Long Pants.

Review #2542: Long Pants.

Cast: 

Harry Langdon (Harry Shelby), Gladys Brockwell (His Mother), Alan Roscoe (His Father), Priscilla Bonner (Priscilla, His Bride), Alma Bennett (Bebe Blair, His Downfall), Betty Francisco (His Finish), and Glenn Tryon (Glenn Tryon) Directed by Frank Capra (#102 - Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, #319 - It's a Wonderful Life, #456 - It Happened One Night, #1356 - Meet John Doe, #2036 - The Strong Man)

Review: 

Sure, why not? You might remember that Harry Langdon had made his way to feature films with the release of 1926's Tramp, Tramp, Tramp (1926) and The Strong Man, which saw him directed by Harry Edwards and Frank Capra, respectively. Langdon served as producer on this film for First National Pictures, with Robert Eddy and Tay Garnett being credited as writers while Arthur Ripley came up with the story. Capra related briefly about the making of the film in his autobiography, noting that the publicity that came with the success of The Strong Man eventually bubbled over into making Langdon develop a considerable ego; he was quoted as stating that Langdon's screams for more pathos was misguided because the pathos "is in your comedy" rather than trying for pathos, while Langdon derisively called Capra a director he made out of a "two-bit gag man". Langdon booted Capra right as the film was about to finish (after getting into an argument over daring to need the lead actor's hands for an insert shot). The movie (at one point with the working title "Johnny Newcomer") was a decent hit with audiences (as claimed by Capra) and critics. Langdon worked with Edwards once more with His First Flame (1927) before Langdon became personally involved with directing with Three's a Crowd (1927). A rumor spread around from the First National Pictures lot (from Langdon, who else) that Capra wasn't actually a director and that Langdon did all the work. Desperate to stay around, Capra did For the Love of Mike (1927) and wasn't even paid for the eventual flop, went through a divorce, went back to the gag work and landed upon Columbia Pictures for what became a lengthy association starting with That Certain Thing (1928)*.

Work with me on this premise: A relatively young man (note: Langdon was actually 43 when this came out) has been wearing knee-pants (or "knickerbockers", as they say*) for years and years until at last, he gets a pair of...long pants. I guess the clothes really do make the man, because he quickly finds himself falling for a femme fatale from the big city who happens to have a mob boyfriend. Hijinks ensue for the runtime of 60 minutes (since it is a public domain movie, there are a few copies that are a little shorter or don't even have music, incidentally). There are a few moments that invite the idea of Langdon going into darker territory, mainly because on his wedding day, he tries to escape it the best way he can: trying to shoot the bride. Naturally, he gets stopped because of a goofy hat and gets spooked by someone doing target practice. It is a strange little movie when you think about it, what with people growing up in a flash because of pants, falling for bad girls into a life of crime and, eventually, wind up back into the "normal" world. The best gag is probably when Langdon tries to get a "policeman" to move that sees him fake a fire and other various things only to try and take a swing at just as an actual policeman takes his place. Langdon has been a slippery one to really appreciate, and this is probably the one that probably best defines that strange ability to go for a different type of humor that wasn't necessarily based on his baby-faced nature but something murkier with basically a goof type of character. Sometimes it is funny, and other times it just flies over with the pace of a one-winged mosquito. One focuses on his oddball stuff more than say, Bonner or Bennett, which is mostly on par with the usual average silent comedy in terms of just rolling with the gags over who goes where (yes, crime does pay, even for women). If you like what you saw from Langdon's earlier features, you'll be fine here, even if it is a bit of a hit-or-miss kind of movie in actually getting to the point beyond, well, pants. You never know until you seek it out...

   

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*It really sounds like a joke, but this is straight up what Capra put in his autobiography: Capra got told Columiba wanted to see him because Harry Cohn was looking at a list of unemployed directors and saw "C" for Capra listed first and said "God picked Abraham because his name came first. Good enough for me. Send for Capra."

*Knickerbockers you say?

The Cat and the Canary (1927)

Review #1914: The Cat and the Canary.

