The Last Laugh (1924).

Review #2079: The Last Laugh.

Cast: 

Emil Jannings (hotel doorman), Maly Delschaft (his niece), Max Hiller (her bridegroom), Emilie Kurz (bridegroom's aunt), Hans Unterkircher (hotel manager), Olaf Storm (young guest), Hermann Vallentin (guest with pot belly), Georg John (night watchman), and Emmy Wyda (thin neighbor) Directed by F. W. Murnau (#256 - Nosferatu, #499 - Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans, #1335 - Tabu: A Story of the South Seas, #1885 - City Girl, and #2002 - The Haunted Castle)

Review: 

The Weimer Republic had plenty of choices for people to look upon in its era, whether it was part of the "kammerspielfilm" or not. A cursory look into it states that it was a type of film involving intimate portrayals of the lower middle class. In the years of the Republic that came from the end of World War I, there was a great need for films, which would lead to various efforts from studios that saw various directors make their mark, whether that involved directors such as F.W. Murnau or (future "fellow traveler") Leni Riefenstahl. Murnau had made his debut in 1919, but none of his first six films survive in complete form. He directed for less than two decades due to his untimely death in 1931, but he cultivated such a curious line of work that have distinct qualities to them. The line of connection here with Erich Pommer is not particularly surprising, since he had been a head of production for two studios in Decla Film and UFA and produced a handful of Murnau films. Incidentally, Carl Mayer, who had written for a handful of Murnau films such as The Haunted Castle (1921), wrote the screenplay for this film (to say nothing of the connection of Mayer the writer and Pommer the producer with The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari). The film title [Der letzte Mann] actually translates to "The Last Man", and I am curious as how one knows it as "Laugh" (the German word for that is Lachen instead). In 1955, the film was remade in West Germany with Harald Braun directing. Jannings and Murnau would work together again with the UFA-distributed Tartuffe (1926) and Faust (1926). 

Perhaps it isn't surprising that Jannings (actor of his time and future propagandist) was cast for this role, which mainly allows him to control the screen without any thought for worrying about title cards. It is his own show to chew for pathos to go along with the camerawork from none other than Karl Freund. How can one resist the urge to look up how one can get such shots from a camera that apparently ranged from tying it to Freund's chest on a bicycle to suspending it in a basket from a bridge. All of this comes together for a curious film to view in the lens of seeing the rise and fall of a man in uniform within dignity. In some ways, the man may only really serve as a man when he wears the uniform of a great power (corporation, or perhaps empire?), if you think about it. Jannings accomplishes what is required in showing just how much a man can come and go when one finds their wellbeing challenged, one that might as well be original poster boy for "you are not your job". The camera can make him loom as a man of his job and also surround him like a man and a microscope once the uniform washes away from him. As such, 90 minutes is an interesting time to spend looking at such interesting shots that tells a fable that is generally effective in sobering flow. Well, I was semi-true in saying there were no title cards...because one does pop up near the end that is different from the usual title: "Here our story should really end, for in actual life, the forlorn old man would have little to look forward to but death. The author took pity on him, however, and provided quite an improbable epilogue." The ending is up to you to interpret beyond just labeling it as "the happy part", but I suppose one should consider the sticking point that someone made (whether it was Murnau or a boardroom executive, take your pick) that apparently the washroom attendant makes more than a doorman. Go with the flow or don't, I suppose, because maybe the real laugh is the one had at the expense of the one who thinks films require this type of ending. At any rate, those who want to see just how much one should look upon filmmaking beyond a passive interest would have a worthy time here with a curious and involving feature of camerawork in the measure of a man.

 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Next time: Dersu Uzala.

The Hands of Orlac.

Review #1896: The Hands of Orlac.

