The Perfect Clown.

Review #2042: The Perfect Clown.

 

Cast: 

Larry Semon (Bert Larry), Kate Price (Mrs. Sally Mulligan), Dorothy Dwan (Rosie), Joan Meredith (Her Chum), Otis Harlan (The Boss), Curtis McHenry (Snowball), Oliver Hardy (Babe Mulligan), and Frank Alexander (Tiny Tott) Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer (#667 - The Freshman, #674 - Grandma's Boy, #758 - Safety Last!, #864 - Hot Water, #889 - A Sailor-Made Man, #903 - Dr. Jack, #918 - Why Worry? and #938 - Girl Shy)

Review: 

Nine years ago, I reviewed a movie called Wizard of Oz (1925) that featured comedian Larry Semon as the star. It sucked. But hey, he was a comedian that had his time in the spotlight during the 1910s and early 1920s, clearly it was a case of me not picking something more representative of who Semon was as a presence in silent comedy. Born in West Point, Mississippi, he was born into vaudeville from his parents, a magician and assistant that did their own show. Semon worked for a time in graphic art with newspapers but found his way into vaudeville and later Vitagraph, where he had a contract that dealt with scenario writing, directing, and eventually starring for himself. He did a variety of short films (which can detailed in small part by better folks here) but eventually had to try his hand at feature filmmaking when it came to trying to make big financially due to his free-spending habits. All of this just so happens to match up with seeing Fred C. Newmeyer direct a film without Harold Lloyd in it. Actually, the Colorado native directed various comedy shorts and features between his time spent as an actor in the 1910s and early 1920s, which came after he had also tried his hand at minor league baseball. Newmeyer directed eight features that had Lloyd as star (albeit a few of those directing jobs were shared with Sam Taylor), but he made his first venture without Lloyd in Seven Keys to Baldpate (1925) that featured Douglas MacLean (unfortunately the film is lost). The Perfect Clown, was released not long after this one. So yes, the same year that saw Newmeyer go from directing Lloyd to going on his own was the same one where Semon was the star of two feature films, which both happen to feature Oliver Hardy (two years away from being paired up with Stan Laurel for the first time) in a supporting role.

Norman Taurog, who worked with Semon for a time, once related a story about Semon and his tactics by the mid-1920s. He would be handed a script by Semon before he left for a trip that meant that Taurog filmed the script with a stunt double (Bill Hauber) to stand in for Semon before he returned for shots of close-ups. Of course, a biography of Semon once stated that in a two-year span, Semon was reported to have taken a vacation that totaled two days. It seems that Semon had plenty of gag ideas brimming in his head that he needed to get done in some way, but that did not mean his sense of timing was good enough to execute said gags. Honestly, I wish I could say that the runtime being just a few minutes short of an hour means a jolly time for the curious. Alas, what we have is a pretty mediocre time that doesn't exactly live up to its title beyond an expressive face that its star has. It lingers in coincidences and gags that might as well pop up in a cheesy haunted house show, which is too corny to really be anything other than just the most bored of chuckles ever imaginable. Semon may very well have been trying to draw blood from a stone with his attempt at dragging comedy into feature form, he seems a bit played out within this structure. Granted, it is better than the "ambitious" attempt he did with the aforementioned Wizard film, because it is obviously less high-strung, but that doesn't mean much more than saying a man who did well in shorts necessairly should be in features. The stuff just seems a bit mechanical, not really generating anything besides mild bemusement with a persona that can't hold anything further than what you might have seen with an earlier silent comedian. There are gags here and there that make the film get a bit more chuckles (such as one involving a knocked over person), but as a whole it just is very okay. As a whole, it lingers with nothing special under the foundation that could make you want that many more like it. In short, being average is one thing, being better than generic average is another, but at least it might make you wonder just how much potential there might have been for Semon, and I suppose that is enough.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Body and Soul.

Review #1795: Body and Soul.

Cast: 

Paul Robeson (Reverend Isaiah T. Jenkins / His brother Sylvester), Mercedes Gilbert (Sister Martha Jane - Isabelle's Mother), Julia Theresa Russell (Isabelle - the Girl), Lawrence Chenault (Yello-Curley' Hinds - the Phony Reverend's Former Jailmate), Marshall Rogers (Speakeasy proprietor), Lillian Johnson ("Sis" Caline, a Pious Lady), Madame Robinson ("Sis" Lucy, a Pious Lady), Chester A. Alexander (Deacon Simpkins, a Church Elder), and Walter Cornick (Brother Amos, a Church Elder) Written, Directed, and Produced by Oscar Micheaux (#1633 - Within Our Gates)