Cast: 

Laura La Plante (Annabelle West), Creighton Hale (Paul Jones), Forrest Stanley (Charles Wilder), Tully Marshall (Roger Crosby), Gertrude Astor (Cecily), Flora Finch (Susan), Arthur Edmund Carewe (Harry), Martha Mattox (Mammy Pleasant, housekeeper), George Siegmann (the Guard), and Lucien Littlefield (Dr. Ira Lazar) Directed by Paul Leni (#863 - Waxworks and #999 - The Man Who Laughs)

Review: 

When it comes to the haunted house movie, you can't go wrong with The Cat and the Canary, even if it wasn't the first to really come out. There were quite a few films with a killer going around a house, such as Cecil B. Demille & Oscar Apfel's The Ghost Breaker (1914), its 1922 remake by Alfred E. Green, D. W. Griffith's One Exciting Night (1922), along with Roland West's The Monster (1925) and The Bat (1926), for example. It would continue in further years, with West remaking his film in 1930 as The Bat Whispers, and James Whale directed The Old Dark House (1932). But some films last longer in the public consciousness than others, as is the case with a film like this. The movie was adapted from the 1922 play of the same name that had been written by John Willard to noted success on Broadway. The screenplay was written by Alfred A. Cohn and Walter Anthony, while the story was done by Alfred A. Cohn and Robert F. Hill. This was the first of five adaptations: Universal did both an English and Spanish version in 1930 (The Cat Creeps and La Voluntad del muerto, respectively), which are both lost. A 1939 film was done with more comedy involving Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard, while the next (and last) adaptation was done in 1979 for British audiences. It was the first of four American films directed by German director Paul Leni, the German Expressionist director that went from avant-garde painting to set designer to work in film by the 1910s. He moved to America at the invitation of Carl Laemmle at Universal Studios, as part of a wave of people from Europe coming to America for films (like Fritz Lang, for example). The Last Warning (1928), his final film, was presented as a companion film to The Cat and the Canary, as it also stars La Plante (it was released in both part-sound and silent, but the latter survives), albeit more as a mystery than comedy-horror. Leni would not live long to direct many films in America, dying of a sepsis from a tooth infection in 1929 at the age of 44.

So yes, we have a story about a creepy house filled with folks hearing about a will from a man 20 years dead. The only thing standing in the way of riches for one is to just not be declared insane but sliding panels and a fiend called "The Cat" threaten the whole affair. So yes, the suspense is balanced with comic relief, because this was the time for that kind of movie where horror can't be given to you full throttle, and the final twist is about what you might expect. However, it is the presentation that matters most, and that is where Leni shines. He utilized all of the tricks one would hope for in terms of establishing quality atmosphere, whether that involves shadows, superimpositions, gliding camera shots, or its lively title cards. The scene with a person walking in the hallway with a candle in hard while curtains blow is certainly a highlight when it comes to striking effect, alongside the opening sequence when it comes to saying "a man is trapped like a canary". So yes, the movie is a causal ride of spooky terror that fits far better than a movie without as much subtlety, because, well, things in 1927 can still play well in 2022. La Plante was a key presence for a number of Universal Pictures in the pre-sound era, and she does pretty well for not having too much to really do besides having things happen to them rather than with them. So yes, it's not too hard to be on her side when it comes the towering threat of spooked either by weirdo eccentrics or visitors. The other castmates are mostly there for relief without pandering to bad jokes, which works in favor for Hale in goofy charm that compliments La Plante pretty well or with the familiar face in Marshall. The others bumble in all the right ways without leaving an obvious clue to what could happen next. Yes, you have a good idea where things could go in its 82-minute runtime by about the halfway point, but it still is weird and engaging enough regardless of that fact. As a whole, it is a solidly dignified bit of horror worth a look for its era, being unsettling while having a solid atmosphere that makes everything work out just right.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Well, we have had a quality month of horror. But you know the turn to November means it ain't over yet. As with the case with 2019, 2020, and 2021...it is time for Halloween: The Week After 4.0. That is correct, a number of horror reviews from November 1 to November 7, basically comprised of movies that deserved to be covered in October but are now present in November for all to enjoy. This time, I will be generous and tell you what is coming next because I like you very much.

Next film up is Exorcist II: The Heretic. Shit.

The Jazz Singer.

Review #1326: The Jazz Singer.

Cast: 
Al Jolson (Jakie Rabinowitz / Jack Robin), Warner Oland (Cantor Rabinowitz), Eugenie Besserer (Sara Rabinowitz), May McAvoy (Mary Dale), Otto Lederer (Moisha Yudelson), Richard Tucker (Harry Lee), and Yossele Rosenblatt (Himself) Directed by Alan Crosland.

Review: 
Some films are just born to endure forever. When it comes to the transition from silent to sound in Hollywood's golden age, this film is often marked as the dawn of a new era and of a new genre - the musical. This was the first feature-length film where you could hear someone talk alongside music in the background. The film was adapted from the play of the same name by Samson Raphaelson (which he had adapted from his short story "The Day of Atonement" based on Jolson's real life) from Alfred A. Cohn as a Warner Bros. production through the Vitaphone sound-on-disc system. One thing I should make clear is that this is not the first time anyone heard any kind of sound in a film before. Several short films had dialogue present before 1927, and the studio had utilized the Vitaphone system for a synchronized musical score and sound effects with Don Juan (1926). D. W. Griffith's Dream Street (1921) had a single singing sequence alongside crowd noises with its Photokinema sound-on-disc system, including an introduction sequence of the director speaking to the audience, although not many theaters showed this due to not having the system installed. Sound-on-disc was the uses of phonograph (or an other disc) to record or play back sound that synced with a motion picture through a interlock with the movie projector. It wasn't as if sound film was a new idea that Warner Bros. did alone - the Fox Film Corporation had bought their own system in Fox Movietone, utilizing it first with Sunrise (1927) that included music and sound effects, which they used for motion pictures until 1931 and their newsreel service until 1939.

