The Ace of Hearts (1921).

Review #1866: The Ace of Hearts.

Cast: 

Leatrice Joy (Lilith), John Bowers (Forrest), Lon Chaney (Farallone), Hardee Kirkland (Morbius), Edwin N. Wallack (Chemist), Raymond Hatton (The Menace), and Roy Laidlaw (Doorkeeper) Directed by Wallace Worsley (#850 - The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923) and #1617 - The Penalty (1920))

Review: 

Admittedly, when I think of Lon Chaney, I do think of the times where he put some sort of elaborate makeup for dramas and the occasional horror flick. But there were countless other movies besides that involved Chaney for the silent era. So, yes, here we are with a silent romantic drama that happens to tread on familiar material. Remember The Penalty (1920)? As with that film, it is an adaptation of written material that was written by Gouverneur Morris, with his short story The Purple Mask being the basis for this film; this was also done at Goldwyn Studios, where Chaney worked for five films between his stints at Universal and MGM. The plot, if you want to know, involves a couple who got married because he got selected to dispose of a "The Man Who Has Lived Too Long" that will give him confidence, and Chaney's character happens to be part of the love triangle and part of an explosive climax, which results in a movie that lasts 75 minutes. Apparently, the original ending included a character that survived an explosion only to say how right it was about how the world needed love (i.e. construction rather than destruction), but Samuel Goldwyn balked at how preposterous it sounded. 

It is entirely possible that the secret society presented in this film was really something in 1921 to worry about when it came to censors, particularly with fears over anarchists. The effect is a movie that seems very amusing when not thinking about the context of the time, because hearing about a loosely defined society with people that look like a bunch of librarians who assemble to take down vague rich guys for ill-defined reasons is more amusing than the actual film itself. Simply put, the movie just isn't as interesting as one would hope, because its attempts at romance grind the movie down to a boring halt. It's incredibly predictable to see where the movie goes, because obviously a sudden romance is going to impact any chance of curiosity, even if it is attempted murder. Hell, I'll even accept a failed assassination, but the movie doesn't even lend that your way, as if the examination of just what the world needs through the eyes of "Cause" members gone good is enough (this isn't to say one needs an explanation for everything, because film doesnt need to do that, but even a BS try is better than zero). Hell, if these two are established members of the group-with-loosely-defined-goals, then the idea of them escaping to a new life would be horrifying, as if folks who sent out bombs to take out people can get a second chance just because they found love - the woman initially resisted marriage because of her devotion to the "Cause", so either she served as just a card shuffler or she got to do missions of death. You would actually want to hear more about just what is behind their desire to drive off these rich folks (again though, try doing that without stoking censorship) than hear more gobbledygook about the alleged chemistry between Joy and Bowers, who have as much energy together as two broomsticks that became sentient for ten minutes; they look at each other, and you look at your watch. Chaney is the highlight, but only because every other actor is on autopilot more appropriate for a mime show, as Chaney does manage to convey a slight bit of tragedy with sacrifice and loneliness. After all, what better way to show a lonely person than to have them stuck in the rain for hours before waking up to pet a dog on the steps. The final scene where he muses about getting the card that bears the title of the movie (marking him...to kill) is at least a decent one to close the movie out on, since one would hope to close all movies out with a bang. In conclusion, this is an average movie, lacking in true sentiment or meaningful depth besides an amiable effort from Chaney that makes for a century old clunker. In a sea of other choices where Chaney plays a man wrapped with dilemmas and self-sacrifice, you can do better.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

He Who Gets Slapped.

Review #1771: He Who Gets Slapped.

Cast: 
Lon Chaney (Paul Beaumont, aka HE), Norma Shearer (Consuelo), John Gilbert (Bezano), Tully Marshall (Count Mancini), Marc McDermott (Baron Regnard), Ford Sterling (Tricaud), Harvey Clark (Briquet), Paulette Duval (Zinida), Ruth King (Maria Beaumont), Clyde Cook (A Clown), Brandon Hurst (A Clown), and George Davis (A Clown) Directed by Victor Sjöström (#1327 - The Wind and #1731 - The Phantom Carriage)

Review: 

It should only figure that having a prime presence in Lon Chaney and a noted directing figure in Victor Sjostrom would result in an interesting movie. Sjostrom had moved to the United States when he was hired to direct Name the Man (1924), and he modified his name to "Seastrom". He would direct a handful of films in America in the silent era, and this was the first one to be produced by Metro Goldwyn Mayer (MGM) in its history (albeit not the first released, since it was released in November for the holiday season), which if you remember had Louis B. Mayer as studio chief and Irving Thalberg as supervisor of productions, and the latter knew Chaney well enough from Universal Pictures to bring him to contract with the new studio. Sjostrom and Chaney would each benefit from the overall success that the film brought (one that made double its budget while being shot in the span of nearly two months). The film is adapted from the 1915 Russian play of the same name by Leonid Andreyev, with Sjostrom and Carey Wilson adapting it to the screen.

The film runs at 71 minutes (at least for versions in the public domain and on television, owing to an increased frame per second rate), and it manages to do quite well in making grisly entertainment. Well, at least for a film that involves a man who experiences humiliation so great that he becomes a clown only referred to as "HE" that gets a chance at romance but also revenge. Folks familiar with the actor referred to as "The Man with a Thousand Faces" will find a worthy treat in Chaney's lead performance as a dutiful clown, which technically means he is doing a dual performance: the normal mild-mannered man in the opening and a clown that prefers to laugh at people within pain (of course, there is also exploitation too). In that sense, he does exactly what is needed in a resourceful performance of pathos that we are generally sympathetic to, as in the tradition most would know from his previous highlights like The Penalty (1920), and it probably made sense that he would portray a clown again with Laugh, Clown, Laugh just four years later (which also had a love triangle). In fact, he nearly overshadows the other two folks in this love triangle story. Thalberg took an interest in Shearer, and this worked out pretty well for each side (they married in 1927), and one can see why. She has the bright charm required for what is needed here, and she seems quite suited in matching with Gilbert. He was in the midst of turning into a leading man around this period, and even with a segmented role like this he rolls with it pretty well (i.e. he doesn't get lost as just a nice face to romance another nice face). It might qualify as a thriller feature, if you think about it, since one definitely gets curious over just what will happen with the (unstable) lead presence, particularly when Marshall and McDermott enter the picture. McDermott makes a useful adversary as a bully that doesn't need much screen-time to make it work out, while Marshall makes a worthy exploiting figure. As one of MGM's early standout features, one should certainly not hesitate to pick this feature out, particularly since it happens to now be in the public domain. As a whole, the film is breezy and always interesting when it needs to be when it comes to showing a look into the circus along with being a fairly built thriller that still holds well within the standards of its time. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Penalty (1920).

Review #1617: The Penalty.

Cast: 

Lon Chaney (Blizzard), Claire Adams (Barbara Ferris), Charles Clary (Dr. Ferris), James Mason (Frisco Pete), Milton Ross (Lichtenstein), Ethel Grey Terry (Rose), Kenneth Harlan (Dr. Wilmot Allen), and Doris Pawn (Barbary Nell) Directed by Wallace Worsley (#850 - The Hunchback of Notre Dame)

Review: 

"Between pictures, there is no Lon Chaney."

There were plenty of icons and actors in the 1920s, but when it comes to ones with the talent to back up their reputation, no one can quite match up to the "Man of a Thousand Faces" with Lon Chaney. Born to deaf parents, he found a talent in pantomime that made for an early career on the stage and vaudeville in the early 20th century, although he eventually became hooked on entering film (doing so in 1913). Although he started in small parts, he eventually grew to character roles while even writing/directing his own shorts (the last venture he reportedly directed was The Phantom of the Opera (1925), although he was left uncredited alongside other directors). In a time where actors needed to be adept with their own makeup, Chaney excelled. The Miracle Man (1919) helped give him prominence, and the advent of the 1920s only made that more clear, as one could highlight from his future films, which involved him playing monsters and masterminds over several films (for which some survive, like the aforementioned Opera film) before his death in 1930 (his son would take up acting not long after, becoming a dependable presence in his own right). Can you imagine any modern film doing the challenge that Chaney had to do for this film? He strapped his ankles to his hips while his knees were into special leather stumps that were strapped into the body while his jacket held his feet - and he had to do it over and over again, because Chaney could only be in the stumps for a limited amount of time (for obvious reasons - searching the Internet makes it look even more grueling), so there are no camera tricks needed - originally the film had an epilogue that showed the audience Chaney walking down the stairs on his own two feet (somehow, the footage ended up lost). The film was written by Charles Kenyon and Philip Lonergan, which is an adaptation of the novel of the same name by Gouverneur Morris (if one desires to check out the book to compare and contrast, you're in luck, since it is available to seek out on the Internet). This was the first film that Chaney would star in with director Worsley (who was briefly an actor before turning to directing for eight years), and they would do five films together, which included the famed The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923). 