Review: 

I'm sure you already know that Oscar Micheaux was a distinct man of his time as director. After all, we already saw how well Within Our Gates (1920) went with audiences, serving as the second of his ventures into filmmaking, for which he aimed to tell interesting stories for black audiences. He made over forty features in the span of 29 years, but of the silent portion in his filmography (which he did until 1930), only three survive (Within Our Gates, The Symbol of the Unconquered, Body and Soul). This was adapted from his novel of the same name, as was the case for a number of his films. Of course, the true story to tell is the fact that this is the debut starring role of Paul Robeson. He was born in Princeton, New Jersey in 1898 to a Presbyterian minister and a descendant of the Bustills. He excelled in both acting and sports as a youth, and he wound up winning a state contest for a scholarship to Rutgers College, which he would attend in 1915. He excelled as a member of the football team, the debate team, and singing and graduated (as with high school, he graduated as valedictorian). He then studied law at the New York University School of Law in 1919 and Columbia Law School in 1920 before making his first venture into acitng into the theater in 1920. In 1921 and 1922, he played football in the freshly-created National Football League for Akron and Milwaukee before he graduated. However, he elected to move into acting as opposed to law due to encountering racism at the firm he was hired to work. It was his wife Eslanda that insisted on driving him towards becoming an actor, for which he would excel with performances such as the 1925 revival of the play The Emperor Jones, and it was his wife that negotiated him into this film (incidentally, the two would star together once in Borderline (1930)). Robeson would do various acting performances in the theater and in film, most notable with Othello and Show Boat (1936) while serving as a key figure in the Harlem Renaissance; until his death in 1976, he dedicated himself to a "worldwide cause of humanity for freedom, peace and brotherhood" that advocated for several causes (such as the Council on African Affairs) despite dealing with being investigated in the 1950s for his support of certain causes and policies. In total, he acted in a dozen feature films before disputes on the production of the anthology film Tales of Manhattan (1942) with stereotyping caused him to cease association with Hollywood, but he had a long-running career in concert (spent primairly in Europe) that sealed his reputation as a great African American icon of his time.

Robeson did not exactly take kindly to the film in later years, referring to The Emperor Jones (1933) as his true screen debut. Micheaux was a dilligent filmmaker when it came to getting them done with the budget he had that led to a few "mistakes" being kept in the final version of the film that was shown wherever it could be shown for Black audiences (of course, trying to pass a 31-year old as someone's mother despite being just four years older than their on-screen daughter is its own story), complete with distinct intertitles for characters in grammar. If you thought Within Our Gates had tendancies of a soap opera within its attempts to tell a story involving the dual nature of man: specifically a corrupt preacher and the people that are affected by his actions, one where pictures of Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, and Booker T. Washington are seen on the wall. Of course, there also is a love triangle involving Robeson playing both the evil preacher and his twin-brother inventor that each have their own trials and tribulations with trying to earn money (and a Bible with money hidden in it!). He may have been a melodrama-man, but he was also a story-teller that wanted to show sensitive topics on screen (lynching was present in Gates, for example), so this isn't too different. You may be wondering just what is with the ending. Well, apparently making a 1925 film about a priest who is portrayed as sinister is just too much for some censor boards, most notably with the New York board, which disagreed with the original nine reel version. With a lack of time to make reshoots, Micheaux had to come up with a quick ending that made the events...a dream, for which the film was now at five reels (a screenplay for the film is not intact, therefore making it hard to see exactly what was lost). Robeson is obviously the highlight of the film, one who gets to engage with the screen for two distinct performances that work out for tremendous effect, with the sly shuffling between the two being interesting enough to show just where the line goes in the pursuit of better living in that time and place. Gilbert isn't forgotten here, however, as she manages well with careful timing that makes her the heart of the film when it comes to well-meaning folks trying to maintain themselves in a world of doubt for folks that certainly valued their Sundays like no other. Russell does fine as the pawn in the middle, wrapped with shaky grace. As a whole, Micheaux and Robeson each ended up getting what was best for them. The director continued to make movies on the circuit with quick drive while the actor got to be involved in the process of what it means to make movies. It should be mentioned that of all the movies Robeson made, this one was the only one made by an black director. In that regard, Body and Soul (1925) is a fair achievement for both of them.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Well, February is here again. It shouldnt surprise you to see Movie Night honor Black History Month for the second year in a row, seeing how the first one turned out. There will be a handful of new and familiar faces seen this month in black stars and directors, and the next film up is Two Gun Man from Harlem.

The Lost World.

Review #1614: The Lost World.