In the end, sound-on-film would become the standard for talking pictures by the time the 1930s were over, when studios didn't need to produce sound and silent versions of films anymore. Warner Brothers had started in 1923 from the creation of four brothers: Harry, Albert, Sam, and Jack Warner, with the first three having emigrated as young kids from Poland to Canada. They had started their careers involved with film through the movie theater business, having a movie projector that they could use to show film, which led them to their first theater in 1903 with the Cascade. They soon grew onto distribution and production by the time they formally incorporated their company in 1923. When it comes to the moment one needs to hear a voice, the film certainly does not disappoint, doing so seventeen minutes in with the famous line of "Wait a minute, wait a minute, you ain't heard nothin' yet". This of course is preceded by a few songs and caption cards, since the film is mostly a silent production, with just two minutes of synchronized talking. Jolson certainly seems in his element when it comes to singing, for which he has six songs. Jolson wasn't once dubbed "The World's Greatest Entertainer" for nothing. Today the film may seem a bit over-sentimental, but it certainly played well to a crowd that made Jolson the right man at the right time to give sound film a push forward with his voice. Jolson's performances in blackface makeup are considered dated and viewed as implicit racism now, but it should be noted that Jolson himself fought against discrimination for African Americans when it came to Broadway productions. He has a complex legacy, but he should still be celebrated for the things that he did that aren't dated to time. The other actors do just fine, including Besserer when it comes to her key scene: a dialogue with her on-screen son, brief yet necessary to everything that followed in the next decade. The film as a whole is okay, holding together on the strength of Jolson's charisma with songs more than its family drama, but one can still find appreciation for what goes on screen without becoming bored in its 89 minute run-time (not including the seven minutes of overture and exit music that open and close the film, respectively) for too long. It is a film that holds to the traditions of the past in several ways that also looks to the future, with this being a key step in the evolution for filmmaking. It won an Honorary Academy Award for its studio and production chief Darryl F. Zanuck (who would become a prominent studio figure in his own right in the following decades), "for producing The Jazz Singer, the pioneer outstanding talking picture, which has revolutionized the industry". The film has been remade three times, having been done in 1952 (with Danny Thomas), 1959 (a TV adaptation with Jerry Lewis), and 1980 (with Neil Diamond). In any case, this is a fairly decent film that endures for its historical value alongside an alright foundation of actors and songs that helped in starting the tide for sound and songs for film.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Underworld (1927).

Review #1325: Underworld.

Cast: 
Clive Brook ("Rolls Royce" Wensel), George Bancroft ("Bull" Weed), Evelyn Brent ("Feathers" McCoy), Fred Kohler ("Buck" Mulligan), Helen Lynch (Meg), Larry Semon ("Slippy" Lewis), and Jerry Mandy (Paloma) Directed by Josef von Sternberg.

Review: 
"Shadow is mystery and light is clarity. Shadow conceals--light reveals. To know what to reveal and what to conceal and in what degrees to do this is all there is to art."

Sometimes you just need a crime film to wind you up for entertainment. This was the film that helped to serve as a template for gangster films to develop that would come along in the next decade, while also helping to deliver its director and writer to further projects over the next several years. It should only make sense to cover a film from Josef von Sternberg, who forged a career in the latter parts of the silent era with his directorial efforts that were characterized by his expressive camera work. He had gotten his start in film in 1919, working with silent directors such as Roy William Neill and Emile Chautard, with his first film credit being for The Mystery of the Yellow Room as assistant director. He had his debut as director in 1925 with The Salvation Hunters, which he also wrote and co-produced. It subsquently recieved a private viewing at the home of Charlie Chaplin, which led to being tasked to direct a film starring Edna Purviance named A Woman of the Sea (1926). A preview screening did not fare well with Chaplin, who decided to not release the film, which later had its negatives burned seven years later in order to note it as a loss for tax reasons, although production stills survive. He had signed by Metro Goldwyn Meyer, but he left the studio after troubles on both The Exquisite Sinner (soon re-shot by Phil Rosen) and The Masked Bride over his vision. He was hired in 1927 by Paramount Pictures "technical advisor for lighting and photography". He was tasked to reshoot scenes and recut footage for Frank Lloyd's Children of Divorce (1927) when executives determined the film was not releasable in its current state. The success of his revision led to him being tapped to direct this film.

