User reviews

This film is a great surprise. Apart from being thematically unusual (murder, suicide, corruption, capital punishment, rape, etc) it is visually astonishing and years ahead of its time, anticipating lots of stuff from 40's film noir to art-house European cinema (Bergman's Wild Strawberries for instance).

The film uses the `narratage' technique first used the same year by Preston Sturges in `The Power and the Glory' (also a very interesting film, directed by William K. Howard and a clear precedent of `Citizen Kane') which consists of voice-over narration and flashbacks and flashforwards, but if takes it much further with a very complex structure that includes flashbacks within flashbacks, dreams, hallucinations, flashforwards and characters appearing in scenes where they were not originally present and commenting the action with the main character.

The film is also extraordinarily shot with quasi expressionistic photography, lots of tracking shots, montages and very imaginative use of stock footage. To make all this even more admirable the film was produced on a very low B budget and it runs only 65 minutes.

MAJESTIC PICTURES in their short Hollywood production life 1930-35 made excellent small films using sets at other studios. This meant they could use those facilities and instead spend big on actors and crew. Without studio overheads their input concentrated on finding and using excellent A grade sets and costumes and facilities without owning them. As a result their films had an RKO or MGM look. Actors would be called to make a film at RKO and find it a Majestic title ensuring constant work on a big lot but maybe for a minor player. This allowed Majestic to get A tech and image at a bargain rate and not embarrass their desired actors. However in this film they even excelled themselves and most Hollywood majors studio style in creating a unique melancholy almost- noir nightmare of doomed love and honor... and all the emotional treachery that goes with it. Somewhere between SORRY WRONG NUMBER and DETOUR and overlapping time shift of PULP FICTION, this film THE SIN OF NORA MORAN uses those techniques and techniques of voice over, flashback and sad romance with equal parts hangman's noose, resigned fate and deceit. What a find! THE SIN OF NORA MORAN is a film school textbook of economic film making and could easily stand an upgraded remake today. Excellent! Treat yourself!. Good restored UCLA DVD too. Zita Johan in the lead part as Nora is simply exquisite and her melancholy tone throughout is most effective. Her sin? Being born.

I like (many) pre-code movies, simply because you never know what might happen. Quite a contrast to the formulaic stuff that was produced after 1935 (approx.) and, for those who think the 'Hayes' code is dead, the assembly-line production of rom-coms since 1990 rigidly stick to the same drivel: about 20 minutes from the end, a disagreement causes the intended couple to split, but miraculously re-unite by the final curtain. Nauseating.

Sins of Norah Moran is a bit melodramatic in places, esp. in the early going, but Majestic Studios (one of the so-called 'Poverty Row' film-makers, who rented space and equipment from the mainstream guys to keep costs down) weaved a melancholy tale here of a sad-sack orphan who grows up only to have the 'system' beat her down. She stands accused of murdering a former co-worker at the circus (he sexually assaulted her - a modern screenplay might have her nominated for Congress), and facing a death sentence. Her recent 'governor' boyfriend probably did it, but will Nora blow the whistle? I was struck by how the 'governor', a married man, cavorts so openly with this pretty young girl - were the 'Press' so under control during this era or was there just so much of this 'running-around' going on that the gov could hide in plain sight?

In time, he sees her at a 'kept' home every Friday & Monday - it kind of blows up when his wife finds a stack of unsigned love letters. The script makes no effort to condemn Nora or the Governor for their dallying, but, of course, it's poor Nora who will face severe consequences when the villain is suitably dispatched. Dang it-where's Perry Mason when you need him?

But that's pre-code: anything can happen. That's what makes it so interesting. Great camera work & use of flashbacks & voice-overs. Experimental. Unorthodox. Compelling. Kudos to TCM for reviving interest in this era. 8/10

Here is a decent film from Majestic Pictures from 1933. Zita Johann plays a girl in desperate circumstances who gets embroiled in a murder. The structure of this film is quite unique for it's genre. The direction by Phil Goldstone and the performances are excellent. Many offbeat touches are present and there is a decent music score, rare for a little poverty row production like this. Films like this make me appreciative of the little studios that put these out. This probably played small houses or the bottom half of a double bill. It really is well done and the brief running time (just over an hour) goes by pretty quickly. The print I saw running on YouTube was decent, with good picture and sound. The clever montages and effects really add to the enjoyment of this film.