Cast: 

Bessie Love (Paula White), Lewis Stone (Sir John Roxton), Lloyd Hughes (Edward Malone), Wallace Beery (Professor Challenger), Arthur Hoyt (Professor Summerlee), Alma Bennett (Gladys Hungerford), Virginia Brown Faire (Marquette the half-caste girl), Bull Montana (Apeman/Gomez), Francis Finch-Smiles (Austin), Jules Cowles (Zambo), Margaret McWade (Mrs. Challenger), and George Bunny (Colin McArdle) Directed by Harry O. Hoyt.

Review: 

"I have wrought my simple plan

If I give one hour of joy

To the boy who's half a man

Or the man who's half a boy."

What better time is there to cover a creature feature than a pioneering one? Oh sure, there is much to highlight with films such as King Kong (1933) or Mighty Joe Young (1949), but each film has one striking similarity: They all had effects work done by Willis H. O'Brien. The Oakland native worked in a variety of fields in his youth, which ranged from cattle ranches to cowboy before finding an interest in dinosaurs. He eventually honed a talent for architecture into sculpting, and a model-making session with dinosaurs and brief footage led to his first chance with a short feature. The result was The Dinosaur and the Missing Link: A Prehistoric Tragedy (1915), which garnered notice from Thomas Edison (inventor and businessman with his pioneering film company). O'Brien would make more work with dinosaurs, with a key highlight being The Ghost of Slumber Mountain (1918) that he directed and starred in (alongside producer Herbert M. Dawley), which showed live actors and stop-motion creatures together (the short was sadly cut from the original print of 40 minutes to 12, and only seven further minutes have been recovered). There are quite a few firsts with this film: It was the first full-length film with stop-motion animation (with regard to the creatures), and it was the first film to be shown in an airplane during flight. It is the fact that one can access the film at all that is just (thankful, since it has existed in numerous cut versions over 95 years, with various versions that ranged from 60 to 90 minutes (because of one attempt to destroy the copies of the film to make the effects more exclusive when King Kong came around) - in any case, one can now see the film (it was intended (originally it lasted 106 minutes, but now it runs at 110) because of recent restorations (which combined portions of 11 film elements to make the most complete version), and it happens to lurk in the public domain. The film was written by Marion Fairfax (listed as screenplay and editorial direction), that was an adaptation of the 1912 novel of the same name written by Arthur Conan Doyle (writer of the Sherlock Holmes series of adventures, which equally were inspired by a real person). One can't forget about the director in all this. Hoyt (listed as providing "dramatic direction" in the credits) was a screenwriter and director over the course of three decades from the silent era to 1945 (doing a variety of films until 1933 alongside shorts) while being a graduate of Yale University in literature. O'Brien (listed as research and technical director) would do over a dozen films with effects work in decades of work (despite being hampered at times in raising funds to do what he wanted), and he liked to add a rubber bladder to his models at times to make them seem more alive. His work (helped by three associates for the models while he did animation) was grueling, spending hours at a time just to get a few seconds of footage with his metal skeleton, rubber skinned creatures, and test footage done in 1922 was shown by Doyle to the Society of American Magicians, who he apparently wanted to trick into believing the footage was actually of living dinosaurs (which worked for a time).

There were numerous adaptations of the book in the following decades (including one with minimal input from O'Brien directed by Irwin Allen), although none have matched the power of the original. The film begins with the esteemed author Doyle introducing the story, with a brief poem delivered by intertitle (as noted above), before it moves to the story it sets itself up before dinosaurs come around, which involve Hughes' reporter character yearning to prove himself (and face death) to win the affections of a girl. It just happens to coincide with a professor who claims to have seen living dinosaurs within the back country of the Amazon, but he has to prove it because most of his records were washed away in a canoe accident (which is amusing in of itself from the next intertitle, which say he nearly killed three reporters sent to interview him!) - and so he demands folks to go with him back to the Lost World and satisfy the doubters (particularly with his hatred of reporters...oops). You'd better believe that makes for a fun time. What we have for the main quartet is a field of actors with recognizable talent for the era required and beyond. Love was not a presence to be trifled with, owing to her vast presence in film, radio, and television for nearly 70 years, with this falling into the range of wholesome charm - it works well within the confines of the film, where one doesn't lose sight of her or find other things to focus on besides her soulful expression. Stone was a soon to be known character presence and MGM mainstay, and it is evident to see why: he makes a worthy warm presence to the proceedings, dignified in his hunt for game in contrast to the big spectacle and bombast present elsewhere - a true sportsman, as the film suggests. One would hope to be familiar with Hughes, since he and Berry starred together in The Sea Hawk (1924), one of a string of films with him as a leading man (he would appear in over 90 productions as star/support in 21 years of work). He does fine with a long face destined for a few curious gestures, which is what one needs for a film like this. Beery is obviously quite a force of stature to be reckoned with, and it only makes sense to see him in a key part since he was in the middle of a lengthy career with plenty of film credits that ranged from heavy villain roles to comedy and more - obviously he does well with not getting lost in that bushy beard and bombast spirit, a man up to the challenge. The climax of the film goes to the big presentation: bringing a "living proof" Brontosaurus right to the face of the doubters a year later...only to see the dinosaur roam the streets of London due to an accident. My favorite part is the creature knocking down a statue right before it starts to bob its head around at various things. Clearly, what we have is a movie to stoke fascination in the magic that makes cinema so much fun to look upon. Sure, other movies followed in its wake with furthered advancement in effects like Jurassic Park (1993), but one cannot deny the power that comes from a mysterious world full of imagination and eclectic actors to make it all worthwhile (the subsequent follow up to that book/film, interestingly enough, proved a homage with its title, for which it shares the same name as this film). 95 years have shown the age of its effects and story at times, but it is still a worthwhile time to experience at least once, serving as the important link of creature features made in the backbone of silent films that thankfully is available for all to see any time.

