Grand Hotel (1932).

Review #1338: Grand Hotel.

Cast: 
Greta Garbo (Grusinskaya, the dancer), John Barrymore (Baron Felix von Geigern), Joan Crawford (Flaemmchen, the stenographer), Wallace Beery (General Director Preysing), Lionel Barrymore (Otto Kringelein), Lewis Stone (Dr. Otternschlag), Jean Hersholt (Senf, the porter), Robert McWade (Meierheim), Purnell B. Pratt (Zinnowitz), Ferdinand Gottschalk (Pimenov), Rafaela Ottiano (Suzette), and Morgan Wallace (Chauffeur) Directed by Edmund Goulding (#1332 - Hell's Angels)

Review: 
"Grand Hotel. Always the same. People come. People go. Nothing ever happens."

Theatricality goes a long way when you have the star-power to go with it. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer was the studio for stars in the 1930s, and Irving Thalberg was precisely the person to create big films through the power of picks - selecting scripts, gathering staff, etc. He had purchased the rights to adapt the novel Menschen im Hotel (1929) by Vicki Baum (who had been a chambermaid at a few high-class Berlin hotels), which was turned into a play by William A. Drake the following year (a musical of the same name was also adapted from the novel and play in 1989). Drake, alongside un-credited writers in Béla Balázs and Edgar Allan Woolf, helped to turn it into a film through writing, which comes together like a series of vignettes or an anthology piece, but it was one of the first films to utilize more than two stars to serve as headliners, which now seems like a common thing (as proven by future big-name productions in the following decades to be covered another time). It also has one key distinction - the only Best Picture winner to have no nominations in any other category. MGM would continue this trend with the comedy Dinner at Eight (which also features both Barrymores and Beery) the following year, and it would be re-made by the studio in 1945 as Week-End at the Waldorf. In any case, this is a film that has an undeniable staying power with its core five cast that a lesser cast or less capable director would've turned into plain old-hat melodrama. At 112 minutes, it pulls off entertainment that worked for Great Depression audiences and still works for modern audiences, where one shining star doesn't shine too bright over everybody else, mostly because not all of them share the stage at one point in the film. One starts with Garbo, who had risen from parts in films in her native Sweden to star in Hollywood in the span of six years, with her naturalistic acting (which worked well for silent and sound) being just as known as her reclusive nature, right down to the most memorable line of the film being how she just wants to be alone. She fares just fine, mostly when sharing the passion and focus with Barrymore, with her personally requesting red front-lighting for her love scenes, which certainly work. J. Barrymore (nicknamed "The Great Profile" with a noted career of stage and film since 1903) fares just as calmly, where one does not dwell on the considerable age difference between him and Garbo but instead focuses on his charm, which can go for either romance or dialogue with L. Barrymore. Crawford (a resilient star through self promotion alongside talent) shines with resourcefulness, a lady for the moment, whether it is hope or desperation (a role that was trimmed by the censors of the time for various reasons). L. Barrymore proves to be a fair surrogate for the audience, where one wants to see someone's attempt at a mild-mannered attempt at a first and last great gesture of life, although that makes it seem more tragic than it really is, particularly since this part could've been more grating (or on the other hand a sad one) with a different actor. Beery goes for the ham with a German accent in tow (with a promise that only he would have to put on an accent convincing him to sign on), with mixed results, really, although if a heavy is needed, one can't go wrong with someone like Beery. In any case, one will find themselves pulled into a film with spectacle to spare, from its production quality (most signified in its lobby scenes, along with art direction from Cedric Gibbons) down to its reasonable direction from Goulding that keeps everything going to the right room without missing a beat, which makes it endure to this very day.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1920).

Review #1152: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Cast: 
John Barrymore (Dr. Henry Jekyll / Mr. Edward Hyde), Brandon Hurst (Sir George Carewe), Martha Mansfield (Millicent Carewe), Charles Willis Lane (Dr. Richard Lanyon), Cecil Clovelly (Edward Enfield), Nita Naldi (Miss Gina), and Louis Wolheim (Dance Hall proprietor) Directed by John S. Robertson.

Review: 
It is always interesting to look deep into the past for films, particularly with horror movies. 1920 was a particularly interesting year for horror, with this film being released alongside other horror films such as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and The Golem: How He Came into the World. In any case, this film is a pretty effective one that is worth a look for horror fans, particularly ones into silent features with a standout lead performance. The credits list Clara Beranger as providing the scenario for the film, which took inspiration from the stage play adaptation by Thomas Russell Sullivan that had first opened in 1887, the year after the publishing of the original novella by Robert Louis Stevenson. The changes from the novella for the stage play are reflected here in the film, such as giving Jekyll a fiancee and making more of a contrast between him and Hyde in their morals. This was the fourth adaptation of the work into film (the other three being done in 1908, 1912, and 1913, respectively), along with the first of three adaptations released in 1920, with one being directed by F. W. Murnau, although his film, The Head of Janus, is now lost. Barrymore shines above the rest of the cast, managing to play both roles with a clear distinction through his expressions that make for some fairly compelling drama with him. Hurst does pretty good as the counterpart to play against Barrymore for certain scenes, presenting a somewhat compelling argument for yielding to temptation in order to combat it. The other cast members aren't too bad, but the real focus stays on its star for the chunk of its 79 minute run-time, and it never really borders on boredom at any main point.

The struggle between trying to separate evil impulse and the soul is certainly something that can be worth thinking about for time after a viewing of something nearly a century old. The film takes its time to build to its big highlight - the transformation of Jekyll to Hyde. This is where Barrymore shines the most, as this was a scene without any sort of special makeup or camera tricks, being one long sequence where he turns away from the camera by hiding his face with his hands to later reveal his features of the beast, complete with face contortions from Barrymore. Of course in later sequences there is makeup used to show a pointy head and fangs, but they are well-done for the time. The Hyde sequences certainly must have proved a bit shocking for its time, adding to the entertainment factor fairly well. The climax delivers a fair and quick payoff, and on the whole the movie is a fairly entertaining one, with Barrymore being the key highlight that makes this one worth a watch nearly a century since its release.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.