This film's not quite what you expect from 1933, the trailer boasts that it uses the famous 'narratage' technique from Preston Sturges's The Power and Glory, with Flashbacks and narration; then Flashbacks within Flashbacks. At just sixty five minutes the plot twists are great and the old fashioned dialog is really quite funny.

Made on a tight budget, it manages to look like a bigger movie using library footage and cleaver back projection. Overall well worth watching just for the novelty value.

THE SIN OF NORA MORAN (Majestic, 1933) directed by Phil Goldstone, with title inspiration to Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer's THE SIN OF MADELIN CLAUDET (1931) featuring Helen Hayes, is a low-budget production with high production values. Starring Zita Johann, a notable stage actress with few films to her credit. her characterization of Nora Moran offer her a very rare opportunity in a feature film performance.

The plot opens as John Grant (Alan Dinehart), a district attorney, is visited by Edith Crawford (Claire DuPrey), his sister, regarding a handful of unsigned love letters belonging to her deceased husband and governor of the state, Dick Crawford (Paul Cavanagh). Grant reveals the woman to be Nora Moran, age 21, in prison on death row awaiting her execution. Through flashback, Grant relates the sin of Nora Moran, Crawford's mistress, starting as a child of six where young Nora (Cora Sue Collins) is adopted by Mr. and Mrs. Moran (Harvey Clark and Aggie Herring). Following their deaths, the teenage Nora (Zita Johann) faces life of uncertainty. With the help of her good friend, Father Ryan (Henry B. Walthall), Nora goes on her own searching for work until eventually working for the King Brothers Circus under Paulino (John Miljan), a lion tamer. She leaves the circus after Paulino forces himself on her. While in New York, Nora becomes a chorus girl in musical shows, attracting attention of Dick Crawford (Paul Cavanagh), a man with political ambitions. She learns through Grant that Dick has a wife, but continues to show her love for Dick by preventing Paulino from ruining his political career through blackmail. Grant's story further reveals why Nora ended up in prison and awaiting execution. Also in the cast are Sarah Padden, Ann Brody, Syd Saylor and Otis Harlan.

I first saw THE SIN OF NORA MORAN when presented during the after midnight hours on New York City's WOR, Channel 9 back in 1982 under another title, VOICE FROM THE GRAVE. With Zita Johann, best known for co-starring opposite Boris Karloff in THE MUMMY (Universal, 1932), I assumed this to be another horror movie. I have never heard of VOICE FROM THE GRAVE and wanted to see what it was all about. After many years in obscurity, THE SIN OF NORA MORAN (title restored) not only turned up on DVD, but made its Turner Classic Movies premiere May 3, 2020, by this viewing refreshed my memory. Following the original theatrical title and opening credits, THE SIN OF NORA MORAN predated those film elements used frequently during the 1940s through its grand mix of film noir narrative, montage sequences, voice over thoughts, split screen changeover, non-stop underscoring, and slight dose of supernatural overtones. Coming from an independent movie studio as Majestic, THE SIN OF NORA MORAN works surprisingly well through its then unique method of storytelling told during its 64 minutes. Aside from THE POWER AND THE GLORY (Fox, 1933) starring Spencer Tracy, it makes one wonder if there are any other flashback narratives of this sort that have become virtually unknown to film scholars?

