I finally got the “new” Kino edition of Sjörstrøm’s The Outlaw and his Wife, and, while it appears to be the same print as that used for the laserdisc, the darker scenes are somewhat brighter, allowing for more detail. The subtitles, too, have been re-done, although, I suspect to allow it to still fit with the existing music track, many of the lengthy subtitles speed by, necessitating freeze-framing the DVD in order to successfully read them (at least I needed, too.) Still love the film, and the ending, with the slightly brighter picture, makes much more sense.
Included on the DVD is an hour “documentary” simply called Victor SJöström, by Gösta Werner. Consisting, mainly of long clips from various Sjöström films, you learn virtually nothing about him, except for his influence on Ingmar Bergman (Bergman is seen in interview, talking about Sjöström). His stay in America is glossed over with but a few photos of Lillian Gish, Garbo, and Lars Hanson (I suspect they didn’t have the rights to those film clips), and there is no mention of why he left to go back to Sweden. Plenty of performance clips from the sound films Sjöström did on his return, including the two with Bergman, finish the film. Not great, but the clips are long enough to whet your appetite to see more of his films. (Thankfully, I also got the other Kino DVD, too).
WHAT SILENTS & PRE-CODES HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?
-
myrnaloyisdope
- Posts: 349
- Joined: May 15th, 2008, 3:53 am
- Location: Toronto, Ontario
- Contact:
Continuing on my Dieterle kick, I checked out 1932's The Crash, starring Ruth Chatterton and George Brent. They play a well off couple who end up loosing it all in the stock market crash of 1929. Chatterton can't take being poor, so she flees to a tropical island and ends up falling in love with a sheepherder. It reminds me a bit of 1931's Safe In Hell, but lacks the atmosphere and sense of desperation of that picture. Chatterton's character is pretty much self-absorbed, which is ok, but her character isn't given enough time to evolve.
Being a Warner picture it clocks in at 56 minutes, so the film feels quite rushed, the ending especially gets wrapped up in about a minute, and seems pretty illogical based on everything before. There was some potential in this film, as the dynamic of Brent and Chatterton's marriage is pretty interesting, there's the implication that Chatterton was having an affair (with Brent's knowledge) with a wealthy stock-broker in order to get hot stock tips. I think that's an interesting story, how the two of them corrupt themselves to get money, and it is alluded to, but it doesn't seem to be the focus of the film.
In keeping with the market theme, I also watched William Wellman's The Conquerors (1932) starring Ann Harding and Richard Dix. They play a pioneer couple circa 1860 who start up a bank, and the film tells their story up until the stock market crash of 1929. Throughout the film we see their ups and downs, including birth, death, suicide, and multiple economic crashes. I get the sense that the film was mainly meant as an optimistic tale about how America would overcome it's contemporary woes. But the cynic in me thinks it could be read ironically as well. I mean even if you get through one Depression, another one is going to come along.
The film was quite good, it reminded me of Wellman's So Big! of the same year, in that it told the story over a period of say 70 years, and both films have a western feel. But where I thought So Big! was rushed and disjointed, I found The Conquerors to have no trouble telling such an epic story, despite it being only about 90 minutes. It feels pretty accomplished as a film, and it's among his stronger films of the period.
Being a Warner picture it clocks in at 56 minutes, so the film feels quite rushed, the ending especially gets wrapped up in about a minute, and seems pretty illogical based on everything before. There was some potential in this film, as the dynamic of Brent and Chatterton's marriage is pretty interesting, there's the implication that Chatterton was having an affair (with Brent's knowledge) with a wealthy stock-broker in order to get hot stock tips. I think that's an interesting story, how the two of them corrupt themselves to get money, and it is alluded to, but it doesn't seem to be the focus of the film.
In keeping with the market theme, I also watched William Wellman's The Conquerors (1932) starring Ann Harding and Richard Dix. They play a pioneer couple circa 1860 who start up a bank, and the film tells their story up until the stock market crash of 1929. Throughout the film we see their ups and downs, including birth, death, suicide, and multiple economic crashes. I get the sense that the film was mainly meant as an optimistic tale about how America would overcome it's contemporary woes. But the cynic in me thinks it could be read ironically as well. I mean even if you get through one Depression, another one is going to come along.