One can see various gangster tropes fairly quickly into the film, namely with its maverick criminal lead, a messy love triangle, memorable nicknames, and of course a shootout for the climax (really half of these could be culled for a Western). It all ends up to make a breezy 80 minute experience. Style is a thing that can fit for any decade, and this is one is certainly bold enough to keep up with such demands from its director. The cast do well with the material, such as Brook, who

certainly has the eyes to sell a down-and-out drunk without needing to swagger in hysterics. Bancroft certainly seems bold enough to play an eccentric heavy, devoted to his work, loyalty, and women that provokes attention whenever on screen. Brent plays out the main triangle fairly carefully. The rest of the cast fill out quite well, and the film is relatively engaging without complicating itself in too much detail. It captivates the curiosity in ways that would play itself out further for future films when it came to a focus on criminals and what made them tick, for which von Sternberg does with bold confidence.

The writing for the film was done by journalist and playwright Ben Hecht, who earned an Academy Award for Best Original Story (awarded until 1957) at the very first Academy Award ceremony in 1929 (the award window would not be tightened up to honor just the preceding year until the 1935 ceremony). Hecht became one of Hollywood's go-to people for screenplays, while von Sternberg found success with various studios before his last film in Jet Pilot (1957). He had his conflicts with studio executives over the years when it came to trying to compromise his artistic vision, but he managed to pull off a noted career with the style that came through on screen, with this film being a key piece of his legacy of shining entertainment.

Next Time: The Jazz Singer.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Kid Brother.

Review #1044: The Kid Brother.

Cast: 
Harold Lloyd (Harold Hickory), Jobyna Ralston (Mary Powers), Walter James (Jim Hickory), Leo Willis (Leo Hickory), Olin Francis (Olin Hickory), Constantine Romanoff (Sandoni), Eddie Boland ("Flash" Farrell), Frank Lanning (Sam Hooper), and Ralph Yearsley (Hank Hooper) Directed by Ted Wilde and J.A. Howe.

Review: 
The Kid Brother was the tenth feature film to star Harold Lloyd, released nearly nine months after For Heaven's Sake (#727). The film attempts to carry numerous elements together, such as comedy, romance, and drama, and it manages to do fairly decent while being consistent with its gags. The basic story isn't too particularly deep, but it is one that makes for good entertainment (much like the other Lloyd films) that is more than enough. The film credits two directors (Wilde and Howe, with the latter given a "co-director" credit), although apparently there was also uncredited work done by Lloyd and Lewis Milestone (previously reviewed on Movie Night for his direction of The Racket (1928) - #901). In any case, there is quite a good amount of gags and intertitles to go around, such as the laundry shuffling sequence, or the climax involving a massive ship and one mischievous monkey. The cast all do a fine job in the roles they are assigned to play. Lloyd plays his role with a bit of bashfulness as the youngest Hickory yet he also doesn't underplay his cleverness either, with Lloyd being adept at rolling with the situations that go on in the film. Ralston is charming as ever, doing an acceptable job in her final film with Lloyd. The rest of the Hickorys are brimming with confidence and stature, and each of the three (James, Willis, and Francis) do a good job in their scenes, especially with Lloyd. Romanoff, Boland and Yearsley prove to be fairly decent adversaries as well. This is a movie that comes and goes with amusement and a bit of sharpness that you'd expect from a film with Lloyd, but it is done in a way that it doesn't come off as standard fare or repetitive. There is a certain enjoyment to the situations and how it is executed that make this a fair winner. At 84 minutes long, the movie is just the right kind of length for reasonable enjoyment for most fans of silent films or ones looking for a good laugh.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

It (1927).

Review #1018: It.

Cast: 
Clara Bow (Betty Lou Spence), Antonio Moreno (Cyrus T. Waltham), William Austin ('Monty' Montgomery), Priscilla Bonner (Molly), Jacqueline Gadsdon (Adela Van Norman), Julia Swayne Gordon (Mrs. Van Norman), and Elinor Glyn (Herself) Directed by Clarence G. Badger.