Cast: 

Conrad Veidt (Paul Orlac), Alexandra Sorina (Yvonne Orlac), Fritz Kortner (Nera), Carmen Cartellieri (Regine), Hans Homma (Dr. Serra), Fritz Strassny (Paul's father), and Paul Askonas (Servant) Directed by Robert Wiene (#261 - The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari)

Review: 

If you remember, Robert Wiene directed one of the most notable expressionist movies of its time. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920), with Conrad Veidt as one of the stars, is also one of the most notable horror features in the pre-1930 era, when horror was in loose definition for films. The German-born Wiene got into acting in the early 20th century before directing and writing by 1913, with Fear [Furcht] (1917) also serving as an early horror feature to go along with Genuine (1920). Wiene continued to make films on a regular basis until 1933, when Nazis took power in Germany. He made one further film in exile before dying of cancer in 1938 at the age of 65. This film (originally released as Orlacs Hände) was released as a production from Austria as an adaptation of Les Mains d'Orlac, a 1920 French novel by Maurice Renard. Two further films were adapted from the book: Mad Love (1935) and The Hands of Orlac (1960), although there have been a number of unofficial adaptations that cribbed elements from the book such as Hands of a Stranger (1962) and Body Parts (1991).

If one is thinking they are going to get a strange and eerie horror feature involving a man wondering what to make of his newly transplanted hands...you will get something, but one should temper their expectations. It is more of a psychological feature with the barest of horror elements (while not being an Expressionist work either), moving at a pace that will see just how one's patience goes on the strength of one good actor and well-enough cinematography for 90 minutes. Veidt is the best part of the film because of how he elevates what would be a bland character in lesser hands and makes it one with tortured patience and vulnerability that keeps you invested in seeing where the pain lies with him. He may seem a bit overwrought when it comes to looking at silent performances, but it works with what needs to be shown here. Kortner makes a sinister showing to make the buildup more than just a glacier-pace, because there isn't exactly much to really describe about the movie about "killer" hands besides a grouchy parent, since we know that our lead isn't exactly a killer (but Kortner doesn't have too much time anyway). This kind of overshadows the others such as a withering Sorina or Strassny being an old nut, but at least the movie is respectably done from start to finish. The train wreck that is in the beginning of the film is handled in sprawling detail I do think the second half works a bit better than the first when it comes to getting down to business, but its attempts at a tidy conclusion does seem a bit too convenient (strangely, Berlin had one quibble in its censorship authority: not the idea of a guy going nuts due to having "killer" hands, but a sequence talking about making molds of fingerprints from wax). So yes, the movie is a psych-out scare rather than a body count movie, and that will work out for others better than others when it comes to imagination and patience, and I think it ends up doing just fine in that regard. It may not be as particularly creeping as its title might suggest, but you could still have a decent time regardless.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Okay, here's a blueprint of the month to guess on: the decades of the 1910s to the 2010s gets one film featured to review before the cycle repeats itself again (of course, the 1910s may be hard to repeat...)

So yes, a film from the 1920s gets followed by one from the 1930s, so enjoy the guessing.

He Who Gets Slapped.

Review #1771: He Who Gets Slapped.

Cast: 
Lon Chaney (Paul Beaumont, aka HE), Norma Shearer (Consuelo), John Gilbert (Bezano), Tully Marshall (Count Mancini), Marc McDermott (Baron Regnard), Ford Sterling (Tricaud), Harvey Clark (Briquet), Paulette Duval (Zinida), Ruth King (Maria Beaumont), Clyde Cook (A Clown), Brandon Hurst (A Clown), and George Davis (A Clown) Directed by Victor Sjöström (#1327 - The Wind and #1731 - The Phantom Carriage)

Review: 

It should only figure that having a prime presence in Lon Chaney and a noted directing figure in Victor Sjostrom would result in an interesting movie. Sjostrom had moved to the United States when he was hired to direct Name the Man (1924), and he modified his name to "Seastrom". He would direct a handful of films in America in the silent era, and this was the first one to be produced by Metro Goldwyn Mayer (MGM) in its history (albeit not the first released, since it was released in November for the holiday season), which if you remember had Louis B. Mayer as studio chief and Irving Thalberg as supervisor of productions, and the latter knew Chaney well enough from Universal Pictures to bring him to contract with the new studio. Sjostrom and Chaney would each benefit from the overall success that the film brought (one that made double its budget while being shot in the span of nearly two months). The film is adapted from the 1915 Russian play of the same name by Leonid Andreyev, with Sjostrom and Carey Wilson adapting it to the screen.