The film was quite good, it reminded me of Wellman's So Big! of the same year, in that it told the story over a period of say 70 years, and both films have a western feel. But where I thought So Big! was rushed and disjointed, I found The Conquerors to have no trouble telling such an epic story, despite it being only about 90 minutes. It feels pretty accomplished as a film, and it's among his stronger films of the period.
"Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?" - The Magnetic Fields
-
myrnaloyisdope
- Posts: 349
- Joined: May 15th, 2008, 3:53 am
- Location: Toronto, Ontario
- Contact:
More pre-coders, as I'm trying to clear up space on my hardrive:
I watched Wellman's Stingaree, and enjoyed it. A western with an opera subplot? Weird. Anyway the film is pretty fun to watch, with Richard Dix as the outlaw Stingaree, and Irene Dunne as a servant/opera singer who needs a break. It's just one of those odd films that if you read the synopsis you would think it is ridiculous, but instead it works. Mary Boland is a highlight as Dunne's master, and she's just so over-the-top with her singing and self-absorption that it is hard not to enjoy. Dix is pretty charismatic as the lead, and Dunne handles herself pretty well, both with her singing, and her acting. I must say she has a weird career path, as she didn't get placed into musicals despite her singing abilities, and she didn't really get any comedic parts until The Awful Truth. I'm not sure what to make of it, it would seem her early success in Cimarron kind of hamstrung her, and she didn't shake out of it for several years.
I also checked out Raoul Walsh's In Old Arizona (1929), which was Fox's first talkie. Well I am a big fan of Warner Baxter (42nd Street anyone?), and was interested to see the film which he won an Oscar for. I thought he was pretty good. He manages to be pretty charming and funny, and he keeps his Mexican accent the whole film, though it's not an especially great performance. For 1929, well he holds his own, and the direction is interesting because the film appears to have been filmed outdoors for the most part, so camera movement is pretty common, and while it feels very much like an early talkie western, it's not bad at all.
Finally I watched King Vidor's The Champ (1931). Well it's a pretty watchable film, and I thought Jackie Cooper was tremendous, with remarkable charisma and self-assuredness. The film wasn't great, and is perhaps a bit too sentimental, but Cooper's performance is worth watching, as is Wallace Beery's. I'm a big Vidor fan, and I'm not sure how to reconcile this film with his work, other than to say he directed it competently, and certainly did the script justice. That seems to be his greatest strength as a director: he made every film better, simply being the director.
I watched Wellman's Stingaree, and enjoyed it. A western with an opera subplot? Weird. Anyway the film is pretty fun to watch, with Richard Dix as the outlaw Stingaree, and Irene Dunne as a servant/opera singer who needs a break. It's just one of those odd films that if you read the synopsis you would think it is ridiculous, but instead it works. Mary Boland is a highlight as Dunne's master, and she's just so over-the-top with her singing and self-absorption that it is hard not to enjoy. Dix is pretty charismatic as the lead, and Dunne handles herself pretty well, both with her singing, and her acting. I must say she has a weird career path, as she didn't get placed into musicals despite her singing abilities, and she didn't really get any comedic parts until The Awful Truth. I'm not sure what to make of it, it would seem her early success in Cimarron kind of hamstrung her, and she didn't shake out of it for several years.
I also checked out Raoul Walsh's In Old Arizona (1929), which was Fox's first talkie. Well I am a big fan of Warner Baxter (42nd Street anyone?), and was interested to see the film which he won an Oscar for. I thought he was pretty good. He manages to be pretty charming and funny, and he keeps his Mexican accent the whole film, though it's not an especially great performance. For 1929, well he holds his own, and the direction is interesting because the film appears to have been filmed outdoors for the most part, so camera movement is pretty common, and while it feels very much like an early talkie western, it's not bad at all.