Regardless of this newfound rediscovery and interesting premise, it appears Zita Johann's legacy continues to remain more for THE MUMMY than THE SIN OF NORA MORAN. (**)

Two viewings, the first on 9/3/2018 at the suggestion of YouTube. The initial experience was such that I revisited the film on the tenth. "The Sin of Nora Moran" is one of those not-quite-of-its time (or place) movies, with its use of layered flashbacks, contrasting first person narratives, and use of fantasy. In a little over an hour the movie delivers the narrative fullness expected from a much longer work. The contrasting stories, told in Rashomon-like fashion, deepen the reality of a paradoxically realistic (melo-)drama. A major artistic work, with techniques to be seen in "Citizen Kane" (1941), "Wild Strawberries" (1957) and even "Zentropa" (1991 - e.g., the two-scene featuring what appears to be a projected head of the heroine conversing with her governor-paramour). Apparently the film fared poorly with audiences at the time of its release. While its reputation has grown over the years, I must confess I had never heard of it before YouTube suggested it, and I'll guess that it remains unjustly obscure. If the film were from Europe it would probably be better regarded today, perhaps belonging on a double bill with Joe May's "Asphalt" (1929). This was one of many important cinematic discoveries I've made in the last few years on YouTube. I may see this again.

Zita Johann is 21 year old "nora", hiding some deep secret. she is wrapped up in a murder. she knows stuff, but she's not saying much. made in 1933, so even the posters for the film are pretty naughty. convicted of a murder, nora lets us see things through her flashbacks. she starts out in her jail cell, but now we're retracing the events. co-stars John Miljan as Paulino. she gets a job with the circus, and is happy until.. she is brutally attacked by the lion tamer. she leaves, and starts dating someone running for governor. more flashbacks. some twists and turns along the way. Directed by Phil Goldstone. he had produced many films, but only directed thirteen. original story by w.m. goodhue. Pretty good stuff!

The Sin of Nora Moran is a 1933 "talkie" picture. Why it's legendary has more to do with the camera effects used, the movie poster, and the use of flashbacks and talk-overs more than the actual plot of the film itself. That's the hard part to put yourself into in the 21st century. You can imagine all the oohs, and aahs, and confusion & shock of movie-goers in 1933, but after almost 90 years it's hard to feel that way yourself. The movie concerns itself with Nora, and the reason she is on death row awaiting execution. There are double and triple twists aplenty. Probably the most shocking thing in the film that I noticed was an implied rape. I can imagine how controversial this must have been back in the day, if I can tell what the implication was meant to be today. Another impressive feat of the movie is how well the story is told, despite all the time changes that happen during the course of the movie. At 65 minutes it doesn't lag at all, and it also serves to show how well an almost lost film can be brought back to life to breathe again on our small screens at home. Worth a watch to experience a revolution in '30's movie-making.

Whilst certainly not the cheeriest of topics for a film, it does feature two quite nuanced performances from the eponymous Zita Johann and from B-feature regular Paul Cavanagh ("Governor"). The story centres around young "Moran" - she came up the hard way - who is now on death row for a crime we know that she did not commit. It's told by way of retrospective for the most part, as we relive the scenarios and encounters that drove the young girl to her present predicament, and using quite effective theatrical devices - especially potent in black and white - I felt quite a degree of pity and respect for the character who had a sense of integrity sadly lacking amongst her associates. The dialogue is sparing, much of the imagery does the work and at times it could pass for a decent silent film quite easily. It's only an hour, but quite an emotional one, and though I can't say I enjoyed watching it - I did appreciate it.

The Sin of Nora Moran (1933)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Nora Moran (Zita Johann) is in prison about to die in the electric chair. We then hear about her troubled life, which has her in that spot. After leaving her job as a circus performer, the young woman meets a politician and soon after he's married they carry on the relationship, which leads to a murder that Nora is convicted of.

THE SIN OF NORA MORAN seems to have picked up a few fans over the past few years because it's rather racy poster started going around social media and then more fans started to look for the film. The new cult following that the picture has earned is understandable and especially when you consider that these Pre-code films are more popular than ever. There's no question that this movie is far from a classic but at the same time there's no doubt that it's entertaining enough to where film buffs will want to watch it.

The film's biggest problem is that it's obviously working with a small budget and director Phil Goldstone really doesn't bring much flare to the film. The cinematography is quite flat and there's a certain cheap feel all over the picture but there's still some stuff that works well. I thought the screenplay was good for the most part as it works as what would eventually become known as a film noir. The screenplay also keeps you off guard as to what really happen the night that Nora was arrested.