300! Holy cow, Movie Night has reached 300 reviews in one calendar year, which I did not certainly did not see coming at the beginning of this year (I'm sure that statement can be applied several times over). I figured as long as the output (and quality, obviously) was better than 2019 or 2018, one would be satisfied, so I hope one has enjoyed what has proved in my mind to be Movie Night's greatest year in ten years on the Internet, which was exactly ten years ago. While I doubt there will be many years of 300 reviews, I would hope that the next year of Movie Night will prove just as worthy to read upon for you folks. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Battleship Potemkin.

Review #1322: Battleship Potemkin.

Cast: 
Aleksandr Antonov (Grigory Vakulinchuk), Vladimir Barsky (Commander Golikov), Grigori Aleksandrov (Chief Officer Giliarovsky), I. Bobrov (Young sailor flogged while sleeping), Mikhail Gomorov (Militant sailor), Aleksandr Levshin (Petty Officer), N. Poltavseva (Woman with pince-nez), Lyrkean Makeon (The Masked Man), and Konstantin Feldman (Student agitator) Directed by Sergei Eisenstein.

Review: 
Yes, it only figures to pick a film as notably subversive as this one for 1925 in Tribute to the Decades. Despite any biases I may display towards communism (and countries that practiced it then and now, which applies especially to China), I did not let that get in the way of saying that this is a good film. I may indulge a line or two occasionally about my gripes with left/right-wing politics trying to seep their way into films where it does not belong (such as with the recent Academy Award for Best Picture nominees), but it generally should not serve as some sort of key reason I don't like a film. Enjoy the review.

The middle of the decade continued the run of plenty of notable classic films across cinema. Ben-Hur became the biggest hit of the year (alongside being the most expensive silent film ever made). The Gold Rush proved to be the best comedy hit of the year (along with arguably being one of the greatest comedies ever). Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack (who went on to co-direct classics such as King Kong) collaborated for the first time with Grass (1925), which followed a tribe in Persia. But it isn't hard to deny the power of a certain Soviet feature when it comes to its place among world cinema. What can one really say about a revolutionary film like this? It is the kind of film that fits the film school circuit as an example of what one can do with editing and montage, where the focus is not so much an individual but the collective as a whole, which one would expect from a Soviet production meant to inspire the masses with its own form of propaganda, which led to bans in numerous countries (including the Soviet Union itself). Eisenstein had directed his first film eight months earlier with Strike, which dealt with a factory strike in 1903 that used animals as metaphors for the condition of numerous individuals. It was made to commemorate twenty years since the mutiny of the battleship Potemkin, which had already been dramatized in 1906 named La révolution en Russie, which ran for four minutes. The film is not meant to be a complete re-telling of the story of the mutiny, as one could expect from a dramatization. If that were true, one would have to show scenes of the Russian fleet being unable to capture the ship around the Black Sea (to the point where Emperor Nicolas II called the attempts "difficult and shameful story") before Romania gave the sailors asylum, with the ship itself left nearly sunk with the Romanian flag on before it was renamed the Panteleimon before being turned into scrap metal prior to production. If you want to be even more pedantic, the famous Odessa massacre on the steps sequence never happened in real life either, instead being used for dramatic effect, although it should be noted that it was inspired by a massacre that occurred five months before the mutiny and demonstrators. The point of the film was to inspire passion and thought with its montage, where the focus is on the images and not so much on the mostly amateur actors (although Aleksandrov would become noted for his later directorial work). One will likely find themselves wrapped up in the drama of the mutineers and at least pick up the urge to research more about it (along with other various revolving topics, but that's another story). It definitely doesn't get in the way of viewing the Odessa sequence, which is easily the highlight that can be dissected on the most on its rhythm of delivering such emotional intensity without missing a beat, with its influence being seen quite clearly in other films to follow (such as The Untouchables). There are plenty of images one could highlight that stand out (such as the sequence involving the raising of a red flag to thunderous music), but the shot of the baby carriage rolling down the steps is the most obvious one to go with when talking about the punch the film can pull. There are plenty of great films out there that stand out for their entertainment value or their innovation in style and form, and this is one that stands for the latter category with pride, where it isn't surprising that numerous publications found it one of the greatest films ever made for several decades. For the curious at heart when it comes to wanting to view films beyond American ones, this would likely prove a fine one to consider (particularly since it is readily available to find on the Internet), alongside the curiosity for silent films for the decade.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Lady of the Night (1925).