Finally I watched King Vidor's The Champ (1931). Well it's a pretty watchable film, and I thought Jackie Cooper was tremendous, with remarkable charisma and self-assuredness. The film wasn't great, and is perhaps a bit too sentimental, but Cooper's performance is worth watching, as is Wallace Beery's. I'm a big Vidor fan, and I'm not sure how to reconcile this film with his work, other than to say he directed it competently, and certainly did the script justice. That seems to be his greatest strength as a director: he made every film better, simply being the director.
"Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?" - The Magnetic Fields
-
charliechaplinfan
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am
Last night I watched Tess of the Storm Country Mary brought tears to my eyes when she baptised the dying child. I'm planning to read Kevin Brownlow's Mary Pickford Rediscovered and revisit all the Mary films I have.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
-
Ann Harding
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: January 11th, 2008, 11:03 am
- Location: Paris
- Contact:
By a funny coincidence, I also watched Tess of the Storm Country (1922) By J.S. Robertson with Mary Pickford, David Torrence and Jean Hersholt. Mary made an earlier version of Tess in 1914 which I haven't seen unfortunately.
Tess (M. Pickford) lives with her father, a poor fisherman in a miserable shack. Their neighbour, the rich and nasty Elias Graves (D. Torrence) would like to get them expelled with all the other squatters...
I really like the social content of many Pickford pictures around that time. She is often living in very poor conditions but always shows an enormous resilience in front of terrible odds. The story contains a lot of melodramatic clichés such as poor girl loves rich boy, child born out-of-wedlock and abandoned at birth, etc. It works extremely well thanks to Mary's exhuberant performance and also the character actors. Among them, a vicious and nasty Jean Hersholt -getting ready for Stroheim's Greed no doubt!- and a commanding David Torrence as the self-righteous landowner. The previous J.S. Robertson pictures I had seen were not as effective as this one. I suspect Mary had probably a lot to do with the production. The print had suffered a lot of decomposition at the beginning. This is a shame, but still, it's another Pickford to discover ASAP if you haven't seen it yet.
Tess (M. Pickford) lives with her father, a poor fisherman in a miserable shack. Their neighbour, the rich and nasty Elias Graves (D. Torrence) would like to get them expelled with all the other squatters...
I really like the social content of many Pickford pictures around that time. She is often living in very poor conditions but always shows an enormous resilience in front of terrible odds. The story contains a lot of melodramatic clichés such as poor girl loves rich boy, child born out-of-wedlock and abandoned at birth, etc. It works extremely well thanks to Mary's exhuberant performance and also the character actors. Among them, a vicious and nasty Jean Hersholt -getting ready for Stroheim's Greed no doubt!- and a commanding David Torrence as the self-righteous landowner. The previous J.S. Robertson pictures I had seen were not as effective as this one. I suspect Mary had probably a lot to do with the production. The print had suffered a lot of decomposition at the beginning. This is a shame, but still, it's another Pickford to discover ASAP if you haven't seen it yet.
I have this book - it's beautifully produced, with dozens and dozens of really exceptional photographs. Plus the usual Kevin Brownlow expertise. I'm sure you'll love it, charliechaplinfan!charliechaplinfan wrote:I'm planning to read Kevin Brownlow's Mary Pickford Rediscovered and revisit all the Mary films I have.
-
charliechaplinfan
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am
I've just been watching The Coming of Amos (1924) with Rod La Rocque. Not a very good print - Televista, I think - but a really fun film. La Rocque is his usual comically charming self - he plays an Australian sheep farmer whose mother's dying wish was that he visit the French Riviera to acquire a bit of polish. There he meets an exiled Russian princess (temperamental beauty Jetta Goudal) whose boyfriends have a habit of meeting untimely ends. Could hissable love rival Noah Beery be responsible?
As soon as La Rocque unpacks a couple of boomerangs from his luggage, you know they're going to feature in the climax - and sure enough, they do. Some very funny title cards, and an early appearance from Trixie Friganza (Anita Page's boisterous mother in Keaton's first talkie, Free and Easy in 1930).
Not as good as La Rocque's hilarious Cruise of the Jasper B (1926), but an entertaining film none the less.