The film also benefits from Johann being so good in the title role. She's certainly very attractive and fits the role nicely and also manages to deliver a full performance. The supporting cast includes John Miljan, Alan Dinehart and Paul Cavanagh as well as Henry B. Walthall in a brief part.

Zita Johann does a decent job as a victim who refuses to stand up for herself. This is first-rate soap, but nothing more, as it is highly improbable a situation like this would ever occur. Still worth viewing for the montages and style of the film.

The story really intrigued me on paper, and structurally 'The Sin of Nora Moran' fascinated just as much. Non-linear narratives are not for all but to me this structure has been done very well many times on film. Others have mentioned being drawn into seeing the film from its poster, and no wonder. It is definitely one eye-catching poster that has a real allure that is difficult to resist. So there were no real reservations before seeing 'The Sin of Nora Moran'.

While hopes were extremely high, there was admittedly a little doubt as to whether 'The Sin of Nora Moran' would work well. Having seen my fair share of films etc that had great potential but either doesn't fully live up to it or completely wastes it. Luckily 'The Sin of Nora Moran' did live up to expectations, if not exceeded them, and didn't waste its potential at all. Is it a masterpiece? No. Does it deserve to be seen more and is it a good film? To me, yes on both counts.

A lot works here. One of the most striking aspects of 'The Sin of Nora Moran' is the cinematography, not many pre-code films made this early on in the history of sound pictures had photography this realistic-looking. Stylish and atmospheric absolutely many times, like here, but the camera techniques and the atmosphere created with them was so vivid it was like watching a semi-documentary. The film is very skillfully directed, going at a tight pace while allowing some breathing room, and the scoring and use of sound is not intrusive or over-the-top in my view. Zita Johann gives a very powerful and heartfelt lead performance that makes one care about Nora without making her too obvious.

Rest of the cast do very well too if not quite up to Johann's level with their characters not being as interesting. Alan Dineheart comes off best as the second most interesting character and with some of the film's best lines. In a script that is very thought-provoking with some tense and poignant parts. The film may not look lavish outside of the cinematography, but in my view it does not look cheap and has a suitable amount of grit that suits the bold subject matter well. As well as the cinematography, the other interesting aspect of 'The Sin of Nora Moran' is the structure of the story. A relatively unconventional one at the time, not unheard of but not seen a lot, and an interesting one, not many films at the time had a flashback within a flashback for instance. Also appreciated its boldness, with some ahead of the time themes to address on film and none are sugar-coated. Did find myself caring for Nora and her plight.

Having said all of that, some of the constant back and forth in the first half can feel a little confusing (wouldn't go as far to say that it's illogical though personally) and like one is not quite keeping up always.

Some of it is admittedly melodramatic and schmaltzy early on.

In summary, very good and interesting on the whole. 8/10

If you look through the reviews for "The Sin of Nora Moran" you'll see that there are a lot of very positive reviews...with scores of 9 and 10. Well, for the life of me, I have no idea why the reviews are so positive...the film is schmaltzy, illogical and cheap...and I only recommend it to Pre-Code film lovers.

The story is told in a very passive manner...a huge strike against it. What I mean is that it begins with an angry wife and her brother explaining to her what sort of sacrifice Nora Moran made to help the angry woman's husband. Then, the story unfolds with flashbacks and narration...and it's a very distracting and poor way of telling the tale. The story involves Nora and her agreeing to be prosecuted for a murder she didn't commit in order to help her married lover.

So, apart from the style, why did I dislike the movie? A huge problem is that the story makes no sense. Why would Nora agree to be executed when she's innocent?! The whole martyr angle, though common in the 30s with films like "Madam X", "So Big" and many others, is just illogical here and makes for a schmaltzy story.

Another problem is that the story is very much pro-adultery...something VERY normal for the Pre-Code era but which seemed a bit sleazy....but not in an enjoyable way (such as in "Red-Headed Woman"). This and the cursing make it an interesting curio...though not an especially good one.

I was not expecting that: this is brilliant! It's one of those films you see and are simply blown away by. If you've not watched this, stop whatever you're doing and watch it now!