Review #1069: Lady of the Night.

Cast: 
Norma Shearer (Molly Helmer / Florence Banning), Malcolm McGregor (David Page), Dale Fuller (Miss Carr), George K. Arthur ("Chunky" Dunn), Fred Esmelton (Judge Banning), Lew Harvey (Chris Helmer, Molly's father), Gwen Lee (Molly's friend), and Betty Morrissey (Gertie) Directed by Monta Bell.

Review: 
I will admit that the concept of someone playing dual roles for a movie is pretty interesting, particularly in the era before CGI such as silent films like this, and it also helps if the actor or actress playing both roles manages to make the roles distinct. The story done to set up the two is a bit sketchy in setting them up, but it isn't anything too harmfully contrived. Shearer plays her two characters with enough contrast and believability to make for a fairly interesting pair of performances. It may interest you to know that Joan Crawford made her film debut in this movie, doing so in a uncredited role, serving as the body double for Shearer for the climax of the film involving Shearer's two characters, which is handled well. Her portrayal of Molly is more interesting to watch on screen than her portrayal of Florence, but the fun is seeing her presence and her grace that seems very believable for the time. McGregor is fairly decent, showing some carefulness and ready nature. The rest of the cast is okay, with Arthur being slightly amusing. The film is a fairly pleasant one, showing its characters and a decent little romance that has the hallmarks that you would expect from a love triangle. It manages to achieve its basic goals of entertainment without resorting to anything overtly ridiculous or anything boring. I won't say that it's a hidden classic or a hallmark of romance, but it is at least a decent experience. The color hues utilized in the film (such as blue or purple) are fairly pretty to look at. With the performances by Shearer, the film doesn't manage to overstay its welcome with its 62 minute run-time. This is a movie that you might find to be a neat little gem if you're in the mood for what it offers and what it shows.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Go West (1925).

Review #1037: Go West.

Cast: 
Buster Keaton (Friendless), Howard Truesdale (Owner of the Diamond Bar Ranch), Kathleen Myers (His Daughter), Ray Thompson (The Foreman), and Brown Eyes (Herself) Directed by Buster Keaton (#757 - Seven Chances, #762 - College, #805 - The Navigator, #877 - Three Ages, #908 - The General, #926 - Our Hospitality, and #941 - Sherlock Jr)

Review: 
Go West was the seventh feature film starring Buster Keaton, who also served as director (doing so for all except the first feature film that he starred in). This one features Keaton working at a cattle ranch, where he does things such as bronco-busting, cattle wrangling, and dairy farming, which go about as well as you'd expect, with Keaton forming a friendship with a cow. Admittedly, it is easy to say I enjoyed the movie, in part because it is a warm experience that has enough orchestrations and humor to make a relatively useful movie. It isn't a classic like some of Keaton's other works (such as The General or Sherlock Jr), but I will say that it is a fine little gem that serves its purpose of entertainment. Oddly, it is the dynamic between Keaton and the cow that drives the film forward, with numerous sequences between them are fairly useful and sweet in some way. The highlight of the film is the cattle stampede at the end, mostly because of how well it is orchestrated, from the reactions of the other actors to the way that the cattle move about, particularly with some of the sight gags that occur. The rest of the cast isn't too developed, but they serve their purposes well for the movie's standards. Keaton makes for a bumbling but always endearing lead, with a face made for silent era comedies like these, even if it may not fit the usual formula for his films. There isn't any sort of stunt-work that stands out too much, but I will say that there is some fun to be had with the movie and its goofiness with the premise that works out alright, with nothing too ridiculous or overdone. It takes its time to get rolling, but it sure feels worth it in the end. It has a runtime of 69 minutes, which I'm sure is nice enough for people to get a quick enjoyment.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Master of the House.