As soon as La Rocque unpacks a couple of boomerangs from his luggage, you know they're going to feature in the climax - and sure enough, they do. Some very funny title cards, and an early appearance from Trixie Friganza (Anita Page's boisterous mother in Keaton's first talkie, Free and Easy in 1930).
Not as good as La Rocque's hilarious Cruise of the Jasper B (1926), but an entertaining film none the less.
-
drednm
I liked CRUISE OF THE JASPER B and have THE COMING OF AMOS but haven't watched it yet....
Yesterday I watched DW Griffith's SCARLET DAYS which I thought very good. A rare Griffith title (1919) and not much like his other features since it's a western set in the gold fields of 1840s California.
Richard Barthelmess (Rudolph Valentino almost got the part) plays Alvarez, a local "Robin Hood" type who's wanted by the law. Ralph Graves plays a dude from Virginia seeking his fortune. They be come unlikely allies when a local saloon gal Rosy Nell (Eugenie Besserer) is robbed of her gold by a characters named Spasm Sal. The gold has been saved so that she can meet her daughter (Carol Dempster) who has been raised in a boarding school in Boston. Just as the daughter arrives Rosy Nell catches Spasm Sal stealing her gold. The woman dies.
The owner of the saloon Bagley (Walter Long) immediately lusts for Dempster as she gets off the stage. As a favor he allows Rosy Nell to have a few days before her hanging. Of course he also has gotten hold of the gold.
Into the mix is a little Mexican spitfire type (Clarine Seymour, looking a lot like Clara Bow) who loves Alvarez. They end up hiding in a cabin when Bagley and his men attack. It seems Alvarez has gotten the gold back. In a wild shootout, Graves and Barthelmess (rivals for Dempster) team up against Bagley and his men.
I suppose the basic story could have been placed anywhere, but the old west theme gives Griffith and cameraman Billy Bitzer some great locales for scenic shooting. Pacing and editing is, as always, top notch.
Barthelmess (almost unrecognizable) and Graves are very good as the male leads. Graves is only 19 here, having broken into films the year before. This was his first big role. Long and Seymour (who would die in 1920) are good with their stereotypical roles. Dempster seems kind of gangly here but is ok with the "heroine" role.
But taking the acting honors is Besserer. Best remembered as Al Jolson's mother in THE JAZZ SINGER she is terrific as the strutting saloon queen (and unrecognizable) and effective as the loving mother.
Yesterday I watched DW Griffith's SCARLET DAYS which I thought very good. A rare Griffith title (1919) and not much like his other features since it's a western set in the gold fields of 1840s California.
Richard Barthelmess (Rudolph Valentino almost got the part) plays Alvarez, a local "Robin Hood" type who's wanted by the law. Ralph Graves plays a dude from Virginia seeking his fortune. They be come unlikely allies when a local saloon gal Rosy Nell (Eugenie Besserer) is robbed of her gold by a characters named Spasm Sal. The gold has been saved so that she can meet her daughter (Carol Dempster) who has been raised in a boarding school in Boston. Just as the daughter arrives Rosy Nell catches Spasm Sal stealing her gold. The woman dies.
The owner of the saloon Bagley (Walter Long) immediately lusts for Dempster as she gets off the stage. As a favor he allows Rosy Nell to have a few days before her hanging. Of course he also has gotten hold of the gold.
Into the mix is a little Mexican spitfire type (Clarine Seymour, looking a lot like Clara Bow) who loves Alvarez. They end up hiding in a cabin when Bagley and his men attack. It seems Alvarez has gotten the gold back. In a wild shootout, Graves and Barthelmess (rivals for Dempster) team up against Bagley and his men.
I suppose the basic story could have been placed anywhere, but the old west theme gives Griffith and cameraman Billy Bitzer some great locales for scenic shooting. Pacing and editing is, as always, top notch.
Barthelmess (almost unrecognizable) and Graves are very good as the male leads. Graves is only 19 here, having broken into films the year before. This was his first big role. Long and Seymour (who would die in 1920) are good with their stereotypical roles. Dempster seems kind of gangly here but is ok with the "heroine" role.
