utgard14 Enjoyable Warner Bros. biopic about Paul Julius Reuter, the man who built the famous Reuters news service. Edward G. Robinson players Reuter. The movie covers his story from when he was using carrier pigeons up through the use of the telegraph. As is often the case with these biopics, he faces hardships and doubt from critics but perseveres. It's all pretty formulaic, I admit, but also undeniably entertaining. I was never bored. Eddie G's backed up by a fine stable of character actors, including Gene Lockhart, Otto Kruger, Nigel Bruce, and Albert Bassermann. Edna Best is the love interest and Eddie Albert plays Robinson's assistant. A solid cast. The subject matter may not lend itself to the most exciting story but they do a surprisingly good job keeping it interesting.

bkoganbing A Dispatch From Reuter's was the second of two biographical films that Edward G. Robinson did while at Warner Brothers. Previously those prestige roles were reserved for Paul Muni and Robinson acquits himself well both as Dr. Paul Ehrlich in Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet and now as Julius Reuter. The former film however is far better.Julius Reuter had a fascinating story to tell, but a lot was left out of this movie. For one thing, Reuter was born Jewish and converted to Christianity. I'm not sure how well that stood with Jack Warner as a Jew, but Jack Warner the film maker who did items like Confessions Of A Nazi Spy was not about to send that kind of message out in 1940 to his audience. One does wonder just what did attract him to the Reuter story.Reuter, first with the use of carrier pigeons and then with the telegraph, developed wire service reporting as we know it. Technology be it animal or human did fascinate him. He understood that news was power, fortunately if he was anything he was honest. A more unscrupulous individual might have caused great harm. One also wonders how Reuter would have viewed the internet in these days. The story begins when Reuter was a juvenile in the 1820s and ends in 1865 with Reuter a successful individual in the news business. Reuter lived another 34 years and in that time was involved in some imperial schemes, certainly in keeping with the times, but would not be viewed well today and again not a message Jack Warner wanted to convey in 1940.Edward G. Robinson is fine as the dedicated Reuter with Eddie Albert in the sidekick role and Edna Best not having to do much, but be loyal and supportive as Mrs. Reuter. It's not quite up to the level of the Muni biographical films, nor as good as Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet, but entertaining enough though it barely touches on the real Reuter.

stevenfallonnyc "A Dispatch From Reuter's" pretty much has one great thing going for it, and that is Edward G. Robinson of course as Julius Reuter. Otherwise, this is semi-standard old-movie fare that can be quite dull most of the time.Reuter of course was a news pioneer, but not every successful story always makes for a good movie. Seeing guys in the 1930s and 1940s play people in the 1800s is always kind of funny. (Especially when they do the "harumph" thing when they get angry.) There's a lot of talk concerning pigeons that the viewer will get tired of pretty quickly. The characters aren't engaging and the plot is, well, boring and thin. It's a ten-minute movie stretched out to 90 minutes.Unless you are a fan of Edward G. Robinson really, which I am, this is definitely one you can certainly live without seeing.

Sleepy-17 Just like the other reviewer stated, this one has it all, great acting, great script, great music and direction. It has all the elements of the Warner Brothers films that I grew familiar with when I was a grammar school student, watching the Early Show on TV. I learned about literature, biography, acting, photography styles, music (Korngold, Steiner,Waxman), directing (Curtiz, Dieterle), and a warped view of history (They Died With Their Boots On), all at the same time. This one rests on the great humanity of Edward G. Robinson's acting ability. ****Possible Spoiler***** Watch for the pigeons bearing proposals of marriage! Sheer hokum, but very watchable, and yes, moving. I had never seen this one before; when I was young I would skip movies like this to watch ones promising more violence. But it brought back all those Warner Brothers emotions of warmth and idealism.