I recently watched Lucky Star from the new Fox/Borzage/Murnau set. At first I thought is was my least favorite of the silents Janet Gaynor and Charles Farrell did with Borzage during the twenties, but upon refelection, I'd now say that it's one of my favorites, and all because of the performance of Farrell. For sheer romantic spirituality, it's hard to top Seventh Heaven, but Farrell's character is much more belevable in Lucky Star, and he does a phenomenal job as the crippled Tim who overcomes his disability to win the girl. He's much more realistic and restrained as a crippled American war vet than as a Parisian street cleaner. Plus the chemistry between he and Gaynor is more slowly and lovingly realized in Lucky Star. She's a little girl when they first meet, and he treats her as such. Their relationship grows over time and as a friendship develops between two people who are each lonely in their own way.
The sets may not be as ambitious as in Seventh Heaven, or as Impressionistic as Street Angel, but they are picturesque and create a world of their own in the simple country setting. You can still see the influence of Murnau here.
I don't want to create a spoiler for those who haven't seen it, but it's wonderful to see that Lucky Star has finally been released to DVD. Long over due!
"Humor is nothing less than a sense of the fitness of things." Carole Lombard
The BFI (British Film institute) is releasing it's own versions of both SEVENTH HEAVEN and LUCKY STAR this month in Region 2 format. STREET ANGEL is not included. But the print of SEVENTH HEAVEN might be better than the Fox DVD, and LUCKY STAR may have a much score. Let's hope so anyway.
Gagman 66 wrote: The BFI (British Film institute) is releasing it's own versions of both SEVENTH HEAVEN and LUCKY STAR this month in Region 2 format. STREET ANGEL is not included. But the print of SEVENTH HEAVEN might be better than the Fox DVD, and LUCKY STAR may have a much score. Let's hope so anyway.
Good news Jeffrey! It's always good to have more than one version available.
"Humor is nothing less than a sense of the fitness of things." Carole Lombard
I've just watched Hot Saturday 1932 which is a must if you love naughty precodes, it boasts a young and very handsome Cary Grant and Randolph Scott, the lead is played by Nancy Carroll. She plays a somewhat niave girl who although well brought up and moral gets herself into a situation she can't explain, she lives in a small town and is soon the talk of it. As if this isn't enough the poor girl loses her job as well. Well all is well that ends well. It is a delightful film.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
I've been awful busy the last month or so, I've moved cross country to Toronto, and haven't had the chance to write about some of the things I've watched, so here's my attempt to catch up a little.
Perils of Pauline (1914) - Not especially good, and often amateurish, but still a fascinating historical document. Perhaps most interesting for the fact that Pearl White's Pauline is a proto-feminist, as she resists the trappings of marriage, and continually seeks adventure and danger despite the protestations of the men in her life. As a downside, each episode is incredibly predictable, with Pauline going on some adventure, while the villain Koerner tries to sabotage her, before she is saved by her fiance Harry.
Given that it's a serial released in the same year as Les Vampires, I can't help but notice how sedate Perils is, completely absent of the inventiveness, anarchy, and energy of Feuillade, and also missing the political element that Feuillade often touched on.
The Sheik (1921) - My first Valentino, and like my first Fairbanks a disappointment. I was expecting as much, as everything I'd read about The Sheik suggested it was inferior to it's sequel and was prone to Valentino's hamminess. Well I can't disagree at least about Valentino, as his crazed smile, and overexaggerated facial expressions really undermined his character of the stoic sheik. If someone had just told him to look bored, he would have been so much better. He's a beautiful man, and films very well, but man when he smiles it just ruins the mystique. I'm hoping Son of the Sheik does Valentino justice.
Ooh, and I managed to catch a triple feature this week of Marlene Dietrich films: Der Blaue Engel, Touch of Evil and Morocco. I'd seen the The Blue Angel a couple of times before, and though I still like it, I find it less enjoyable each time I watch it. Where I used to marvel at Jannings degradation, and Dietrich's seductiveness, I now watch it and feel a bit disconnecting. The final betrayal by Dietrich in particular is very jarring and doesn't make much sense to me. She goes from being a loyal wife to a total b**** for no real good reason. Maybe if she retained the coyness she displayed earlier in the film the transformation would seem more gradual.
As for Touch of Evil, well it's sublime, and heck of a lot of fun. I still like Ambersons better as far as Welles pictures go, but Touch of Evil is probably his funnest and accessible film.
The real revelation for me was Morocco, which I'd seen and really didn't like upon first viewing. It felt stilted, and had a bad case of Gary Cooper. But the second viewing did the trick. Coop is absolutely great in the lead, as he isn't given a ton of dialogue, and instead just gets to look beautiful and act tough and stoic. I'm starting to appreciate how great he can be, never a wasted gesture or movement. Dietrich was quite good too, a little uneven, but still a screen presence. Josef von Sternberg's direction is at its finest too. He manages to give his images a dreamlike quality, as everything seems to shine on-screen. It's really quite accomplished and a huge improvement over his first talkie Thunderbolt, and at a brief 65 minutes manages to avoid the ploddedness that The Blue Angel falls pray to at times.