But taking the acting honors is Besserer. Best remembered as Al Jolson's mother in THE JAZZ SINGER she is terrific as the strutting saloon queen (and unrecognizable) and effective as the loving mother.
If you can find Walsh's autobiography, the story of this film's production is fascinating. It was started with Walsh as the Cisco Kid, but a jack rabbit jumped through the windshield of his car, costing him the role and one of his eyes.myrnaloyisdope wrote:I also checked out Raoul Walsh's In Old Arizona (1929), which was Fox's first talkie. Well I am a big fan of Warner Baxter (42nd Street anyone?), and was interested to see the film which he won an Oscar for. I thought he was pretty good. He manages to be pretty charming and funny, and he keeps his Mexican accent the whole film, though it's not an especially great performance. For 1929, well he holds his own, and the direction is interesting because the film appears to have been filmed outdoors for the most part, so camera movement is pretty common, and while it feels very much like an early talkie western, it's not bad at all.
-
myrnaloyisdope
- Posts: 349
- Joined: May 15th, 2008, 3:53 am
- Location: Toronto, Ontario
- Contact:
I'm working my way through some of my backlog of William Wellman films, and I've watched a couple this week.
First up was 1926's The Boob which is Wellman's oldest existing film, and it's also the first of his silents I've seen. I'd read a quote from him where he described it as the worst film ever made. It's not that bad, but it's pretty terrible. George K. Arthur plays a boob who loses his girl to a city slicker, so he decides to fight bootleggers. Along the way he enlists the help of a drunkard, a little black boy, and a spinster. Oh yeah and Joan Crawford. Essentially the film is lame comedy, and a threadbare plot, and offers very little. Crawford's in the film for maybe 2 minutes, and aside from a very bizarre dream sequence featuring ghostly versions of Arthur battling bootleggers on a flying car, there's nothing even visually notable about the film.
I also watched 1933's College Coach, starring Dick Powell, Pat O'Brien, and Ann Dvorak. O'Brien stars as a mercenary football coach hired by a struggling college in order to bring in some money. Powell is the clean cut star of the team who's true love is chemistry. Dvorak (looking surprisingly unexotic) is O'Brien's forlorn wife. It's a straight-up programmer with a pretty convoluted plot, but there are a few interesting parts. Notably a fight between Powell and an irritatingly arrogant Lyle Talbot, which has a surprising brutality to it. O'Brien is pretty fun as the coach who's the master of self-promotion.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about the film, is its treatment of college football. Some of O'Brien's tactics include paying the best players to come to his school. But instead being treated as scandalous it's played for comedy. The notions of amateurism and integrity are kind of cast aside as being irrelevant, especially when there are football games to be won, and money to be made.
First up was 1926's The Boob which is Wellman's oldest existing film, and it's also the first of his silents I've seen. I'd read a quote from him where he described it as the worst film ever made. It's not that bad, but it's pretty terrible. George K. Arthur plays a boob who loses his girl to a city slicker, so he decides to fight bootleggers. Along the way he enlists the help of a drunkard, a little black boy, and a spinster. Oh yeah and Joan Crawford. Essentially the film is lame comedy, and a threadbare plot, and offers very little. Crawford's in the film for maybe 2 minutes, and aside from a very bizarre dream sequence featuring ghostly versions of Arthur battling bootleggers on a flying car, there's nothing even visually notable about the film.
I also watched 1933's College Coach, starring Dick Powell, Pat O'Brien, and Ann Dvorak. O'Brien stars as a mercenary football coach hired by a struggling college in order to bring in some money. Powell is the clean cut star of the team who's true love is chemistry. Dvorak (looking surprisingly unexotic) is O'Brien's forlorn wife. It's a straight-up programmer with a pretty convoluted plot, but there are a few interesting parts. Notably a fight between Powell and an irritatingly arrogant Lyle Talbot, which has a surprising brutality to it. O'Brien is pretty fun as the coach who's the master of self-promotion.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about the film, is its treatment of college football. Some of O'Brien's tactics include paying the best players to come to his school. But instead being treated as scandalous it's played for comedy. The notions of amateurism and integrity are kind of cast aside as being irrelevant, especially when there are football games to be won, and money to be made.
"Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?" - The Magnetic Fields
-
Ann Harding
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: January 11th, 2008, 11:03 am
- Location: Paris
- Contact:
I managed to see the whole of the serial Judex (1916) by Louis Feuillade in three sittings. This 12 episodes series is absolutely wonderful.
We follow a mysterious avenger, Judex (René Cresté) wearing a black cloak. A crooked banker, Favreau, who bankrupted numerous companies and pushed people to suicide (sounds very contemporary, doesn't it?) is the target of Judex. He has to give half his fortune to a charity or face Judex's retaliation. As Favreau didn't comply, he suddenly collapses in the middle of a dinner and dies. His daughter discovering her father's dark past renounced her fortune and goes to work. But the wicked adventuress Diana Monti (Musidora) is on her trail as she doesn't believe Favreau is dead...
Louis Feuillade had already made a lot of serials (Fantômas and Les Vampires) when he shot Judex. But, unlike the previous ones, he chose a positive hero rather than a criminal mastermind in the previous films. This was partly due to censors as it was the war. But, Judex has a wonderful atmosphere with beautiful locations (Paris, its suburbs, the Seine valley and the French riviera) and a very gripping narrative. We get abductions, mistaken identities, hero in disguise, car chase, mysterious castle, etc. All the characters are delineated with great care. Judex's motives are at first not explained and as the story unfolds we discover his aim. All the character actors are fantastic. I want to point out Cocantin (Marcel Levesque), the shy and muddled private eye who is really a hoot or the street urchin, Liquorice Kid, who is incredibly resourceful. The figure of Judex is a tall, dark and mysterious man who can assume many personalities. I don't want to spoil your pleasure if you haven't discovered this serial before. On the Flicker Alley set, Robert Israel has done a marvellous score that propels the film forward in the most wonderful way. Great fun!
We follow a mysterious avenger, Judex (René Cresté) wearing a black cloak. A crooked banker, Favreau, who bankrupted numerous companies and pushed people to suicide (sounds very contemporary, doesn't it?) is the target of Judex. He has to give half his fortune to a charity or face Judex's retaliation. As Favreau didn't comply, he suddenly collapses in the middle of a dinner and dies. His daughter discovering her father's dark past renounced her fortune and goes to work. But the wicked adventuress Diana Monti (Musidora) is on her trail as she doesn't believe Favreau is dead...
Louis Feuillade had already made a lot of serials (Fantômas and Les Vampires) when he shot Judex. But, unlike the previous ones, he chose a positive hero rather than a criminal mastermind in the previous films. This was partly due to censors as it was the war. But, Judex has a wonderful atmosphere with beautiful locations (Paris, its suburbs, the Seine valley and the French riviera) and a very gripping narrative. We get abductions, mistaken identities, hero in disguise, car chase, mysterious castle, etc. All the characters are delineated with great care. Judex's motives are at first not explained and as the story unfolds we discover his aim. All the character actors are fantastic. I want to point out Cocantin (Marcel Levesque), the shy and muddled private eye who is really a hoot or the street urchin, Liquorice Kid, who is incredibly resourceful. The figure of Judex is a tall, dark and mysterious man who can assume many personalities. I don't want to spoil your pleasure if you haven't discovered this serial before. On the Flicker Alley set, Robert Israel has done a marvellous score that propels the film forward in the most wonderful way. Great fun!
-
charliechaplinfan
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am
I've been nursing my tonsillitis, what better way than to finally see Son of the Sheik with Rudy Valentino and Vilma Banky. I think my favorite Rudy film and it showcases that he was more than a pretty face, he plays his own father very convincingly. His star quality just comes through the screen and although not the best actor of his time for me certainly one of the most charismatic. I can imagine he set many a ladies heart racing with that film. A pity by the time many of them saw it he was dead.