Review #950: Master of the House.

Cast:
Johannes Meyer (Viktor Frandsen), Astrid Holm (Ida Frandsen), Karin Nellemose (Karen Frandsen), Mathilde Nielsen ("Mads"), Clara Schønfeld (Alvilda Kryger), Johannes Nielsen (Doctor), and Petrine Sonne (Laundress) Directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer.

Review:
This is the 25th film under the world cinema label (excluding Canada and the UK), with this being the second film from Denmark (the first being #740 - Himmelskibet), released as Du skal ære din hustru during original release, with the title translating to Thou Shalt Honour Thy Wife. Among all the silent films (roughly over 50), this one sticks out as a fine family drama that has a share of wit to it. The movie shines best when showing these characters and their emotions through their expressions and through subtlety. Dreyer uses his household environment to make an enclosing but fitting atmosphere. Despite not having many scenes outside the house, it never feels like a stage production, due to the actors. The movie take its time to show the life of the family and their daily ritual; it gets interesting after the film shifts its focus to the nanny. Meyer does a fine job as this rough patriarch lead while never becoming two dimensional in his manner of tone. Holm also shines in her matriarch lead role due to being easily relatable and fairly likable. Nellemose is pretty decent. Nielsen and Schønfeld are entertaining in their scenes of trying to confront Meyer. For me, when the core concept of a film that was released before my time (pretty much most films of the 20th century) can still apply and work in the current day, it acts a benefit to the movie's advantage. The movie manages to work as a commentary on the family household most of the time, never becoming too heavy handed while having a few times of levity. It's easy to recommend this one, whether for its worldly flavor or its wonderful execution - take your pick.

Well, if you didn't already know, Movie Night has now reached 950 reviews. I didn't want to make a big deal about it (besides the sticker), but in any case it is important because there are now only 50 reviews to go to the big number, 1,000. Hopefully the next batch of 50 will be as good as the other 19 batches of 50 have been.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Wolf Blood.

Review #855: Wolf Blood.

Cast:
George Chesebro (Dick Bannister), Marguerite Clayton (Miss Edith Ford), Ray Hanford (Dr. Eugene Horton), Roy Watson (Jules Deveroux), Milburn Morante (Jacques Lebeq), Frank Clark (Old Pop Hadley), and Jack Cosgrave (Edith's uncle and manager) Directed by George Chesebro and Bruce Mitchell.

Review:
Wolf Blood (also known as Wolfblood: A Tale of the Forest) is the earliest known surviving werewolf film in existence, as The Werewolf (released in 1913) is now lost to history. This was made by an independent company named Ryan Brothers Productions. The werewolf in this film is not one that comes from a werewolf bite, but a transfusion of wolf blood into an injured person, hence the title. Halfway through the movie (which is only 67 minutes) is when the transfusion happens, though he doesn't actually turn into a wolf, as it is all in his head. There is some fairly decent location work, with the wilderness and all. The movie is more about the love triangle romance between Chesebro-Clayton-Hanford (yes, a love triangle...which is quite strange), which is somewhat entertaining, but nothing special. There is some decent music and color tinting, at least. The plot isn't really that much about the wolf, but it is serviceable for the drama genre of the silent era. There really isn't too much werewolf action (aside from a dream part with wolves), so in that sense the movie is disappointing if one is looking for horror. I suppose one could look at the film from a psychological standpoint (though the twist at the end isn't really that surprising), or study the dynamic of how one falls in love with someone really quickly despite being engaged (par for the course, I guess). From a historical aspect, there is some importance to the movie, but it isn't a seminal piece of film to write home about. It's an okay silent drama (if you haven't seen a dozen of them already and don't have high expectations), but it's not much of a horror film to pick out of the numerous ones with wolves.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Phantom of the Opera (1925).

Review #774: The Phantom of the Opera.