Review: 
To borrow from what is likely a cliche line, but what is "it"? Well, there can be two explanations. The first one, by Rudyard Kipling in 1904, stated that it was not beauty or good talk, but "just 'It'. Some women will stay in a man's memory if they once walk down the street." If that answer doesn't satisfy you, how about the one by Elinor Glyn, who wrote a two-part serial story in Cosmopolitan magazine, who defines it as "That quality possessed by some which draws all others with its magnetic force. With 'It' you win all men if you are a woman and all women if you are a man. 'It' can be a quality of the mind as well as a physical attraction." It should be noted that she was given a "story and adaptation" credit along with a small role in the film. The original story had a male magnetic character, whereas the film changed it to be a woman. In any case, the story itself is featured in a scene where one of the characters reads from the magazine while trying to find out about "it", with a bit of product placement, which was not exactly a common thing at the time.

Honestly, the real reason that I wanted to review this silent film was because of the fact that it has lingered on my to-do list for quite some time, along with 2017 happening to be 90 years since the movie was released. In any case, It is a fairly charming little film, having enough zip and warmth to make for something that is highly entertaining. This was the film that rocketed Bow to stardom, with the label "It girl" soon becoming her nickname while giving her global fame. She just has a certain spark and feel to her that just makes her a fun person to watch on-screen. She just has a zip to her that is magnetic, especially when sharing scenes with Moreno that make the first half of the film pretty entertaining. That's not to say the second half isn't as good, I'm just stating that the movie pulls you in pretty well by its first 30 minutes that make the other 42 minutes go by finely. Moreno does a pretty decent job, and the rest of the cast is fairly nifty and dependable. The titles were written by George Marion, Jr, with the screenplay done by Hope Loring and Louis D. Lighton, and they both serve their purpose well. The film has its moments of sweetness and amusement, doing so with a fair amount of class and determination that certainly makes a clear winner.

Well, look at that. December 1st. Today happens to be my 21st birthday, and I figured it made sense to publish a review for it since I've done a review for that day on four previous years (#292 - Snoopy, Come Home, #493 - The Witches of Eastwick, #759 - The Gold Rush, and #880 - Tillie's Punctured Romance). In any case, welcome to December, folks.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Downhill (1927).

Review #965: Downhill.

Cast:
Ivor Novello (Roddy Berwick), Robin Irvine (Tim Wakely), Isabel Jeans (Julia Fotheringale), Ian Hunter (Archie), Norman McKinnel (Sir Thomas Berwick), Annette Benson (Mabel), Sybil Rhoda (Sybil Wakely), and Lilian Braithwaite (Lady Berwick) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, and #964 - The Ring (1927))

Review:
Downhill (with the alternative title in the United States being When Boys Leave Home) was Hitchcock's fifth feature film along with his third and last released in 1927 (released the same month as The Ring - all three being United Kingdom productions), and while it may be the weakest of the three in that year, this is at least a fairly watchable experience. This was adapted by Eliot Stannard from the play Down Hill by Novello and Constance Collier, and it is clearly evident to see how stagey the movie looks at times, though Hitchcock doesn't resort to too many title cards throughout this silent film, using imagery and color tint (as mentioned before in the previous reviews) in order to help convey the story, along with some memorable shots. It is through and through a melodrama, showcasing themes of guilt and "the real world", with one particular highlight being a title card that says "The world of make-believe", while revealing the main character's tuxedo to actually be attire for a waiter. The scene where he sees the ravenous nature of the people he works for near the ending is also pretty interesting to watch. I found the movie to be pretty decent, but I just didn't find it to hold up entirely well, maybe because of Novello and his character; he doesn't do a bad job, but sometimes it gets tiresome watching him and his descent. The rest of the cast is alright, but there isn't anybody too memorable in it to make mention of (obviously there isn't a villain, unless you count Benson); the ending feels a bit tacked on, ending the movie pretty quickly though at least it somewhat seems to come full circle. It feels clunky at times (and Novello doesn't exactly resemble a schoolboy), but its cynical portrayal of the seedy nature of the main character's downhill does have some standing power. It isn't one of his best films, but this is still a fairly coherent Hitchcock film.

It's weird that I reviewed three consecutive Alfred Hitchcock films from 1927, but I guess it never hurts to have an unofficial "trilogy" of reviews, especially for a master of film like Hitchcock.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Ring (1927).

Review #964: The Ring.

Cast: 
Carl Brisson ('One-Round' Jack Sander), Lillian Hall-Davis (Mabel), Ian Hunter (Bob Corby), Forrester Harvey (James Ware), Harry Terry (Showman), and Gordon Harker (Jack's Trainer) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, and #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog)

Review: 
This was not only Alfred Hitchcock's fourth feature film (along with the second released in 1927), this was also his only film in which he wrote the script all on his own. Naturally, it happens to be about two boxers competing for the love of a woman. It may not exactly be nothing too new in terms of the romance, but the film makes up for it by being nicely executed with its shots and actors. Like with some of the better silent films, it doesn't rely on too many title cards, using imagery within the actors and their expressions to help convey itself at times. Brisson and Hall-Davis have some decent little chemistry together, nothing too cute nor too unbelievable. Hunter is also fairly decent in a somewhat adversarial (though not explicitly villainous) role that works well with either of the two main romantic leads. The rest of the cast are also fairly decent in their roles, not doing too much to standout from the main actors, but also having a fair amount of screen presence. The match at the end of the movie is a key highlight, looking fairly believable (aside from a bit of fast forwarding at times) and being a good place for the movie to end without dragging too long. On the whole, this is a fairly watchable and well conceived movie that certainly holds up, as per the standard for Hitchcock films (or other fine quality movies). Is it one of his best? Not really, but it definitely holds up pretty well on a standard of being fine entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog.