Rudy, if you can hear me, you were marvellous and you've cleared my poor tonsils
Rudy, if you can hear me, you were marvellous and you've cleared my poor tonsils
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
-
Ann Harding
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: January 11th, 2008, 11:03 am
- Location: Paris
- Contact:
Yesterday, I got to see Casanova (1926) by Alexandre Volkoff with Ivan Mosjoukine. This is a really very big production shot on location in Venice with an incredible number of extras.
At the center of the film is Ivan Mosjoukine who was at the time a super-star of French cinema. He was actually more than just a heart throb. I have now seen him in half-a-dozen films and I realise his range as an actor was very impressive. His Russian training gave him a flamboyance which made him unique in French cinema at the time. In this one, he is the famous Casanova and we follow him as he leaves Venice for Saint-Petersburg where the empress Catherine II is obviously very interested in him. But he makes a big faux-pas (making love to another lady) and has to leave Russia in a hurry...
The film has an hand-colored scene during the Venice Carnival which was restored in the print. The rest boats some incredible sets recreating the St-Petersburg Royal Palaces. A lot of the set designers at that time were Russian born and gave an superb authenticity to their design. Overall, the film is very handsome to look at has all the twists and turns you can expect. But, so far, my favourite Volkoff picture is Les Ombres Qui Passent (1924) again with Mosjoukine. It's a shame the French Cinémathèque makes no effort to release all these treasures to DVD...
At the center of the film is Ivan Mosjoukine who was at the time a super-star of French cinema. He was actually more than just a heart throb. I have now seen him in half-a-dozen films and I realise his range as an actor was very impressive. His Russian training gave him a flamboyance which made him unique in French cinema at the time. In this one, he is the famous Casanova and we follow him as he leaves Venice for Saint-Petersburg where the empress Catherine II is obviously very interested in him. But he makes a big faux-pas (making love to another lady) and has to leave Russia in a hurry...
The film has an hand-colored scene during the Venice Carnival which was restored in the print. The rest boats some incredible sets recreating the St-Petersburg Royal Palaces. A lot of the set designers at that time were Russian born and gave an superb authenticity to their design. Overall, the film is very handsome to look at has all the twists and turns you can expect. But, so far, my favourite Volkoff picture is Les Ombres Qui Passent (1924) again with Mosjoukine. It's a shame the French Cinémathèque makes no effort to release all these treasures to DVD...
I got a Douglas Fairbanks film set for Christmas, so now I've been acquainting myself with the third most popular star of the silent era.
First I re-watched Robin Hood, which I had seen once before in a slightly sub-par print. This is an film with fantastic sets, lovely forest scenery and plenty of plot, drama and travel. In short, it's an epic. I love the many different milieus, you really get a sense that you're traveling around in a medieval world. There is a great atmosphere in this film.
I rather like the epic quality of the story too, the development of the hero. In the two following movies I saw, the hero had already been created before the story started, and then there wasn't the same kind of journey and character development.
On the other hand, the story also drags the film down a bit, since it's so long. Robin Hood only emerges at the end of it, and that's a bit of a let-down. I would have liked to see more of Douglas Fairbanks's acrobatics and hilarious fight scenes, as well as more fighting against the oppressive regime of Prince John. And less of the medieval blathering. That would have made the film more engaging for me. I still like it though, like I said it has plenty of good points.
Next I saw The Black Pirate. A movie in wonderfully restored Technicolor. Actually, unlike the more famous color films of the 30's, like The Wizard of Oz and Gone With the Wind, this one is actually not very colorful at all. Two colors dominate the palette in this movie: brown, at the beach and on the ship, and blue, the sky and the sea. The costumes are either brown, black or a not very bright shade of red, and Douglas Fairbanks himself wears black, not very colorful at all. I don't know if this aesthetic choice had something to do with the limitations of color film during the 20's. I'll have to watch the commentary and find out. At any rate, it looks very nice. I rather like that it's not so garish.
For Hollywood, this is a pretty realistic portrayal of pirates. They're bloodthirsty and dishonorable, and they have absolutely zero respect for women. After viewing the Pirates of the Caribbean film series, this depiction can be refreshing.