The film runs at 71 minutes (at least for versions in the public domain and on television, owing to an increased frame per second rate), and it manages to do quite well in making grisly entertainment. Well, at least for a film that involves a man who experiences humiliation so great that he becomes a clown only referred to as "HE" that gets a chance at romance but also revenge. Folks familiar with the actor referred to as "The Man with a Thousand Faces" will find a worthy treat in Chaney's lead performance as a dutiful clown, which technically means he is doing a dual performance: the normal mild-mannered man in the opening and a clown that prefers to laugh at people within pain (of course, there is also exploitation too). In that sense, he does exactly what is needed in a resourceful performance of pathos that we are generally sympathetic to, as in the tradition most would know from his previous highlights like The Penalty (1920), and it probably made sense that he would portray a clown again with Laugh, Clown, Laugh just four years later (which also had a love triangle). In fact, he nearly overshadows the other two folks in this love triangle story. Thalberg took an interest in Shearer, and this worked out pretty well for each side (they married in 1927), and one can see why. She has the bright charm required for what is needed here, and she seems quite suited in matching with Gilbert. He was in the midst of turning into a leading man around this period, and even with a segmented role like this he rolls with it pretty well (i.e. he doesn't get lost as just a nice face to romance another nice face). It might qualify as a thriller feature, if you think about it, since one definitely gets curious over just what will happen with the (unstable) lead presence, particularly when Marshall and McDermott enter the picture. McDermott makes a useful adversary as a bully that doesn't need much screen-time to make it work out, while Marshall makes a worthy exploiting figure. As one of MGM's early standout features, one should certainly not hesitate to pick this feature out, particularly since it happens to now be in the public domain. As a whole, the film is breezy and always interesting when it needs to be when it comes to showing a look into the circus along with being a fairly built thriller that still holds well within the standards of its time. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Aelita.

Review #1682: Aelita.

Cast:

Yuliya Solntseva (Aelita, Queen of Mars), Igor Ilyinsky (Kravtsov - amateur sleuth), Nikolai Tsereteli (Engineer Los / Evguieni Spiridinov), Nikolay Batalov (Gusev, Red Army Soldier), Vera Orlova (Nurse Masha, Gusev's Wife), Valentina Kuindzhi (Natasha, Los' Wife), Pavel Pol (Viktor Erlich, Sugar Profiteer), Konstantin Eggert (Tuskub, Ruler of Mars), Yuri Zavadsky (Gol, Radiant Energy Tower Guardian) Directed by Yakov Protazanov.

Review:

Long staircases, filled with wide shots of people in costumes that try to portray what it would be like if there were people on Mars, wrapped in a narrative of imagination along with a look into the conventional life of a time long since passed that show some parallels within a quasi-focus on science fiction. Yep, sounds like Aelita, also known as Aelita: Queen of Mars and released in an edited form in the States as "Aelita: Revolt of the Robots". Tellingly, as a movie from the Soviet Union, it was released by the studio Mezhrabpom-Rus, part of Workers International Relief (initially created as a counterpart to help with contributions to famine relief that was a counterpart to Western efforts that probably humbled the Soviets, and it is likely worth further research for the curious). This is based on Alexei Tolstoy's 1923 novel of the same name (one key difference in transition involved the Martians not being descendants of Atlanteans). Aelita was not a major success in its time, but it serves an early example of what could come from science fiction on film, particularly with its designs that could be thought of as an inspiration to subsequent works within the genre (such as Metropolis or the Flash Gordon serials). At any rate, the director responsible was a veteran director in Yakov Protazanov, who had been involved with film since 1907, which he had done after rejecting the profession that his father and others had done before him as merchants. He directed a variety of features in the decade of the 1910s before emigrating out of Russia in 1920, for which he did not return for three years. At any rate, he would continue to make films until his death in 1945.

