The Son of the Sheik.

Review #1726: The Son of the Sheik.

Cast: 

Rudolph Valentino (Ahmed / The Sheik), Vilma Bánky (Yasmin), George Fawcett (Andre), Montagu Love (Ghabah), Karl Dane (Ramadan), Bull Montana (Ali the Mountebank), Bynunsky Hyman (Pincher the Mountebank), and Agnes Ayres (Diana, The Sheik's Wife) Directed by George Fitzmaurice.

Review:  

“Women are not in love with me but with the picture of me on the screen. I am merely the canvas on which women paint their dreams.”

It is interesting to consider the lasting legacy that comes from a film like this, one with numerous aspects to consider. For one thing, it is one of the earliest examples of something that seems quite common now: the sequel. Believe it or not, folks did not exactly yearn for franchises and endless adventures with the same folks back in the silent era. Of course, this isn't to say that sequels were entirely void in that time, since there were quite a few novel sequels to various works (Tarzan, the Oz series, you get the idea); by the time of the mid 1920s, the movie industry had a glut of demand for features from audiences that producers were at a task to re-produce with formulas to keep the folks entertained (one producer once compared turning out films to being like a frozen custard machine). One must consider how this relates to Valentino, of course. All knowledgeable folks of film know Valentino came to prominence from the shadows of menial jobs (like dancing) and bit parts with The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (1921), and the release of The Sheik (based on the novel of the same name by E. M. Hull) that same year cemented his lover image into the eyes of many viewers. Fame, as one might expect, does not mean long lasting success, obviously. Valentino soon developed a hatred of the sheik image (one that women loved but men hated, go figure), and he found himself unhappy in his own love life (which included a bigamy charge) that crashed right with having troubles with Famous Players-Lasky that included a strike and lingering debts (which meant that he did not do a film in 1923). At any rate, Valentino may have hated the image that made him the "Latin lover" icon, but he needed to work. What better way to do a comeback for United Artists than to make a film that touched upon his earlier success? After falling out with Lasky, he landed with UA and starred in The Eagle (1925), which was a fair hit. Besides, Hull had already written a second Sheik book (The Sons of the Sheik, written in 1925), so UA had to just task Frances Marion (one of the most prominent female screenwriters of the 20th century) and Frédérique De Grésac (a French librettist, playwright and screenwriter) with adapting it to a film, while George Marion Jr was tasked with titles (Paul Gerard Smith was left un-credited). At the helm as director was Frenchman George Fitzmaurice, who went from being a set designer to director by the time of 1914, and he would direct dozens of features until his death in 1940. 

Of course, the other thing to talk about is the fact that this was the last film to star Valentino. The film was ready for showing in the big cities by July of 1926, and he soon went on a tour across the country to promote the film. On August 15, however, he collapsed in his hotel room; eight days later, having had surgery for a perforated ulcer that led to peritonitis after surgery, he died, at the age of 31). When the film was finally released nationwide, it became a huge hit, riding on the outpouring of grief shown by saddened followers of Valentino (which ranged from riots to hysterics to a fake honor guard for his funeral). Sudden deaths of stars isn't exactly uncommon, but there certainly weren't many that inspired this kind of reaction from folks. It was filmed in Hollywood and Arizona with sweltering heat and production design from William Cameron Menzies. With this, one can at least say that Valentino went out with a film worthy of his lasting image of being the dashing man to dazzle curiosity that was more than the sum of the parts that inhibited his prior Sheik effort. It is no better or worse than what had happened five years prior, mostly because the one difference really is the fact that he plays dual roles. He liked the art of movie-making and he even provided a few costumes to use along with doing his own stunts with this feature, one that certainly doesn't play on as many stereotypes as the original had (namely because the original work was already controversial with its depiction of rape) while being shorter to sit through at 68 minutes. The only other actor to return for this film was Ayres (who by this point had been cutting down on film roles in favor of stock holdings and married life), who has a few brief moments to share with Valentino (looking fairly well with the aged makeup, at least) while he gets to be paired with Banky (whom he had starred with in his previous effort with UA). He might not have liked the role, but he certainly fit well with what was needed for the sensibility of the time with drawing romance without having to do too much (or speak) to get it. He draws one in with plenty of glare and energy required to keep interest for a movie that isn't particularly interested in anything other than a cursory romance/adventure. Sure, him and Banky do seem to have a fair rapport with each other, but this is a case of fair returns of getting what you expect rather than anything more than "diverting" - it may seem goofy, it may seem a bit off-kilter, but it ticks all the boxes of serviceability without fuss or any embarrassment. It is a romp, pure and simple, but it is a likeable one that moves on each plot point with a fair beat and no dull lulls (which includes fair work from Menzies, who made an involving set with desert that doesn't seem entirely phoned in) that works with what Valentino did best in allure. It isn't his greatest feature, but it is certainly one that served as a worthy capstone for a man made for the time and place of the silent era.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

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.