It's really a great film, and one I've neglected for a while now. I think it holds up quite nicely with his very best.
"Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?" - The Magnetic Fields
Birdy it's in the same collection as Merrily They Go To Hell. I've seen Murder at the Vanities too, I'd highly recommend it.
Myrnaloyisdope, you started at the wrong place with Rudy, it's an example of how to overact, it's a pity that this is the film he is well known for. If you have Son Of The Sheik you will see a massive difference. My other favorites are FourHorsemen of the Apocalpse, The Eagle, Moran of the Lady Letty. You'll see much better performances in all his other films as you get to his later filmd you'll see what a polished performer he was.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
charliechaplinfan wrote:Birdy it's in the same collection as Merrily They Go To Hell. I've seen Murder at the Vanities too, I'd highly recommend it.
Myrnaloyisdope, you started at the wrong place with Rudy, it's an example of how to overact, it's a pity that this is the film he is well known for. If you have Son Of The Sheik you will see a massive difference. My other favorites are FourHorsemen of the Apocalpse, The Eagle, Moran of the Lady Letty. You'll see much better performances in all his other films as you get to his later filmd you'll see what a polished performer he was.
I couldn't have said it better Alison. The Sheik did Rudy no justice at all. I think my favourite of his is The Eagle where he absolutely shines. Cobra is also another good film, as well as Blood and Sand. Don't let The Sheik put you off watching Rudy, there's so much more depth to him than that film. I'm biased however, because Rudy is my favourite silent film star. LOL!!!
I knew going into it that The Sheik wasn't very highly regarded and that it wasn't a great intro to Rudy, but nonetheless I wanted to see it before watching Son of the Sheik which by every account is much better. I know enough about Rudy, that I would certainly be willing to see multiple pictures to get a feel for what all the fuss was about.
So I watched Son of the Sheik on the weekend, and enjoyed it quite a bit more. Rudy is much better and infinitely more fascinating when he broods with the occasional smirk thrown in. I still can't say it's a great film, but it's a fun ride, and definitely paints a fuller picture of Rudy. Though I'll admit to being as impressed with Vilma Banky as with Valentino. She is quite purty, and very charismatic. I'll definitely check out more of her.
I also watched the Mary Pickford film Amarilly of Clothes-Line Alley. I'm still getting a handle on the Pickford persona, as this is my 3rd film of hers (Stella Maris and Poor Little Rich Girl are the others), and I think I liked her character in Amarilly the most. I'm able to identify more strongly with the idea of Pickford as a spunky young woman, than as a teenage or pre-pubescent. There's just something odd about a 30 plus year old woman played a 12 year old, even though she manages to do it well. I also like the lightness of the film as contrasted with underlying bleakness of Stella and Poor Little Rich Girl, which left an odd taste in my mouth. Cuteness and child abuse don't really gel.
The Pickford persona is so hard to put a finger on because it's so radically different from anything since. A woman in her 30's couldn't get away with playing teenage roles (and doing so with complete sincerity) today, and I'm not even sure how Pickford was able to do it in the 1910's-20's. On one hand she's obviously a talented actress and quite a pretty gal, but on the other she's essentially trading her sexuality for opportunity to play children. I find it kind of remarkable that her persona was so popular and this is in spite of her acting talents.
I'm interested in checking out more of her films, but perhaps some more enlightened folk can shed light on Pickford's massive popularity.
"Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?" - The Magnetic Fields
Audiences of Mary's time had far less sophisticated sensibilities than they do today. She had a much more naturalistic style of acting, and I think made people want to "mother" her. They were always rooting for "Little Mary" to come through her trials. I think her character symbolized something in the national consciousness of the time. This may be a bit simplistic, but it's the only reason I can think of to understand her immense popularity. Later she feared she would be laughed at, and probably would have been. Her friend Lillian Gish had to talk her out of destroying her films!
"Humor is nothing less than a sense of the fitness of things." Carole Lombard
Once Valentino found his widespread popularity I think producers didn't think that they should put him into quality productions as his audience would go to see him as long as he was beautiful. For me the best film in terms of production and direction is Four Horsemen of the Apolcalpyse. With Valentino you just have to enjoy him for himself, made easier if you are female
I'm so glad that she didn't destroy her work, I still don't think she has the credit she fully deserves, I find her one of the best silent screen actresses. She is better known for her young girls, she can play young women just as well. I'm not a huge fan of Poor Little Rich Girl, take a look at Sparrows and My Best Girl, they are her last silents and among my favorites.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