Sometimes the past turns out to be stronger than any one person can be. Or perhaps the real message is for one to get on with their lives and focus on a collective effort rather than individual dilly-dallying. I guess you can make any kind of inference when the emphasis isn't so much a man trying to get to Mars as it is a look into what makes the difference in a society that needs people to engage with reality instead of fantasies or vices of the mind. Weirdness works out best when it comes to near century-old cinema that happens to dabble in science fiction that might as well be thought of as an offbeat fable, which I suppose plays into whoever wants to believe in the film's moments of imagination (one can interpret it as a parable for communism, particularly with its imagery, although since we are talking about imaginary entertainment, you can imagine my amusement at describing it as such). On one side, there are slaves that are seen being put into the cold storage when used up to contrast with people running away on spaceships after shooting folks for imagined betrayals. So yeah, it kind of sits well with those type of American silent movies that dabbled with a genre 25% of the time to go with the conventional angle, complete with a "uh huh, sure" type of ending (in other words, 1924 expectations); it all starts with a message of "Anta Odeli Uta" and some constructivist sets (it is best described as "abstract and austere", with the best example being the Shukhov Tower). These sets were done by Issac Rabinovich and Victor Simov, while the costumes were done by Aleksandra Ekster. Solntseva made her debut with this film, the first of six in her career (her last film was Earth (1930), made by the famed Alexander Dovzhenko); she would become a director after a variety of work with her husband Dovzhenko that included Chronicle of Flaming Years (1961, which won her the award for Best Director at the Cannes Film Festival, the first and only women to win it for a half-century). She does well here, playing to the flair needed in a role with wires that quietly asks for histrionics without needing to chew all of the scenic routes. Mystery comes easy when paired with Eggert for Martian scheming. Tsereteli fits the conventional counterpart just fine, where one isn't begging to be back on the Red Planet instead of focusing on obsessions and quirks within oddballs like Ilyinsky or troubles involving revolution/kissing. At 113 minutes, it might beg a bit too much on one's patience if it doesn't fit your mindset of what one thinks of when it comes to science fiction, or perhaps its attempts at social commentary will hit the nail just fine (or it will hit like a bloody stump, evidently). I thought it was a decent movie, one that certainly seems more interesting when on Mars than back home, but that could apply to a good number of sci-fi movies at any rate. The historical value of its style and execution certainly will prove more than enough to deliver for one's attention after all these years.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Sea Hawk (1924).

Review #1321: The Sea Hawk (1924).

Cast: 
Milton Sills (Sir Oliver Tressilian), Enid Bennett (Lady Rosamund Godolphin), Lloyd Hughes (Lionel Tressilian), Wallace Beery (Capt. Jasper Leigh), Marc McDermott (Sir John Killigrew), Wallace MacDonald (Peter Godolphin), Bert Woodruff (Nick), Claire Du Brey (Siren), Lionel Belmore (Justice Anthony Baine), Cristina Montt (The Infanta of Spain), Albert Prisco (Yusuf-Ben-Moktar), and Frank Currier (Asad-ed-Din) Directed by Frank Lloyd (#099 - Mutiny on the Bounty)

Review: 
It only figures one needs to build their own ships to really sell their adventure films. At least that is what director Frank Lloyd felt was the best way to approach his film when it came to ship action. At the cost of around $200,000, wooden exteriors were outfitted to existing craft by designer Fred Gabourie (whose best work was props for Buster Keaton silent films), which was soon utilized for scenes on the coast of Catalina Island in California. The footage of the ships in battle were re-used in 1940 for The Sea Hawk (a Warner Bros production with Errol Flynn that had its own distinctive plot as opposed to being a remake). What can one expect from a silent spectacle like this? Well, quite a bit, given that it is an adventure film with pirates, disloyal brothers, sea-slaves, and other various elements, all of which make for an adequate time at 123 minutes, where spectacle will sail the seas far more prominently than its attempts at romance, which in of itself is okay. It takes quite a bit of build-up before it finds itself on a ship, but it all proves to be worth it, mostly because it never seems too stagey or overblown to detriment. When it comes to headliners, Sills is a fair pick for such a rugged role. He had started his career in acting on a whim in 1906, inspired by a visit to the University of Chicago by stage actor Donald Robertson (who had his own stage company) while he was working as a professor (Sills had graduated from the university previously, studying psychology and philosophy on scholarship). In the span of eighteen years leading up to this film, he had found himself on Broadway and subsequent transition to film in 1914 with The Pit. It was this film that helped him find major status, although he would die of a heart attack at the age of 48 in 1930. In this respect, he does pretty well with displaying a rough-and-tumble nature without having to put all the emotion in silly gestures. Bennett walks through her role just as well, where one needs to balance a bit of passion and scorn without so much time on screen, with chemistry between her and Sills feeling pretty assured. Hughes plays off panic fine, although he is overshadowed not only by Sills and Bennett but also by Beery. One cannot resist a colorful rascal of a pirate when done right, and Beery does this in spades, as one would expect from the noted character actor (who would find further success in the following decade). The rest of the actors do just fine, where one needs to just make sure nothing incredibly hammy lurks in the way of the main stars. On the whole, it isn't too surprising to see why this was the audience favorite for 1924, as it is an interesting spectacle piece filled with ambition and useful components (notice in one scene the hand-coloring for the torches in a night scene) that make for a worthy curiosity piece to hold up over the decades. One can't really go wrong with adventure and a small bit of romance to go along with a viewing.

Next time: Battleship Potemkin (1925).

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Sherlock Jr.

Review #941: Sherlock Jr.

Cast: 
Buster Keaton (Projectionist / Sherlock Jr), Kathryn McGuire (The Girl), Joe Keaton (The Girl's Father), Erwin Connelly (The Hired Man / The Butler), Ward Crane (The Local Sheik / The Villain), and Ford West (Theatre Manager / Gillette) Directed by Buster Keaton (#757 - Seven Chances, #762 - College, #805 - The Navigator, and #877 - Three Ages, #908 - The General, and #926 - Our Hospitality)

Review:
This is the shortest feature length film that Keaton directed, lasting 45 minutes (shorter than Seven Chances by around ten minutes), but that does not mean that the film is any less developed or entertaining than his other films. In fact, this is one of his best films in the achievements that Keaton makes on a technical and comedy scale; the deadpan humor of Keaton along with the gags of slapstick are high caliber for him, but it also manages to be quite imaginative with its premise (established quickly, naturally) and execution. How many movies do you know where a character walks onto the movie screen? The part where he goes through numerous film scenes before he enters the mystery world is particularly clever. The second half of the film is more entertaining than the first half for me, perhaps because I like seeing Keaton playing a detective, albeit under certain circumstances (namely, a dream). Keaton and McGuire are fine together, but the real highlight is seeing his interactions with Connelly and Crane, particularly the billiard game sequence. It's just a nice exchange between the three, and it is a scene that proves crucial in the climax, which is neat. The stunts and effects are entertainingly executed (such as the suitcase trick, or the water basin stunt, with a mishap actually resulting in a fractured neck), with the editing being a key highlight. On the whole, this is a highly competently made film, filled with entertaining aspects and imaginative setups. This is an easy film to recommend, as this is one of Keaton's best.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Girl Shy.

Review #938: Girl Shy.

Cast: 
Harold Lloyd (Harold Meadows, The Poor Boy), Jobyna Ralston (Mary Buckingham, The Rich Girl), Richard Daniels (Jerry Meadows, The Poor Man), and Carlton Griffin (Ronald DeVore, The Rich Man) Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer (#667 - The Freshman, #674 - Grandma's Boy, #758 - Safety Last!, #864 - Hot Water, and #889 - A Sailor-Made Man, #903 - Dr. Jack, #918 - Why Worry?) and Sam Taylor (The Freshman, #727 - For Heaven's Sake, Safety Last!, Hot Water, Dr. Jack, Why Worry?)

Review: 
It is nice to come closer to being full circle with Harold Lloyd's silent feature filmography, with this being the ninth of his eleven to be reviewed (reviewed out of order, but still). This was Lloyd's sixth feature film, with this being the first not to be produced by Hal Roach (who had produced the previous five); in addition, this was a "character picture" (as described by Lloyd), where the relationship between Lloyd and Ralston's characters is given more emphasis than simply having a load of gags. However, the climax of the movie (involving numerous modes of transport, such as the trolley, horse-drawn wagon, and horseback) is a clear highlight for the movie in terms of eye catching hilarity. This time around, the main character is a stutterer around girls who writes about his "lovemaking"; two different types of women (and how to "woo" them) are shown, one being a vamp and the other being a flapper; these two scenes are pretty amusing for the time. Lloyd and Ralston do a pretty job together, balancing sentiment along with moments of amusement quite well. Daniels lends a capable hand to the film, and Griffin serves as a fair enough villain for Lloyd to take action against. Like the other Lloyd films, it runs at a good capable pace (this time around 80 minutes) while also showcasing some fun gags; one of my favorites is Lloyd being moved slowly by a turtle while trying to talk with Ralston. The stuttering (and accompanying whistle to help Lloyd out) never comes off as tedious nor too ridiculous; the parts with him trying to get his book published is quite funny as well. On the whole, this falls along the line of being another good Lloyd movie to watch and enjoy. It isn't as great as something like Safety Last!, but it definitely is something to have a good time with, stutter or not

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Hot Water.