What we have is a film that uses its star to wonderful effect to elevate melodramatic material to enjoyable entertainment, a charming and gruesome time one could look up any time they desire for public domain night (or day). Think about it: how many movies involve a legless mastermind of crime that wants revenge on the doctor that amputated him as a boy along with robbing San Francisco with riots along with an alliance with certain anarchists. Oh, and he just happens to have an interest in a mistress that can peddle with him for the piano alongside an operating room (so he can have someone's amputated legs grafted to him?!), a trap door, and an armory that also contains people making straw hats while folks decry him for being an amputee (uh...) and a secret service agent tails him. Playing a tortured monster type would obviously be drawn out for several performances in Chaney's career, and he has the charisma required to balance mastermind and occasional tenderness without falling prey to a silly plot that would have undermined a less interesting actor. He moves around with tenacity that dominates everyone else in watchability in a wise fashion, since the other folks turn out to be puppets anyway. Adams and Terry are okay in the casual sense of needing to act with Chaney for touches of romance, whether spent in the art room (where he manipulates to be a model for the devil after the fall) or in his own domain. Clary (playing a doctor that not only amputated a boy's legs unnecessarily but also forgot that he had a head injury too) plays middling authority with pithy interest, but it surely works better than with Harlan as his assistant (who mostly serves as foil to Adams and her art talent because...). Mason (an American actor that usually played henchmen and cowboy roles) does fine with the sniveling adversary role that is needed for a certain sequence at the end for effect. By the time the film ends its time at 90 minutes, one will have found plenty of interesting enjoyment from Chaney that its redemption plot will come off with no real hitches (aside from the obvious moral part at the end). If one desires something involving crime, maniacal mayhem with an actor at the helm putting all of his effort into a role with a challenge like no other, this century old film will certainly fit the bill well for a silent era that had plenty of curiosity to go around.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923).

Review #850: The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

Cast
Lon Chaney (Quasimodo), Patsy Ruth Miller (Esmeralda), Norman Kerry (Phoebus de Chateaupers), Kate Lester (Madame de Gondelaurier), Winifred Bryson (Fleur de Lys), Nigel De Brulier (Don Claudio), Brandon Hurst (Jehan), Ernest Torrence (Clopin), and Tully Marshall (King Louis XI) Directed by Wallace Worsley.

Review
While this does not necessarily fall into the horror genre (being more of a romance/drama), it is often considered the first film in the "Universal Monsters" series, with a few of the films from that line already reviewed on this show (such as The Phantom of the Opera (#774), the Dracula films, the Frankenstein films, The Invisible Man (#069), The Old Dark House (#465), Murders in the Rue Morgue (#531), The Mummy (#632)...), adapted from the 1831 novel of the same name by Victor Hugo, with certain liberties taken. I figured it was time to get to this film, which I had considered doing for quite some time, though I always seemed to push it back for other movies, until now. It is clear to see why Chaney was often called "The Man of a Thousand Faces", as he is spectacularly unrecognizable as the Hunchback, with the makeup being exquisitely grotesque, looking great for the time and even now. Miller and Kerry do fine in their romance scenes, having some sort of chemistry amidst the ultimate heartbreak. Hurst plays a decent villain, but the real star of the show is the grand scale of everything. There is a good deal of depth in the sets and costumes that create such a magnificent and true atmosphere, with different color hues in certain scenes that really stick out nicely. There isn't too much use of inter-titles, but the film manages to convey itself neatly without dialogue, like most great silent films do. The version I watched includes music compiled by Donald Hunsberger (with adaption and conduction by Robert Israel and his orchestra), which accompanies the movie excellently in capturing the movie's scale. The length of the movie depends on what copy you are seeing, ranging from 95 minutes to over two hours, with the version I watched being nearly around 110 minutes, and it paces itself well. Clearly I recommend this movie, and you can find it almost anywhere in part due to it being in the public domain.

Overall, I give it 9 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.

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: Laugh, Clown, Laugh.

Review #330: Laugh, Clown, Laugh.

Cast
Lon Chaney (Tito/Flik), Loretta Young (Simonetta), Nils Asther (Count Luigi Ravelli), Bernard Siegel (Simon), Cissy Fitzgerald (Giacinta), and Gwen Lee (Lucretia) Directed by Herbert Brenon.

Review
Lon Chaney was one of the prime silent film stars long ago, being a lot of roles like the Hunchback to even the Phantom, giving him the name of "The Man of a Thousand Faces". And he does a a great job for his first appearance here (With his son being reviewed in #260 - The Wolf Man), managing to do a great job to convey his feeling al into his face. The rest of the cast do a decent job, conveying their feelings decently. It's a strange, yet sad film, with a circus feel that brings a bit of joy. It's a decent film that has a mostly short runtime (Lasting mostly over an hour), giving some sort of entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars