What a waste of my time!!!

Don't listen to the negative reviews

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

I don't recall exactly when I became a fan, although Witness for the Prosecution must have had something to do with it, so now I catch whatever I can of this wonderful, towering actor.And, I was not disappointed with the Beachcombers, although the plot let me down, and I did not watch it all the way through.That being said, Charles Laughton is riveting as usual and dead-on as a stumble bum. I always wonder if modern-day actors can emulate the truly greats, and my answer is essentially no they cannot because, first, there aren't the scripts today, which greatly enhance an actor's performance and, second, it doesn't matter because, perhaps with the exception of Leonardo, D. Washington, D. Hoffman, and perhaps a few others, no actors today can tie on the bootstraps of the actors of yesteryear. Not considering the greats of the silent age (I'm thinking C. Chaplin, B. Keaton and H. Lloyd, all exceptional, and the many, fantastic character actors throughout cinema who added inestimable richness to many a movie, my personal favorites, and I know it's subjective, and I'm speaking of film presence including Charles Laughton, are: William Powell, Spencer Tracy, and Jack Lemmon. Heck, I'm not allowing myself to include Steve McQueen, one of my favorites because he is a notch below the above-mentioned, in my overly haughty assessment.P.S. I'm sure I'm leaving someone of the list, and, by the way, I notice the inherent sexism of my comments, but I chalk most of it up to contemporary society where woman are not afforded the stardom or roles of men. Again, an overly presumptuous statement.

Well, I admit being an insatiable Laughton buff …. Laughton was a genuine giant, like the Frenchmen Simon and Baur.Laughton, his cute wife, the '30s, a Maugham adaptation—this should be the 4th Laughton movie I am reviewing, and the 2nd Maugham adaptation (--South Seas, missionaries, religious intolerance vs. dissolute life …--). Mean, ugly, fat, playful—I'm just stating the obvious—Laughton was an English Simon—the same abundant talent …. Also obvious is the degree to which he enjoyed playing his colorful roles ….THE BEACHCOMBER is a pretty remarkable movie, snappy and fresh, and leisurely made; Elsa Lanchester was 36 in this flick, she had married Laughton in '29—that is, 9 yrs earlier, when she was 27. Daddy Wells had written short movies for this babe.Elsa Lanchester does an interesting performance, if in a role limited.THE BEACHCOMBER is also genuine cinema—exciting, it has gusto and fun. As subject, it is a satire against puritanism. In a Pacific island, a womanizing drunk is hell-raising and causing scandal to the community. He attracts the antipathy of a couple of religious missionaries who ask for his deportation. Sentenced for 3 months on Agor island, he becomes the ruler of an earthly heaven, a ruler spoiled by the merry natives. Maugham frankly considered the Christianity to be a plague, and praised the sensual involvement of the South Seas natives.One of the missionaries is a miss; the climate and circumstances do much to moisture and soften her senses. She falls in love with the drunk.

This is a pretty broad comedy with some fun performances by Laughton, Lanchester and Newton. The plot's rather thin and really relies on the great character work by all involved.Even though the characters seem to transform far too quickly for my tastes, you almost don't even care because it's so enjoyable to see.Frankly, I'd almost recommend this film just to see Charles Laughton's classic facial expressions alone.Obviously The African Queen owes much to The Beachcomber and while the former is the superior film, I'd recommend this to any fan of Laughton, Lanchester and 1930's romantic comedies.

Compared to Charles Laughton in Vessel of Wrath, Cary Grant in Father Goose and Humphrey Bogart in The African Queen look they stepped out from a Savile Row tailor. They don't know what to do with him over in the Dutch East Indies. He's a lazy, shiftless bum who won't work, won't pay his debts and is leading the natives that good Christian missionaries Elsa Lanchester and her brother Tyrone Guthrie are trying to convert into sober, hardworking Protestants.My guess is that Laughton is in the Dutch territories because he's been kicked out of British island possessions for exactly the same reasons. As it is he has a friend in the local magistrate Robert Newton. But Newton's patience is being tried. The British would say he'd gone native.He exiles Laughton after Laughton tried to disgrace one of Elsa Lanchester's pupils. But wouldn't you know it, fate casts Elsa right on the island that Laughton is exiled to, doing 'hard labor.' A few things happen and she decides maybe she should try to reform him as opposed to ostracism.Laughton and Lanchester give a couple of cute performances about some middle-aged people finding romance, of course anticipating The African Queen by 13 years. Lanchester has a much tougher reforming Laughton than Kate Hepburn did with Humphrey Bogart. Bogey may have been seedy, but he did own his own business.In a way this story is sort of Somerset Maugham's yin to the yang of Rain. Both stories are based in the tropics with missionaries as their leading characters, but this one is essentially comedic, although there are some serious events here like a typhoid out break, where Laughton proves invaluable in dealing with the natives.Charles and Elsa give us a grand show, don't miss it. Lanchester has a much tougher job