Not wishing to decry the cinematic style of 1933 but this feels like it was made decades later. It's told in an interwoven non-linear manner favoured by the likes of Orson Wells with CITIZEN KANE and Quentin Tarantino with PULP FICTION but incredibly this was made by Phil Goldstone (who he?) at Majestic Pictures (again, who?) Apparently the audiences in 1933 were confused by what is now a common way of telling a story. Maybe the poster pulled in the wrong sort of audience? Making this even more fascinating is that it also interplays delirious montages, dream sequences and even dreams within dreams into its narrative. This was unheard of back in the early 30s yet nevertheless, if you're familiar with pictures from this era, there's absolutely no mistaking that this was made in 1933. It is however definitely not just a piece of interesting art - it's hugely entertaining and totally riveting.

The 'sin' as you'll find out is not actually her own sin. The story, although very easy to follow, is wonderfully complex and absolutely unique. You will never guess who did what and will have no idea how it will end. I've not been so pleasantly surprised by watching a film for ages but I admit what hooked me in was the amazing Alberto Vargas poster. Like the poster for THE STORY OF TEMPLE DRAKE, clearly the poster has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the film, it was just to grab your attention - and Mr Vargas would be pleased to know that it's still working it's magic ninety years later.

I've only just watched this but you know what? I'd like to watch this again because there were probably clues and symbolism I didn't notice first time around. There aren't many films which make you want to do that. This is something special.....even better than the poster!

Ex-circus performer Zita Johann (as Nora Moran) becomes a New York chorus girl. She meets up-and-coming politician Paul Cavanagh (as Dick Crawford), and they begin an affair. Since Mr. Cavanagh is married, he sets up a "love shack" for trysts with Ms. Johann. After a few months of private bliss, an accidental murder ends their love affair. District Attorney Alan Dinehart (as John Grant) is assigned to prosecute Johann. Mr. Dinehart helped Cavanagh to win a state governorship, and is the brother of his cheated-on wife. Dinehart also narrates the story. Phil Goldstone's "The Sin of Nora Moran" is a structurally interesting, but ultimately fair-to-middling movie.

**** The Sin of Nora Moran (1933) Phil Goldstone ~ Zita Johann, Paul Cavanagh, Alan Dinehart

'The Sin of Nora Moran' is conveyed across a few different points of view and not at all in chronological order. It jumps from dream to memory to present time, generally without making any clear distinction between them. It's easy, as a viewer, to become a little confused about what did or not happen, or what was only imagined. And yet, that disorientation is what I find really makes the film. It ties it together by tearing it apart. The majority is from the perspective of Nora herself, and, being that she is a terribly shaken and traumatized young woman facing her own execution, the scattered, glassy-eyed story-telling really only makes sense. In addition, it's stretched out perfectly. By the time you're finally able to figure out exactly what's happened, there's little time left. It excellently reflects the desperation of the character on whom the last 15 or so minutes are centered. The resolution is not exactly satisfying, but neither was that of poor Nora Moran. Overall, it's a pretty good tragedy, and quite artistic for its time. I liked it :)

I am giving this a 8 because it was very progressive and fascinating for 1933.

The film utilizes a storytelling narration and goes back and forth between flashbacks, the present, hallucinations/dream state, and different points of view about the events leading up to a woman (Zita Johann) awaiting execution for a murder.

While this was fascinating, it was a bit of style over substance, as it made the story somewhat confusing.

Ziti Johann gives a lovely performance. Paul Cavanagh, a favorite of mine, gives performance very much in the style of the early 1930s, that is, he's a little melodramatic. However, the role was written that way.

As of this writing, the little girl who played young Nora Moran, Cora Sue Collins, is still alive. She sometimes makes appearances at the events of the Hollywood Museum in Los Angeles.

I still can't get over seeing a film that is 91 years old. Incredible.

This should be an excellent weeper, but it doesn't come off. Too much of the story is told by narration and the performances are flat and, in the case of lead Zita Johann, far too frequently leaden -- as often happens with a good actor, an apparently deliberate but boring choice. The cinematography is excellent, although the 'talking heads' finale is a bizarre choice.