Showing posts with label Frances Raymond. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Frances Raymond. Show all posts

March 3, 2022

A Chapter in Her Life.

Review #1809: A Chapter in Her Life.

Cast: 
Claude Gillingwater (Mr. Everingham), Jane Mercer (Jewel), Jacqueline Gadsden (Eloise Everingham), Frances Raymond (Madge Everingham), Robert Frazer (Dr. Ballard), Eva Thatcher (Mrs. Forbes), Ralph Yearsley (Zeke Forbes), Fred Thomson (Nat Bonnell), and Beth Rayon (Susan) Directed by Lois Weber (#644 - The Blot)

Review: 
"As I was convinced the theatrical profession needed a missionary, he suggested that the best way to reach them was to become one of them so I went on the stage filled with a great desire to convert my fellowman."

The story of the silent era has many names and many faces, but one that is not to be forgotten in the era when it comes to multi-faceted talent is Lois Weber. Actress, screenwriter, producer, and director, Weber cultivated an eventful career that lasted roughly two decades in motion pictures. Born in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania, she excelled in music, doing so in both piano and soprano singing to go with her evangelical interests (which she served on street corners alongside social activism). It was at the age of 25 (in 1904) that she decided to take up acting, convinced that the profession needed a missionary (in her words). She would work in the theater for a number of years before becoming involved with the film industry through the American Gaumont Chronophones; in 1911, she would become a director, serving as a co-director for several short films. In 1914, alongside her husband Phillips Smalley (a familiar pairing as they directed a handful of films together), she directed her first feature-length film in The Merchant of Venice (1914), although it is now lost. She would work for numerous studios such as the Rex Motion Picture Company and Universal before she would form her own studio in 1917, which had its own shooting stage while employing her husband as studio manager and her as the key brain behind filmmaking (although their relationship would soon deteriorate). Her most noted works generally touched social problems of the time (in the tradition that directors like D.W. Griffith had done), such as Where Are My Children? (1916), which touched on the subject of abortion alongside The Blot (1921), which touched on the issue of poverty. Of course, 1921 would end up being her peak. She would direct just five further works until 1934. This film was the third-to-last film that Weber would direct, in part because of the collapse of her film studio in 1921 but also because of the shift of audience curiosity with the advent of the Jazz Age (well, one could also cite a push within Hollywood to weed out certain folks, but whatever). 

By this point in her life, she returned to Universal to remake her previous effort in Jewel (1915), which like this film is an adaptation of the 1903 novel Jewel: A Chapter in Her Life, which had been written by Clara Louise Burnham. By the time the 1920s ended, she spent her time within house operations (such as her own Garden Village and ranch), before a mild comeback attempt in 1932-33 formally ended her career; Weber died in 1939 at the age of sixty, but her legacy has only now come into focus when discussing driven directors of the early age, complete with a recent biography (Lois Weber in Early Hollywood by Shelley Stamp). Weber adapted the book with Doris Schroeder (she would help write a handful of Westerns in the next few decades). Older moviegoers might find familiarity with works such as Pollyanna when it comes to main characters being idealistic children (after all, its lead actor in Gillingwater would appear in a handful of films opposite Shirley Temple from 1936 until his death in 1939). The movie is more of a vehicle for Weber to express her belief in the power of divine love through faith to help guide others back from their old ways (i.e. weird socialite people). So yes, the power of innocence overwhelming hypocrisy is exactly the kind of thing that springs just an hour for one's attention. In that sense, one will be just fine here, since this is a mild effort that works out in its attempts at good-hearted optimism without choking the viewer in too much sentimentality. Gillingwater was already forty years old when he entered the film industry, so he naturally makes a worthy foil for kind folks to play off (or play historical characters); this was the debut star role for Mercer, who was featured in a handful of roles before falling out the industry. Her wide-eyed expressions do okay for what is needed in terms of passing the time between trying to not just say "swell". The others fit the formula required in doing expressions that don't turn into vacant stares (for a film that utilizes little sets, anyway). The film maneuvers towards the inevitable with few surprises, but at least it does not ooze in tedium or with an overbearing sense of importance (take one or two steps and it might fit within the religious film craze, really). While this isn't exactly one of Weber's best films, it is a mild curiosity that could still fill an hour for any curious cinema enjoyer, and I suppose that will be more than enough when it comes to exploring women directors of the early 20th century.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Welcome to Women's History Month for March once again. We will feature films from numerous decades while featuring familiar and new feminine faces. Next Time is Working Girls (1931).

November 28, 2015

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.