Review #963: The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog.

Cast: 
Marie Ault (The Landlady - Mrs. Bunting), Arthur Chesney (Her Husband - Mr. Bunting), June Tripp (Daisy Bunting, a Model), Malcolm Keen (Joe Chandler), and Ivor Novello (Jonathan Drew - The Lodger) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, and #910 - Notorious)

Review: 
This was the third Hitchcock film (with the other two being The Pleasure Garden and The Mountain Eagle), and it is also considered one of the first thriller films, with this one based on a novel of the same name by Marie Adelaide Belloc Lowndes and the play Who Is He? by Horace Annesley; this is also the first time I've covered one of his silent films, of which he made nine, all in the 1920s. In any case, this is a first rate thriller, managing to have a good deal of style and suspense that works at making this a neat classic. The color tinting along with the shots the editing (done by Ivor Montagu, who also suggested the reduction of title cards) also help in giving the movie an interesting look (one particularly memorable shot being To-Night Golden Curls, which is shown a few times during the film); the shot of Novello's introduction is also a nice shot, with his appearance and the way the shadows and figures are shot making for an interesting introduction of the title character. Novello certainly has an interesting performance, balancing quirky (and somewhat suspicious nature) and his chemistry with Tripp into a fairly entertaining performance for a movie verging on the suspense of who the killer could be. Ault and Chesney do fine jobs as well. Keen also does a decent job, particularly in his scenes with Novello and Tripp near the end (although one highlight is him cutting out cookie dough in the shape of a heart). One scene in particular stands out, with an edit of his feet pacing on the room above the others being a great image to watch. The film definitely has its moments of using imagery or its actors to carry the film, with the climax (and the nature of the town mob) being quite fitting. The movie reaches on levels that Hitchcock would cover in many of his other films throughout his career, from the nature of the kill to the innocent man; on the whole, this is a fairly crafted film that proved to be the spark of his career.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The First Auto.

Review #949: The First Auto.

Cast:
Charles Emmett Mack (Bob Armstrong), Patsy Ruth Miller (Rose Robbins), Russell Simpson (Hank Armstrong), Frank Campeau (Mayor Jim Robbins), William Demarest (Dave Doolittle), Paul Kruger (Steve Bentley), Gibson Gowland (The Blacksmith), E. H. Calvert (Elmer Hays, the inventor), and Barney Oldfield (Himself - The Master Driver) Directed by Roy Del Ruth (#395 - The Maltese Falcon (1931), #432 - The Babe Ruth Story, and #807 - The Alligator People)

Review:
The transition of technologies is always a strange one for certain types of generations to handle, whether from transitioning from landline phones to cellphones, or horse carriages to automobiles; the latter is featured here, and while the movie isn't anything too great it is at least acceptable entertainment. Contrary to the promoted billing, Barney Oldfield (pioneer automobile racer who also served as the technical coordinator for the movie) is neither the main star nor does he have too much on screen, aside from a scene where he drives an automobile at one mile a minute, which is quite fast for the time depicted in the film (1904); in real life he was the first to reach a speed of 60 mph (97 km/h). The film mostly revolves around Mack and Simpson and their conflict over the transition from horses to "horseless carriages", which works alright for the 75 minute run-time. Miller is fairly alright, though nothing too special. The rest of the cast is fairly decent in their roles. Mack was killed in a car accident while driving to work, which occurred near the end of filming, with the movie premiering three months later.

What is interesting about this silent film is that it has a Vitaphone sound-on-disc soundtrack, complete with a musical score and sound effects (synchronized to the movie) that also contains spoken words (three) and laughter at some points. This is a fairly adequate comedy-drama, having a few tidy gags while also being relatively serious enough without going too overboard; the climax has a few thrills, even if it sounds a bit odd: Simpson and Miller are attempting to get to the automobile race before Mack's car (filled with sulfur) explodes, while they are on horse carriage. The automobile action (such as the race against a horse and the races at the end) is neatly executed, and I imagine this will appeal to fans of old automobiles (one particular photo of Oldfield and Henry Ford is shown near the end, featuring the Ford 999). The whole transitioning technologies aspect of the plot is still fairly applicable now, albeit with a few changes (such as the climax). On the whole, this is a mildly entertaining movie that works best alongside other silent movies of the time while not requiring too much to invest in. It's not hard to recommend, if you're looking for a movie with some old-fashioned automobiles.