Review #864: Hot Water.

Cast:
Harold Lloyd (Hubby), Jobyna Ralston (Wifey), Josephine Crowell (Her Mother), Charles Stevenson (Her Big Brother), and Mickey McBan (Her Little Brother) Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer (#667 - The Freshman, #674 - Grandma's Boy, #758 - Safety Last!) and Sam Taylor (The Freshman, #727 - For Heaven's Sake, Safety Last!)

Review:
The last time I did a Harold Lloyd film was last November, and I figured that it was time once again, with around 20 days to Thanksgiving and such. This time around (in his 7th feature film) is an episodic kind of film, with three parts merged into one feature, as opposed to the plot driven Lloyd films (like Safety Last!, for example). The first part (involving him winning a turkey in a raffle and the ensuing ride home) is pretty well done, with the turkey naturally playing a good part in some fine gags. The second part (about Lloyd and some of the extended in law family going on a ride in a new car) is also well done. One moment that was pretty quirky was when the mother-in-law starts crying (because her wedding gift was broken - by an annoying little kid, naturally) and Lloyd consoles her by kissing her on the cheek...via a dog, of course. I do like that one of the inter titles talks about how the couple will soon have a new car to themselves...after 59 payments, of course. Naturally this was made in a time where neck ties were important to wear (I myself wear two ties), which leads to a fine little gag when he puts one on when driving. The gags are fun to watch as usual, with Lloyd being a good every-man. The last part (involving the mother-in-law sleepwalking around the house) is pretty funny with all of the misunderstandings by Lloyd, with a chase scene in the middle of a wind storm at his house. His hair even goes up near the end, which is a charming little shot. The movie itself is quick at 60 minutes, and if one is looking for a Lloyd film, this would fit the bill nicely.

So there was a baseball team that won the World Series on Wednesday (November 2nd), from Chicago. Must've been the White Sox. (Ha!) 
Congratulations to the Cubs, who I first referenced in my Sharknado (#625) review (back in 2014, when talking about the fact that the film was made meaning the Cubs would win in my lifetime...with a footnote saying I could live to be 100.), and now they finally did it. Strange year, this is. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Waxworks.

Review #863: Waxworks.

Cast:
Emil Jannings (Harun al-Rashid), Conrad Veidt (Ivan the Terrible), Werner Krauss (Jack the Ripper / Spring-Heeled Jack), William Dieterle (The Poet / Assad the Baker / A Russian Prince), John Gottowt (Inhaber der Panoptikums), Olga Belajeff (Eva-Maimune-Eine Bojarin) Directed by Paul Leni and Leo Birinsky.

Review:
Waxworks (known as Das Wachsfigurenkabinett in Germany) is an anthology film, with some fantasy and horror elements (yes, this another German "world cinema" film on Movie Night. Do not worry, other countries will get their due all in good time). Two main stories (Harun al-Rashid, Ivan the Terrible) and a closing one (Jack the Ripper/Spring-heeled Jack) are conveyed to us (with the framing piece being that the Poet must come up with backstories for the two wax figures), with Dieterle being in all three parts. The sets and costumes for the two main stories are spectacular, with fine cinematography work by Helmar Lerski. There is also a bit of neat color tinting as well. The first segment is pretty good, with a nice performance from Jannings that brings out some nice humor. It's the longer segment (by a few minutes), but it doesn't overstay its welcome too much. The second segment is also pretty interesting, with Veidt playing this villainous kind of role with a bit of lunacy that later turns into desperation, with the scene of him trying to reverse the hourglass being quite frantic, with his fate at the end being quite poetic. The final piece to close out the film is brief (around six minutes), but it is serviceable, even if it ends a bit like you'd expect (who could've dreamed that one up, I wonder), for the 20's anyway. Obviously it isn't likely realistic with world history facts, but there is a curiosity that the movie inspires within itself. Krauss does fairly well as the last villainous character. On the whole, this is a fine piece of work, weaving some enjoyable stories together with a good sense of style and flair for the time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Navigator.

