Cast:
Charles Farrell (Lem Tustine), Mary Duncan (Kate), David Torrence (Mr Tustine), Edith Yorke (Mrs Tustine), Anne Shirley (Marie Tustine), Tom McGuire (Matey), Richard Alexander (Mac), and Roscoe Ates (Reaper) Directed by F. W. Murnau (#256 - Nosferatu, #499 - Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans, #1335 - Tabu: A Story of the South Seas)
Review:
Admittedly, covering certain directors takes a bit of leeway when it comes to the realm of the silent era, particularly with F. W. Murnau. Of the 21 feature films made by the German director, only twelve of them survive in its entirety, with this being one of the lucky ones while being the last of the three Fox Film productions he did. Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) is obviously the most famous as a statement in visual interest (it had a synchronized musical score and sound effects soundtrack. His next feature, 4 Devils (1928), is now considered lost. At any rate, Murnau shot the movie in Athena and Pendleton, Oregon, and it probably makes considerable sense to someone who actually did once purchase a farm of his own. The working title of the feature was "Our Daily Bread", which ended up being used for select distribution in European countries (besides, in 1934, King Vidor would use the title for his own film). The movie is an adaptation of Elliott Lester's play The Mud Turtle, which had run for a number of performances in 1925 (as such it was adapted to the screen in scenario by Marion Orth and Berthold Viertel while H.H. Caldwell and Katherine Hilliker did the titles). There were two versions of the film: a part-sound version that had music and re-shot parts when Murnau refused to cater to Fox's demands and the silent version. The sound version is lost, but the silent version has been restored from its initial re-discovery in the 1970s (as a survivor of the vaults unlike a number of Fox Film features, which includes Sunrise's original 35mm negative). Incidentally, this film would serve as an inspiration for Terence Malick's Days of Heaven (1978).
It may not be as memorable in its striking visual power as say, Sunrise, but it still makes for quite a feature to enjoy. In a way, it is a distinct telling of that film when it comes to the clash of people from the small towns and someone from the city that could lead to consequences. Now, instead of the lakeside, one reaches the wheatfields of Minnesota. It is like a companion film without becoming a shell. The lesson one does learn within a romance filled with sweet people like this is that you can leave the city but still find weird things in the countryside. Idyllic life isn't something you just find on a farm or the city because it happens to look like it can be, as people of all personalities can be found wherever you lurk, where one hopes to find honest people for meaningful understanding. There is more to life than making movement and relying on habits and prejudices, you might say. The character may seem simple and easily defined, but one just has to find the little layers within that makes useful ambiguity. One never knows what would have happened if Murnau had not died in 1931 when it comes to filmmaking, but I can imagine that he clearly valued the art of silent filmmaking more than just doing a film with sound for the sake of it. You can show a city diner without needing the sound to make it seem alive when it comes to showing how Farrell and Duncan make a quick quality pair. As pawns in the game of life that isn't easy or fair for singles or couples, they grow on you pretty well. It's not a movie built for cute moments of course, since Torrence serves as the grumpy counter to idealism while Alexander makes a quality cad.
Inevitably, the ending isn't quite what you would hope would occur from a film like this. It seems just a bit too sudden and convenient for what has to be seen and not see in the resolution of the triangle conflict. Of course, who really knows if the final shot of two people crossing the threshold of being again in the farms will work the way you think: understanding people is one thing, living with them day after day is another. Murnau is hopeful but not preachy about what he thinks to say about the illusions that come with rural and city life. As an 89-minute feature, it is paced with delicate efficiency that arrived perhaps a bit too late to make the mark it should have deserved among the silents. At any rate, Murnau's penultimate feature is a pretty good one that can be watched among his other surviving works with general interest.
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment