The Mark of Zorro (1940).

Review #1869: The Mark of Zorro.

Cast: 

Tyrone Power (Don Diego Vega/Zorro), Linda Darnell (Lolita Quintero), Basil Rathbone (Captain Esteban Pasquale), Gale Sondergaard (Inez Quintero), Eugene Pallette (Friar Felipe), J. Edward Bromberg (Don Luis Quintero), Montagu Love (Don Alejandro Vega), Janet Beecher (Senora Isabella Vega), George Regas (Sergeant Gonzales), Chris-Pin Martin (Turnkey), and Robert Lowery (Rodrigo) Directed by Rouben Mamoulian (#773 - Applause)

Review: 

Zorro, if you remember correctly, originally appeared in serialized form in 1919 from author Johnston McCulley, which went under the title as "The Curse of Capistrano" (it has since been published as The Mark of Zorro). As such, the first film adaptation came with The Mark of Zorro (1920), with Douglas Fairbanks as the adventurous one-man force that served as a co-writer, producer, and star. 20th Century Fox had the rights to do a remake when they bought them from Fairbanks, although it did not stop other stories to be adapted involving the character as created by McCulley, such as Republic Pictures making The Bold Caballero (1936). Of course, Tyrone Power is an ideal matinee idol to take the helm as the title lead. The Cincinnati native was an actor as was the case with his Irish great-grandfather (the original Tyrone Power), his grandmother (Ethel Lavenu), and his father (Tyrone Sr.). He appeared in films starting in 1932, but it was his appearance in his fifth with Lloyd's of London (1936) that made him into a screen presence worth seeing on the screen over and over, and he was only 22. At the helm of director was a solid successor from Fred Niblo in Rouben Mamoulian. He had emigrated from the Russian Empire to England before to direct plays before moving to the States to teach and direct opera/theatre. He would direct a variety of productions even after entering film such as Oklahoma! and Carousel. His first film was Applause (1929), an early sound feature, but his best-known feature is probably Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931). He would direct films on a regular basis from 1929 to 1942 (with two more films afterwards) that did a variety of genres (noir, musicals, adventure) while also serving as a founding father for the Directors Guild of America; he died at the age of 90 in 1987. Six years before his death, Zorro, the Gay Blade (1981) was dedicated to him as a tribute to the classic adventure portrayed in this film. 

The screenplay was done by John Taintor Foote while the story was done by Garrett Fort and Bess Meredyth. One other key tribute came with the world of comic books, as it is one of the parts of the original origin-story of Batman (whose parents were killed after a screening of the movie); Zorro in general proved an inspiration to the concept of Batman as devised by Bob Kane and Bill Finger, since both characters are folks presenting themselves as rich playboys while secretly fighting crime in a dark costume. Coincidentally, this film has a member of the cast in Robert Lowery, who would become the second actor to play the character of Batman in a film serial later in the 1940s. This film and The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) share two actors basically playing the same type of character with Rathbone and Pallette. It might not be as great as the original feature in terms of outright professionalism and newness (i.e. not being the first great Zorro adventure), but it does make for a solid adventure film with enough reason to exist with a capable lead and all-around charm to make it just as interesting for the curious moviegoer to view hand in hand with past and future Zorro movies. Mamoulian achieves a film with plenty of fluid engagement and rhythm that achieves plenty in 94 minutes. The balance of narrative and action is done to where one isn't aching to see too much of one over the other, moving along with smiles rather than gloom. Power plays the double act required in the title lead with worthy screen presence, dashing in the moments needed for his public face but also riveting when it comes to being the man in black with an accompanying tight drawl. He might be young, but he has the presence of an old soul that probably would've fit well in a variety of action eras (sure, Zorro should probably be played by someone of a different ethnicity when it comes to helping people living in California before it became a state, but one must pick their battles when it comes to older films). Darnell and Power have semi-decent chemistry together despite the age difference (ten years between the 26-year old Power and, well...) with at least some sort of general innocence to make things look semi-solid (Sondergaard does seem more intrigued to be in the same room with Power at times though). Pallette is the ideal pairing with Power in heroic accomplice for all of his drawing power in voice qualities and timing. Bromberg makes for a decent stooge pretender, although Rathbone is the key other highlight, one with dignified ruthlessness that simmers well against Power in the ways expected to help make its ultimate endpoint quite worth it (of course, he was quite good with fencing to where he did not need to have a double). Fred Cavens helped choregraph the fencing sequence while his son Albert served as a stunt double for Power in shots from behind, which means one isn't watching sequences of folks jumping around while trying to fence (not that there's anything wrong with that, since it is execution that matters more than anything). The funny thing is that it isn't the final part of the film, since there's still a bit of time left to wrap things up, which works out just fine, bookending itself in throwing a sword into the air with winking convenience. As a whole, it runs at a slick rate that will dazzle all whoever heard of the term "matinee" and lined up to see it with rapt attention, packed with energy that has not dulled over the prevailing eight decades since release that shows how one can re-adapt prior material and make it seem fresh and worthy of viewing for audiences that other films wish they could do so well.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Sanshiro Sugata.

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 Wind (1928).

Review #1327: The Wind.

Cast: 
Lillian Gish (Letty Mason), Lars Hanson (Lige Hightower), Montagu Love (Wirt Roddy), Dorothy Cumming (Cora), Edward Earle (Beverly), and William Orlamond (Sourdough) Directed by Victor Sjöström.

Review: 
For the year of 1928, change was imminent for film. Lights of New York, the first all-talking full length feature was released in July of that year (released through Warner Bros with the Vitaphone system, improving from their previous efforts). Sprinkled within the top grossing film list were mixes of silent and sound (or at least part-sound) films, such as The Singing Fool (the follow-up part-talkie musical by Warner Bros with Al Jolson) or The Circus (one of numerous Charlie Chaplin films that highlighted the decade) and so forth. The actors of yesteryear would either transition into the burgeoning era of voice or would find themselves doing other avenues of work besides film. Lillian Gish was a key pioneer as an actress for the silent era, who had transitioned from stage acting in the early 20th century to appearing films by 1912, with her highlights primarily being her work from D. W. Griffith, which I've noted before with Way Down East (1920). The rise of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer in 1924 led to Gish signing and starring in films with them, with this being the last of the three made with the studio. This was the last of the three films she made for MGM (along with her last silent role), which was not a huge success upon release, having been delayed a year before release. This was the penultimate American film directed by Victor Sjöström, who was noted for work in his native country of Sweden in the decade with films such as The Phantom Carriage (1921) before moving on to sign with Louis B. Mayer to direct in 1924 with Name the Man, and he and Gish had collaborated on The Scarlet Letter two years earlier. Gish went back to theater acting in the following decade, although she would appear in films from time to time until her death at 99 in 1993, while Sjöström directed four more films (his last being in 1937) and returned to acting in the theater and in film, with his last performance before his death in 1960 being Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries (1957).

This film was an adaptation of the 1925 novel of the same name by Dorothy Scarborough, which depicted a lonely small town Texan life in the 1880s, ending with the main character being driven mad by the corpse of the man she killed (after being raped) being uncovered by the wind that leads her to wander into a windstorm. The ending for the film was notably different from the book in that it was a happy one - although it has been said that it was imposed onto the film over a filmed "sad" ending, this does not seem the case. Gish and Sjöström were not fans of doing this ending, but the sensibilities of a public wanting something happy to close their viewing experience in the 1920s wins out, I suppose. It doesn't harm the film as a complete whole, mostly because it is compels attention for 78 minutes without hesitation, a drama of suffering in the elements that resonates without needless extravagance or maudlin sentiment. The film was primarily made in the Mojave Desert (with over 90 degree temperatures), with eight airplanes being used to help simulate wind (no points for wondering how bad conditions must've been for crew having to deal with all that air and sand). Gish is at her finest form here, displaying fragility and depth with a steely soul that urges to persist on and confront her fate like poetry with grace, whether when having to handle the harsh conditions of a small windy town (which can seem quite literal at times) or some of the people that come from it. Hanson (a Swedish actor who had his career turn to Hollywood with a few successes) does fine with Gish, having a reasonable screen presence when needed. The rest of the cast do well with their parts when needed, whether villainous with Love or comedy relief with Orlamond. The film is an engaging one, wracked with chills that make for quite a moody piece to view for the curious at heart. It is one with plenty of entertainment through its direction, acting, and effects that make it a welcome gem for the silent era and film viewers.

Next Time: 1928 strikes again with In Old Arizona.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror.

Review #798: Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror.

Cast
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor John H. Watson), Evelyn Ankers (Kitty), Reginald Denny (Sir Evan Barham / Voice of Terror), Thomas Gómez (R.F. Meade), Henry Daniell (Sir Anthony Lloyd), Montagu Love (General Jerome Lawford), Olaf Hytten (Admiral Sir John Fabian Prentiss), and Leyland Hodgson (Captain Roland Shore) Directed by John Rawlins.

Review
Following two excellent Holmes films (#583 - The Hound of the Baskervilles, and #721 - The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes) were released by 20th Century Fox in 1939, Universal Studios bought the rights from the Doyle estate to make films about Holmes - updated to the present day. In fact, the opening title card talks about how Holmes (and Watson) is "ageless, invincible and unchanging", with this movie being about Holmes trying to take down a Nazi agent using propaganda through the radio (which did occur during the War). It is an interesting premise, but I can't resist to wonder if there were other movies dealing with plots like this. There is at some sort of mystery to the film, and the movie does move quickly enough, at 65 minutes (if you wonder why I always mention the length of a movie as positive/negative, it's merely a way to try and justify how the movie does with regards to pacing, or if a movie is too long or too short to try and enjoy, for my taste anyway. In this case, the movies does a fine job in terms of satisfying its goal of telling a story with a short length).

While it is a b-movie, it is at least a movie that tries its best to be entertaining while dealing a subject as serious as treason during wartime, not coming off as cheesy, nor too overblown (it's interesting to note that the movie ends with a title card stating to buy war bonds). Rathbone and Bruce are consistent as ever, making for a fine duo that play well off each other. Ankers is also pretty decent, making a good contribution to the plot. Denny (there really isn't spoilers if the movie is over 70 years old, so no complaints) is okay, coming off as so unassuming that you really don't think he's the villain, because...well, it is strange to presume that a member of the "Inner Council of British Intelligence" would be behind all of this - unless he was an impostor, because Holmes is a master at deducing that sort of thing, and it helps that I'll let it slide unopposed. It's a movie that is fairly passable for its time, even if it isn't as enjoyable as the previous films. Bottom line: Take it for what it is worth.

Countdown: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2...

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.