Cast
Lon Chaney (Erik, The Phantom of the Opera), Mary Philbin (Christine Daaé), Norman Kerry (Vicomte Raoul de Chagny), Arthur Edmund Carewe (Ledoux), Gibson Gowland (Simon Buquet), John St. Polis (Comte Philippe de Chagny), and Snitz Edwards (Florine Papillon) Directed by Rupert Julian (with additional uncredited work by Edward Sedgwick, Ernst Laemmle, and Lon Chaney)

Review

After a bit of shopping on the Eve of Christmas, I decided to watch a film that I had planned to do earlier in the year but had forgotten to. 90 years after its release, all of the cast members had died, but it was only last year that the final cast member (Carla Laemmle, playing a prima ballerina) died, which was also when Soundstage 28, a set made for the movie that was demolished. Naturally, the one scene that is most memorable is the reveal of the Phantom himself, makeup (created by Chaney himself) and all. It shocked audiences in 1925, and it still looks shocking now, in a way that CGI can never duplicate. Of course the sequence in color (with the Phantom as the Red Death, most notably) is also a highlight, particularly for the time it was shown in. It's a melodrama that lasts for...a run time that depends on what version you are watching. The original release was 101 minutes, but when it re-issued in 1930 with sound, it lasted 101 minutes. The version I watched lasted 107 minutes, so I guess I won out with the movie. The movie certainly sets itself well with regards to the mysterious aspects of the Phantom, but also with the character himself, presented as more than just someone who stalks the opera, but one of misery and hope, masked in deformity. Of course he also was once a prisoner on Devil's Island before he escaped, but still. Chaney truly dominates the movie, in part due to the makeup, but also his ability to act so well without sound. The chandelier scene is treated a bit low key (compared to other scenes), but it is enjoyable to watch a chandelier fall down, especially due to its size. This is a technical marvel in terms of its makeup by Chaney, but also a good horror film that was one of the first films in the Universal Monsters series. Go see it.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Gold Rush.

Review #759: The Gold Rush.

Cast
Charlie Chaplin (The Tramp - The Lone Prospector), Georgia Hale (Georgia), Mack Swain (Big Jim McKay), Tom Murray (Black Larsen), Malcolm Waite (Jack Cameron), and Henry Bergman (Hank Curtis) Directed by Charlie Chaplin (#353 - Monsieur Verdoux, #599 - The Kid and #600 - City Lights)

Review
On my own birthday, I decided to review a movie I knew I might enjoy. In a way, I had built this up by reviewing a Keaton film on Saturday and a Lloyd film on Monday, so I decided to revisit another silent film star, especially such a character like The Tramp. The highlight among all the good gags in the movie is him eating his shoe, mainly because of his reaction to eating what is essentially cooked rubber. I especially love when (BIG JIM) McKay goes crazy and starts imagining Chaplin as a chicken, costume and all...and then telling him that he imagined him as one. The movie is so enjoyable, because the Tramp is such an interesting character to watch walk around the cold along with with the other characters, such as Swain and Murray's characters. Chaplin directed, wrote, produced, and edited this movie, which is really impressive. The cast is interesting, especially Swain as (BIG JIM) McKay, who certain looks and fits the role of second fiddle to Chaplin. It's interesting how the Klondike sets were really just sets on the back lot and stages at Chaplin's studio, because they look really impressive in terms of how ram-shackled they are. The movie has good laughs, tinges of suspense, and a fine balance of drama that make for a wholly compelling movie. I highly recommend it to everyone.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to have some cake.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Seven Chances.

Review #757: Seven Chances.

Cast
Buster Keaton (Jimmy Shannon), T. Roy Barnes (Billy Meekin, His Partner), Snitz Edwards (His Lawyer), Ruth Dwyer (Mary Jones, His Girl), Frances Raymond (Her Mother), Erwin Connelly (The Clergyman), and Jules Cowles (The Hired Hand) Directed by Buster Keaton.

Review
Ah, Buster Keaton. I knew that I would eventually get to one of his feature films sometime on this show, and what better time than now, before this year (the 120th anniversary year of his birth) ended? You might be wondering why this film, and not his first film, The Saphead? As the old saying (read: not really) goes, sometimes you don't need a particular reason. One good thing about Keaton is that you can find a good portion of his films on the web (if you look hard enough, anyway), which is a relief. But aside from that, Keaton is certainly the most definable thing in this movie, because of his screen presence. He is an interesting person to watch, especially near the end during the chase. One of my favorite parts is him climbing a tall tree...that is then chopped down. Speaking of which, the end sequence of being chased by would-be brides is especially amusing, particularly at how absurd it can get, to the point where Keaton is not only chased by a bunch of women, but by a group of rocks. The rock sequence was a pure accident of Keaton accidentally dislodging a rock, which made two other rocks tumble that was turned into a full on tumbling of (paper-mache and chicken wire) rocks going after him and the women that is so fun to watch. Seeing people getting knocked over by rocks is funny especially when you don't really see their pained reactions. There really isn't much story (Keaton must get married by 7pm on his 27th birthday to receive 7 million dollars), but the movie doesn't really drag too much, which makes the 56 minute run time worth it. The cast is entertaining enough, but the movie really is all about Buster Keaton and his acting-directing talent. It's no wonder why he is called the "The Great Stone Face", but it's also no wonder why he is still being watched to this very day.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Freshman.