Review #805: The Navigator.

Cast
Buster Keaton (Rollo Treadway), Kathryn McGuire (Betsy O'Brien), Frederick Vroom (John O'Brien), Clarence Burton (Spy), and H.N. Clugston (Spy) Directed by Buster Keaton (#757 - Seven Chances and #762 - College) and Donald Crisp.

Review
It's fun to cover another Keaton movie because it is always nice to see the deadpan humor alongside stunt work by Keaton himself, complete with sight gags and a reasonable amount of pacing. The Navigator doesn't have many cast members, but the dynamic between Keaton and McGuire works just fine. It's entertaining seeing the two of them try to run a ship without servants nor anyone else to help; at one point they even fly the flag signaling quarantine, while trying to lower a boat to the water. Speaking of which, the aquatic scenes are well done, with Keaton being a master even under a heavy suit. The ship itself is a good setting, and it is used well, with several gags (such as when they try to make food) utilizing the ship to good capacity. It's interesting how the movie seemingly feels relevant today; sure, people don't go on ships as much as they used to, but there is a certain feeling of watching people try to use technology (of any kind) and either dealing with it or taking time to find ways to use it right. The movie moves at a fine pace, not languishing while on the ship; at 59 minutes, it is a treat for anyone.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: America.

Review #415: America.

Cast
Neil Hamilton (Nathan Holden), Erville Alderson (Justice Montague), Carol Dempster (Nancy Montague), Charles Emmett Mack (Charles Montague), Lee Beggs (Samuel Adams), John Dunton (John Hancock), Lionel Barrymore (Capt. Walter Butler), Arthur Donaldson (King George III), Charles Bennett (William Pitt), Frank Walsh (Thomas Jefferson), Frank McGlynn Sr. (Patrick Henry), and Arthur Dewey (George Washington) Directed by D. W. Griffith.

Review

The first film to be reviewed with D. W. Griffith, America was at the last parts of his directing career, and this film wasn't much of a success in 1924. Is the film any good anyway? Sort of. The facial movements aren't bad, but Hamilton and Alderson don't exactly do the best job. The battle scenes are alright, and the film tries in the history department, looking decent. The film has a length that I imagine some audiences in 1924 might not have liked, over 2 hours at about 140 minutes, and sometimes it feels slow, but if you want a film that has some patriotism, this might be for you, even if it is a bit dated.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

original: 

Movie Night: The Thief of Bagdad (1924)

Review #399: The Thief of Bagdad.

Cast
Douglas Fairbanks (Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad), Snitz Edwards (His Evil Associate), Charles Belcher (The Holy Man (Imam) / Narrator), Julanne Johnston (The Princess), Sojin Kamiyama (Cham Shang, Prince of the Mongols), Anna May Wong (The Mongol Slave), Brandon Hurst (The Caliph), Tote Du Crow (The Soothsayer), and Noble Johnson (The Prince of the Indies) Directed by Raoul Walsh.

Review
The Thief of Bagdad provides a few firsts for Movie Night, the first film from 1924 reviewed here, the first film with Douglas Fairbanks (Who also wrote and produced this film) on here, and the first film on here directed by Raoul Walsh, who directed many films in six decades. How is the film though? It's a fun tale, to say the least. The film (Who some might recognize is freely adapted from One Thousand and One Nights) has a good enough story that manages to not feel stretched, not feeling too short or too long at 140 minutes. The actors don't speak, but they do have actions and movements to them, and Douglas Fairbanks uses the action to his advantage swashbuckling excellently as the rest of the actors do a fine job, keeping the film from falling off balance. The production design by William Cameron Menzies is extraordinary, a new thing at the time. The effects work well, looking state of the art for the 1920s, especially given that Fairbanks wanted his epic to look and work well, which while being expensive (At the time) to make, was a success back then and it still is today, spawning two remakes and also the film Aladdin as well. This is a film of spectacle, that manages to work brilliantly. There's only one more thing to review...Countdown to 400 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.