MartinHafer This film is an extra on the Alpha Video release of "Sin You Sinners". I am actually surprised, as "Dance Hall Racket" isn't even mentioned on the DVD cover--though it is clearly the better film ("Sin You Sinners" is REEEALLY bad). And, unlike "Sin You Sinners", a few of the 'dames' in "Dance Hall Racket" are actually nice looking ladies--whereas the ones in "Sin You Sinners" are enough to kill anyone's sex drive...permanently! Both films clearly earn scores of 1--though if I could give one lower to "Sin You Sinners", I would! Considering that this film stars Timothy Farrell, you can safely assume the film is crap. This 'actor' has the distinction of having appeared in such classics of dreck cinema as "Test Tube Babies", "The Violent Years" and Ed Wood's masterpieces "Jail Bait" and "Glen Or Glenda"! Surely this is a record for awfulness that few, if any, actors can match! And, watching his smooth yet sleazy character is pretty entertaining, as I am a bad movie aficionado.On top of Farrell, the film also is pretty weird because it was written by Lenny Bruce...and he even is one of the stars of this ultra-low budget movie! His wife, Honey, even got a starring role as a sexy B-girl. There is also a character named 'Punky' (Bernie Jones)--who might be one of the most obnoxious characters I've seen in many years. His routine is pretty sad--with a terrible fake Swedish accent, a goofy Pinky Lee-style hat and no discernible talent. He is meant as comic relief, but he's about as funny as watching a cat coughing up a hairball! He and most of the rest of the male actors are supposed to be sailors, but not a one of them looks or acts anything like you'd expect from such characters.The film is about a dance hall that is run by Farrell. It's a clip-joint where drunks are routinely robbed and drugs are sold by this mobster who is cleverly called 'Boss' throughout the film! Along the way, you see a bit of skin--hot stuff for 1953 but very, very, very tame when seen today.So with all these terrible actors and no budget whatsoever, is this movie any good? Well, no...but at least it's not 100% terrible--though this is hardly a glowing endorsement! The film was clearly meant as an exploitation movie--with cat-fights, skin, sleaze galore and dames...lots and lots of dames! And, if you like very bad exploitation films, it IS worth seeing--it IS fascinating viewing--sort of like a train wreck! However, for the average viewer, it's best to steer clear of this grade-z monstrosity--it's a real turkey.By the way, although I really have seen very, very little of Lenny Bruce on screen, this film and his short "Thank You Mask Man" are enough to make me doubt those who have proclaimed him as a misunderstood genius. I certainly haven't yet seen anything resembling genius from his films. Perhaps you just had to catch his infamous stand-up act.

Michael_Elliott Dance Hall Racket (1953) * (out of 4) Before turning to stand up comedy, legendary Lenny Bruce wrote and starred in this film from director Phil Tucker who is best known for the infamous Robot Monster. Vic (Bruce) tries to rise from a small town racket to a higher up gangster but there's a price to pay. The viewer pays a price as well because this is quite dreadful but thankfully it's bad enough to where you can laugh at it. The acting, including Bruce, is beyond awful. Bruce is so bad killing people that this gets the biggest laughs but the death scenes are also hilarious. Timothy Farrell of Glen or Glenda? fame co-stars.

monkeymonster I saw this film solely because Lenny Bruce was in it.The whole story takes place on a three wall set made from cardboard which is meant to look like a dance hall, and pretty much everyone in this hall has their crooked fingers in pies.Lenny Bruce plays Vinnie, a hard man, and takes centre stage as he is clearly the best actor in this film. The other actors stand around, bump into each other and chew scenery while Lenny does his thing of being the star.Phil Tucker does nothing in the way of original directing often opting to cover scenes with a single master shot and letting the action play out in front of the camera.The print of this film that I saw (on DVD) was terrible, scratched with a constant blemish on the picture, the sound would often pop in and out and there where large jump cuts where someone has clearly edited out the nudity for some reason.All this is a shame because in spite of all its faults the movie isn't that bad, yes the plot seems rather padded and some of the rolls could do with better casting (the drunk with the hat stands out in my mind) but i have seen worse, much much worse than this. I would like to see someone buy this film and clean it up, get the print nice and crisp, film some extra insert shots that it feels like its missing and dub over some of those bad actors and then we'll see how really bad this film is.

madsagittarian This endearing sleaze classic is another "film a clef" from the Grade Z mastermind of ROBOT MONSTER, BROADWAY JUNGLE and CAPE CANAVERAL MONSTERS. This pulpy exposé film is best known for the casting of the notorious Lenny Bruce and his wife Honey Harlowe, but actually they're secondary characters in this "dance hall". Lenny plays the henchman of the gangster-owner, slapping around anyone who tries to double-cross this dubious entrepreneur.All things "Tucker-ian" are in abundance here: non-existent art direction (check out when customers want "to go to Hawaii", which basically means having some crummy palm tree put in front of their table while a dance hall girl smooches with them; that's the best set decoration in the entire film); badly overacted performances which go to the realm of baroquely cartoonish; impossibly dreary single-take medium-long shots in which you can view all the non-decor and the non-actors; and spare, washed-out cinematography only rivalled by Dreyer.But also, DANCE HALL RACKET is perhaps Phil Tucker's most structurally challenging film. Not bad for a movie taking place entirely in a shabby set with three tables, a cramped generic office and a back alley (these limited locations also compliment the stagnant lives of their inhabitants). This "complex meta-narrative" operates on several planes at once. The time-old tradition of having a wraparound story is in effect here, as one detective explains to another that "shocking story" of all the crime and corruption in this dance hall, where we view scenes the detectives couldn't possibly have known, much less been a part of. Despite the known presences of Bruce, Honey, and everyone's favourite world-weary bad guy Timothy Farrell, there are really no major characters. Even the eccentric customers "wanting to go to Hawaii" take equal precedence. There is really no plot in this impressionistic study, despite the faint whispers of racketeering. I've only ever seen this movie on the video offered by Something Weird, and that print more than a few times has some small scenes repeated. Evidently, the reels were mixed up and someone stopped it, put the right one on and kept going. But leaving these moments in adds another bizarre touch to the screwy narrative. It's as confounding as anything by Alain Resnais.By the same token, the latter incident is a classic example of how Tucker's filmography is in disrepair. Isn't it sadly ironic that the most well-preserved film in his legacy is ROBOT MONSTER... the film over which he threatened to commit suicide? Otherwise, the only remnants I've ever seen of Tucker's work come from some tattered composite prints. Phil Tucker is perhaps the last undiscovered country of Grade Z filmmaking. I mean, even Andy Milligan had a book written about him! Little exists in print about Mr. Tucker, and perhaps there are a few more films signed by him, that are collecting dust somewhere that need to be found. Because of his poverty row films, and the enigma surrounding their creator, his legacy remains a fascinating one.