My condolences go out to the families of the seven members of the USS Fitzgerald who were killed in a collision this weekend. This especially hurts to write considering that Noe Hernandez, one of the men that died, came from my home city of Weslaco. No one should have to go through a saddening tragedy like this. They will be missed and they will never be forgotten; may they rest in peace.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Red Mill.

Review #915: The Red Mill.

Cast:
Marion Davies (Tina), Owen Moore (Dennis), Louise Fazenda (Gretchen), George Siegmann (Willem), Karl Dane (Capt. Jacop Van Goop), Russ Powell (Burgomaster), Snitz Edwards (Caesar Rinkle), William Orlamond (Governor), Fred Gamble (Innkeeper), and Ignatz (Himself) Directed by Roscoe Arbuckle.

Review:
Fear not, folks. Spring Break does not mean that Movie Night is on break. Reviews will pick up in the next few days, do not fear. 

The Red Mill was the first feature-length film directed by Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle, who was working under the alias of William Goodrich due to the Virginia Rappe scandal, in which despite being found not guilty (after two hung juries), his reputation (and his name) had been tarnished. In any case, here's a movie set in Holland. It's not too terribly interesting, but it does have some decent moments, when it lets the players have fun and not go too slapsticky. Davies does a decent enough jobs with reaction shots, even when having to deal with a haunted mill. That, and an ice race. Seeing someone try to ice-skate (albeit with a little bit of help) is a nice little highlight. Moore is tolerable, though Fazenda and Siegmann stand out a bit more, seeming to have a little more chemistry with each other than the main two. The supporting cast is tolerable, with people that you'll recognize if you watch enough silent films, like Snitz Edwards, who hams it up as usual. The plot (adapted from a 1906 musical) gets itself tangled up a bit with romance between numerous characters, but it mostly handles itself without going overlong. Like a good deal of silent films covered on this show, the run-time (70 minutes) helps the film as this could've been a chore if it had been 90 minutes or longer. Honestly, there are better silent films, but at least this one has its moments and scenery along with moderately entertaining inter-titles that make it worth a glance.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

College.

Review #762: College.

Cast
Buster Keaton (Ronald), Anne Cornwall (Mary Haynes), Harold Goodwin (Jeff), Flora Bramley (Mary's friend), Snitz Edwards (Dean Edwards), Carl Harbaugh (Crew Coach), Sam Crawford (Baseball Coach), and Florence Turner (Ronald's mother) Directed by Buster Keaton (#757) and James W. Horne.

Review
Oh the joys of reviewing a movie named College. It is only fitting that I review this movie two days before the second (and last) Final Class Exam that culminates the end of my first semester at my college. To be honest, my first thoughts were that this sounded a good deal like The Freshman (#667), with regards to the premise of a new college student trying to impress someone at a college despite being picked being on, with one of their ideas being to play sports. But I realized that this isn't exactly a tired trope because it still technically works today. The debate of focus of academia vs athletics evidently was even a hot topic in 1927 as it is now. But the movie isn't a discussion of that, it's Buster Keaton being involved in slapstick, with some fun title cards (such as Keaton's academic character talking about athletes such as "Ty Ruth" and "Babe Dempsey") and some highlights such as Keaton trying to play baseball (try being emphasized here) and track and field (My favorite part: Keaton not only misses jumping over a hurdle, he breaks it in half with his face) but also some drama as well. The actors certainly fit their parts well (with Snitz Edwards, who had been in Seven Chances fitting nicely as the beleaguered Dean), fitting the story just fine. One scene that doesn't really age well is the scene where he puts on black-face makeup in order to work at a diner. It doesn't last long (maybe about 3-4 minutes), but it's still strange that he even put it on in the first place. Racist? That's up to you to decide, along with noting the time this was made as well. Despite this, the movie holds up pretty well, and the heart of the movie makes for a relatively fine movie.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Unknown (1927).

Review #516: The Unknown.

Cast
Lon Chaney (Alonzo the Armless), Norman Kerry (Malabar the Mighty), Joan Crawford (Nanon Zanzi), Nick De Ruiz (Antonio Zanzi), John George (Cojo), and John St. Polis (Surgeon) Directed by Tod Browning (#071 - Dracula and #470 - Mark of the Vampire)

Review

I get to revisit Lon Chaney, and watch Joan Crawford in arguably one of her breakout movies. What she said about Chaney in this film is certainly interesting, saying that she learned more about acting from watching Chaney work than from anything else in her career. Chaney certainly shows a lot of facial expression that carry their own emotion. He and Paul Desmuke (the armless double for this film) go well together in the scenes required for this film, he gets a chance to shine, doing that effectively. Crawford certainly shines, even with a limited role, but she works fine with Kelly. The film may run short and may be disturbing, but it's an impressive and an intense film that is fun to watch.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars. 

Movie Night: Metropolis.

Review #500: Metropolis.

Cast
Brigitte Helm (Maria and Robot), Alfred Abel (Joh Fredersen), Rudolf Klein-Rogge (Rotwang), Heinrich George (Grot), Fritz Rasp (The Thin Man), Theodor Loos (Josaphat), and Erwin Biswanger (Georgy) Directed by Fritz Lang (#333 - M)

Review
What can I say but...wow. Metropolis is an science fiction epic, probably one of the first of its kind. It's a film from Germany with a storied history, as it originally ran for 153 minutes when first shown, but it was cut down in later showings due to censorship. The film had lost scenes for over 80 years, with a negative of the original cut later found in Argentina just a few years ago, and that was the version of the film I watched, which lasted almost (but not exactly) 2 and a half hours long. And it is tremendous. Tremendous in scope, tremendous in the effects and tremendous in itself. You could argue its one of the best films ever made because of its story, the tremendous effects and its lasting memorability that is the Maschinenmensch. It's a silent film that transcends just being a silent film, if that even makes sense. The actors may be odd in their movements, but they do at least work well with the film. What I found amusing is the contemporary reviews of this, with statements like "The pity of it is that this unimaginative, incoherent, sentimentalizing, and make-believe film, wastes some very fine possibilities." You know who said that? H. G. Wells himself, who was responsible for many novels...and Things to Come, which itself felt like Metropolis. Another criticism came from Lang himself, who said "Anyway, I didn't like the picture – thought it was silly and stupid – then, when I saw the astronauts: what else are they but part of a machine? It's very hard to talk about pictures—should I say now that I like Metropolis because something I have seen in my imagination comes true, when I detested it after it was finished?" It was a misunderstood film that rose up decades after its release, with enough care to restore this, and I applaud them. This is an outstanding achievement for the science fiction genre and film itself. Thank you to all who read these reviews, the old timers and the new comers, thanks.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans.

Review #499: Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans.

Cast
George O'Brien (The Man), Janet Gaynor (The Wife), Margaret Livingston (The Woman From the City), Bodil Rosing (The Maid), J. Farrell MacDonald (The Photographer), Ralph Sipperly (The Barber), and Jane Winton (The Manicure Girl) Directed by F. W. Murnau (#256 - Nosferatu)

Review
This has been a film I've had on my to review list, and I've held it off for until the near correct moment. And what better time then the review before...you know what. F. W. Murnau is once again the director, and he does a really great job directing. The cinematography by Charles Rosher and Karl Struss manages to create a very effective tone, a beautiful one at that. The actors act their emotions well, and they certainly need to, with the limited amount of inter titles, which is certainly unique, and good because having a film constantly explained with titles and not letting the film do it, is welcome by me. The film has excellent visuals, with a story that feels like a fairy tale, and that's a nice thing. Is it one of the best films ever? Maybe not, but it certainly has a case for it. However there is one more case for the silent era, a big grand epic, coming tomorrow, reviewed here on Movie Night.

Countdown to 500 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Wings (1927).

 Review #349: Wings.

Cast
Charles Rogers (Jack Powell), Clara Bow (Mary Preston), Richard Arlen (David Armstrong), Gary Cooper (Cadet White), Jobyna Ralston (Sylvia Lewis), El Brendel (Herman Schwimpf), Richard Tucker (Air Commander), Gunboat Smith (Sergeant), and Roscoe Karns (Lieutenant Cameron) Directed by William A. Wellman.

Review
Wings is an unique film in some ways. It was the first film to win Best Picture (known as Outstanding Picture at the time) at the first Academy Awards, the only silent film to win the award, and it also includes aerial action from the yesteryear of 1927, over 85 years ago. But does this film still hold up? Yeah, pretty much. The actors do try to convey emotion, to convey message with expressions rather then voice (Obviously considering this is silent), which works decent. Clara Bow does a memorable job, though, having a certain zing which manages to make you interested in her character, which helps. The aerial action is understandably cool. It works really well, especially with the brief flash of color when the planes go down. The story isn't a whole lot, but the action and the relative enjoyment exceed overall. Is it great? Not precisely, but it is a fixture of importance in film and in history, which is more than enough. Countdown to 350 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.