parishioners had been indulging in that since who laid the rails. > > But showing ballsy broads as respectable was something _new_. And, as is often the case, the main issue couldn’t be addressed head on. For the Church to speak out plainly against _modern_ women, not just _loose_ women, would have drawn entirely too much attention to the issue. Interesting point. One of the points that the Hayes Code covered was that women should not be involved in fights. They did not like that. That’s where you got the whole Damsel in Distress thing and the helpless heroine that just screamed. It was not purely a product of the times, it was a product of the Hayes Code. Could have been another way of curtailing the ability of women to be portrayed as powerful in any way. I think the people who claim the Hayes Code was a good thing in disguise are fooling themselves. Imagine if literature had been subjected to the Hayes Code. Does anyone think that might have been a good thing in disguise? ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/24 "2012-01-25T05:13:13Z")
Hays Code. For Will H. Hays. And people do argue it for literature, saying that restrictions before the 70s made it better. I don’t buy that either, but it’s a real contention. ---
**Author:** ![Oslo\_Ostragoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a9a28c/32.png) [@Oslo\_Ostragoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oslo_Ostragoth)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/25 "2012-01-25T06:24:25Z")
Wow. You learn something every day. Are any of these relics available on YouTube or elsewhere? ---
**Author:** ![PalJuicy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a8b319/32.png) [@PalJuicy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PalJuicy)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/26 "2012-01-25T12:15:44Z")
_Lady Killer_ (1933), Mae Clark is sitting on James Cagney’s lap and he actually kisses her boob – twice. Cagney was **hot** back then, BTW. ---
**Author:** ![SeamusMcCool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/82dd89/32.png) [@SeamusMcCool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeamusMcCool)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/27 "2012-01-25T14:21:24Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Everybody gets the Hays Code wrong these days. The [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code) page gets the timing correct, but doesn’t really explain the sequence well unless you already know it. > > The Hays Code went into effect in 1927. That’s right, during the silent days. And the studios did ignore it, mostly. I don’t think everybody gets the Hays code wrong today, people talk about, and are primarily interested in, when the studios started regulating themselves using the Hays code. Not when the Hays code was actually written. If it was ignored at first, then it’s mostly irrelevant to movie history outside of a trivial fact. When the studios started to self-regulate (under pressure from the Church) and picked the Hays code as its guideline is what’s most relevant and what most people and film historians prefer to discuss. You may be right that the Studios might have toned down the content anyways. This happened in the 80s in response to the cynical 70s and changing audience attitudes in the Reagan era, with studios putting out more fare like ET while blood and gore cynical movies like “The Thing” either bombed, weren’t made or were relegated to low budget outside the mainstream market. ---
**Author:** ![SeamusMcCool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/82dd89/32.png) [@SeamusMcCool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeamusMcCool)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/28 "2012-01-25T14:24:46Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > It was a smoker, I saw it in one of those Katie Morgan HBO shows on the history of porn. The thing that made it “different” from modern porn is that the male lead was a fairly successful mainstream comedy star … he apparently didn’t suffer in his mainstream career for appearing in a smoker. That is right, it was a smoker, but as you wrote, the male lead was fairly mainstream and these films generally were more acceptable amongst the mainstream than later smokers/8mm stag reelers in the 50s/60s etc. They were out in the open, while the Hays code drove them underground. About a year ago, the Dryden theater at the Eastman House were showing a collection of turn of the century French erotica films. Apparently somebody found hours and hours of reels in their attic in Paris and donated the collection to Eastman house. This was to be a 90 min “best of” exhibition. I was very disappointed to have missed the screening. ---
**Author:** ![SeamusMcCool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/82dd89/32.png) [@SeamusMcCool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeamusMcCool)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/29 "2012-01-25T14:39:30Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Hays Code. For Will H. Hays. > > And people do argue it for literature, saying that restrictions before the 70s made it better. I don’t buy that either, but it’s a real contention. Neither do I. Restrictions can make art better. Like the lack of sync sound (silent films were actually rarely silent as live musicians and live foley/sound effects artists were usually present for screenings) challenged filmmakers to tell a compelling story through images. There used to be an argument that the switch to colour film was too soon and that more time was needed to completely master the B&W medium. At first colour was seen as a “crutch” by some. You can also create better and/or interesting art by restricting your premise. ie Hitchcock filming from the perspective of an apartment living room the whole movie (_Rear Window_) or completing your film with only 9 10 min takes (_Rope_) Censorship, on the other hand, is an instant fail. Being told I can’t make movies with nudity, guns or blood isn’t doing anything to challenge me to create better art. There’s plenty of artistic/story ground to be covered that doesn’t include nudity, guns or blood. I’m just going to be pissed that I’m being told what kind of story I can or cannot tell. Speaking of censorship \*This Film Is Not Yet Rated \*is an excellent documentary on the subject and the role of the secretive MPAA in rating films. It should be available via Netflix. ---
**Author:** ![salinqmind](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ec8ea/32.png) [@salinqmind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/salinqmind)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/30 "2012-01-25T16:04:18Z")
There’s one called “Wild Boys of the Road”, 1933, starring no one famous. It’s about some young men in the depression, their fathers lose their jobs, family life takes a turn for the worse, and they set out riding the trains like hoboes, looking for work. There is a girl they meet doing the same. No one can help them, work is very hard to find, they are chased by police and the railroad workers, they are turned away by their relatives, and the girl is viciously raped by a stranger in a boxcar. It’s shown on TCM rarely, but it is devastatingly, desperately SAD, in spite of a gimmicky ending. I was in tears the first time I saw it, and I am pretty hard-boiled myself. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416/31 "2012-01-25T17:06:23Z")
I adore late '20s/early '30s slang, and what my writer friend Mel calls “\*Say \*Girls,” the hard-boiled broads who always start their lines with, "\*Saaay \*. . . " The above-mentioned Joan Blondell; Jean Harlow, Carole Lombard, Glenda Farrell, Pert Kelton, Winnie Lightner, Patsy Kelly, Thelma Todd, Polly Walters–each one of 'em _aces_. Anyone but me ever see the Duncan Sisters in _It’s a Great Life_? Wonderful, tough funny musical from 1929–you can really see how and why those two were big vaudeville stars [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pre-code-movies-so-hard-boiled-ya-could-roll-em-on-the-white-house-lawn/610416.md?page=1)