Otherwise this film was a disappointment to me. I had read that this was Fairbanks's return to his traditional brand of unpretentious film making after his epic stint. It certainly is unpretentious, in spite of the color, with all of the action taking place on a rather dull ship in the middle of nowhere. It reminded me of a western at sea. There was also a large hole in the plot. I think the movie would have gained something by showing how the Black Pirate gathered his army. Instead we just see him disappear and then reappear with a whole ship full of fighters. The film loses some of its excitement for me there.
Again, all of this could have something to do with the limitations of color photography at that time. I can't help but get the feeling that the film sacrificed some important story elements for a technical novelty. Still, it's by no means a bad film, but it's not my favorite Fairbanks picture.
Last but not least, I saw Zorro. I got my family to watch this one with me, since Zorro was my dad's childhood hero. So he kept on complaining that the movie didn't focus enough on Zorro's fight for the poor. In fact it doesn't focus on that at all, but it's still a good film, and a perfect vehicle for Fairbanks. He gets to do some of his hilarious stunts, and really shows up the villains again and again, which is extremely satisfying. The title cards are also frequently very funny. Of the three films, this one is the most entertaining, showing Fairbanks doing what he does best.
First I re-watched Robin Hood, which I had seen once before in a slightly sub-par print. This is an film with fantastic sets, lovely forest scenery and plenty of plot, drama and travel. In short, it's an epic. I love the many different milieus, you really get a sense that you're traveling around in a medieval world. There is a great atmosphere in this film.
I rather like the epic quality of the story too, the development of the hero. In the two following movies I saw, the hero had already been created before the story started, and then there wasn't the same kind of journey and character development.
On the other hand, the story also drags the film down a bit, since it's so long. Robin Hood only emerges at the end of it, and that's a bit of a let-down. I would have liked to see more of Douglas Fairbanks's acrobatics and hilarious fight scenes, as well as more fighting against the oppressive regime of Prince John. And less of the medieval blathering. That would have made the film more engaging for me. I still like it though, like I said it has plenty of good points.
Next I saw The Black Pirate. A movie in wonderfully restored Technicolor. Actually, unlike the more famous color films of the 30's, like The Wizard of Oz and Gone With the Wind, this one is actually not very colorful at all. Two colors dominate the palette in this movie: brown, at the beach and on the ship, and blue, the sky and the sea. The costumes are either brown, black or a not very bright shade of red, and Douglas Fairbanks himself wears black, not very colorful at all. I don't know if this aesthetic choice had something to do with the limitations of color film during the 20's. I'll have to watch the commentary and find out. At any rate, it looks very nice. I rather like that it's not so garish.
For Hollywood, this is a pretty realistic portrayal of pirates. They're bloodthirsty and dishonorable, and they have absolutely zero respect for women. After viewing the Pirates of the Caribbean film series, this depiction can be refreshing.
Otherwise this film was a disappointment to me. I had read that this was Fairbanks's return to his traditional brand of unpretentious film making after his epic stint. It certainly is unpretentious, in spite of the color, with all of the action taking place on a rather dull ship in the middle of nowhere. It reminded me of a western at sea. There was also a large hole in the plot. I think the movie would have gained something by showing how the Black Pirate gathered his army. Instead we just see him disappear and then reappear with a whole ship full of fighters. The film loses some of its excitement for me there.
Again, all of this could have something to do with the limitations of color photography at that time. I can't help but get the feeling that the film sacrificed some important story elements for a technical novelty. Still, it's by no means a bad film, but it's not my favorite Fairbanks picture.
Last but not least, I saw Zorro. I got my family to watch this one with me, since Zorro was my dad's childhood hero. So he kept on complaining that the movie didn't focus enough on Zorro's fight for the poor. In fact it doesn't focus on that at all, but it's still a good film, and a perfect vehicle for Fairbanks. He gets to do some of his hilarious stunts, and really shows up the villains again and again, which is extremely satisfying. The title cards are also frequently very funny. Of the three films, this one is the most entertaining, showing Fairbanks doing what he does best.