Review #667: The Freshman.

Cast
Harold Lloyd (Harold Lamb), Jobyna Ralston (Peggy), Brooks Benedict (The College Cad), James A. Anderson (The College Hero), Hazel Keener (The College Belle), Joseph Harrington (The College Tailor), and Pat Harmon (The Football Coach) Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer and Sam Taylor.

Review
When people think of Harold Lloyd, they think of him dangling from the clock tower in Safety Last, or his work in Grandma's Boy (which I'll review in the future), or his role in The Freshman, which is what I'm covering. Lloyd's career could've been stopped before he gained his fame; in 1919 he lost a finger and a thumb in an accident, with a prosthetic glove concealing the damage. But he did not let that stop him. The Freshman was Lloyd's highest grossing silent feature, and it's easy to see why. His character (Harold, also known in the movie as Speedy) is so likable. Lloyd's character isn't a random passerby who happens to pop in, he's a character whose purpose is given depth. You emphasize with him and his plight, which makes it easier to laugh at his naiveness. The gags are slight but easy to recognize, the movie has a lot of fun with the situation Harold sets himself in. My favorite gags involves Harold speaking to the crowd...while a kitten comes out of his sweater. The characters are easily describable given their character names, but at least they act their parts convincingly, especially Benedict, who is easy to dislike, and for good reason. The romance between the main leads is sweet and brief enough to work. The football action at the end is particularly noteworthy because we get to see how football was over 80 years ago. The action was filmed at the Rose Bowl (with crowd shots at Cal Memorial Stadium), and the football action is about as wild and silly (with Lloyd) as it can get. It certainly is a good way to end the film. The movie is like a gift basket, sweet and entertaining for a short period of time (about 70 minutes), and that's probably why this movie is still a great hit with others. I highly recommend this film (along with other silent movies with Keaton and Chaplin) for a good way to spend a day, especially on Thanksgiving.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Wizard of Oz.

Review #589: Wizard of Oz.

Cast
Larry Semon (Scarecrow/Toymaker/Farmhand), Dorothy Dwan (Dorothy/Princess Dorothea), Bryant Washburn (Kynd), Oliver Hardy (Woodsman/Knight of the Garter/Farmhand), Josef Swickard (Prime Minister Kruel), Charles Murray (Wizard of Oz), Spencer Bell (Cowardly Lion/Rastus/Snowball), Frank Alexander (Uncle Henry/Prince of Whales), Otto Lederer (Ambassador Wikked), and Mary Carr (Aunt Em) Directed by Larry Semon.

Review
There was an earlier version of the Wizard of Oz? Yes, there was. Tons in fact. This isn't even the first one, there are other silent versions before this, all (loosely) adapted from the original novel by L. Frank Baum. This movie has the distinction of being written by (supposedly) L. Frank Baum, Jr and Larry Semon, who practically steals the show in this movie. And that's the problem considering this isn't the Scarecrow of Oz, it's the Wizard of Oz. Dorothy barely gets any screen time, especially in the last 40 minutes, when the movie is taken over fully by Semon, and occasionally Bell, who gets some moments, only for it to cut back to Semon, though I guess being the director means getting the opportunity to be in every scene. It wouldn't be as grating if the movie didn't pad itself by just not going anywhere, taking forever to begin the movie and taking forever to end the movie. It takes so long to get to Oz (again), and we're stuck watching slapstick over and over again. It's fun the first time, but it gets old really fast. The actors aren't bad, and if you look hard enough, you'll find Oliver Hardy, before he would gain fame as part of the duo Laurel and Hardy. The characters in this movie are bizarre in their actions, especially Hardy's character. The movie at least is colorful with the hues and the music is decent, but this is still a weird movie. You haven't lived life until you've seen a man flying through the air running away from lightening...and then he climbs into a house. Weird movies can be good, this is not. The setup for the movie by use of a toymaker narrator is either an odd way to setup the movie or just a lazy way. It could be both, given the nonsensical ending that leaves no proper conclusion. It's no wonder why this was a big failure (even bankrupting the studio), the movie is just not that good, and it suffers even more when compared to the more famous 1939 film, which knocks this right off the block. I'd recommend Return to Oz before I recommend this, at least the former is sensible. This is just a sad mess that can't comprehend itself.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.