WINGS (1927), SUNRISE: A STORY OF TWO HUMANS (1927)THE JAZZ SINGER (1927)

     In the beginning...She Blinded Me With Silents (Post 12 of 12)

Clara Bow in Wings

I just finished reading Bill Bryson's book One Summer: 1927. Bryson pieces together the important events that were happening in the United States at that time: Prohibition, Babe Ruth, Calvin Coolidge the great Mississipi flood, the Roots of the Great Despression and at the center of it all the young pilot Charles Lindbergh, who became the most famous man on earth that summer.

Bryson also talks about the movies of that year and I realized I hadn't seen the two movies that won the first ever Academy Award that won the best picture Oscar that year. I say two because, William Wellman' Wings won the Best Picture Production Oscar and F. W. Murnau's Sunrise: the Story of Two Humans won the Best Picture, Unique and  Artistic Production. So there were essentially two Best Picture winners that year and they were very different from each other.

Wings is a high adventure thriller often set in the front of a plane doing battle during World War I. Bryson points out that "to the astonishment of everyone he (Director William Wellman) made one of the most intelligent, moving and thrilling pictures ever made." The movie was big budgeted and seemed like a big gamble, but the story of two American pilots who start as enemies and end up as best friends and battle in the air over the skies of Europe proved to be a huge hit. 

'Many people went to Wings to not thrill at the aerial acrobatics, but gaze in admiration at its female lead, Clara Bow."-Bill Bryson

The two buddies are played by Buddy Rogers and Richard Arlen, but the top billed star of the production was actually the biggest female star in Hollywood, Clara Bow (Rin Tin Tin the German Shepherd was the biggest male star). You could say that Bow's part of the girlfriend of Buddy Rogers probably should have just been a supporting role. Since she's such the biggest name here, it seems like there are a couple of scenes with Bow that are just thrown in. But I really didn't mind. I found Bow so charismatic, I actually wish she had had more to do. It's easy to see why she was such a big star, even if for only a short time.

Janet Gaynor and George O'Brien in
Sunrise: A Story of Two Humans

The other Best Picture winner was Sunrise: A Story of Two Humans, a drama about a man whose mistress convinces him to murder his wife and run away with her. After initial resistance, he agrees and takes his wife out on a rowboat to strangle her and dump her body overboard. As he's about to do it, he becomes overwhelmed with guilt and decides not to do it and asks her forgiveness.. He has to win back his wife's affection, but he does. This is a plot point I had a little trouble getting past. Keep in mind the wife realizes he's about to kill her, yet she does eventually forgive him. I'm just feeling that if my spouse was clearly about to kill me, that would pretty much be the end of the relationship. He also proves to be so volatile, that he's lucky he doesn't kill his mistress towards the end of the movie. That being said, if you could overlook this plot point, the reestablishment of their relationship is very heartwarming and provides many poignant and heartfelt moments. It does devolve into a couple of odd comic interludes (an especially strange one involving a pig) that made me think I was watching a Harry Langdon comedy at times, but the movie did get back on track and the scenes featuring the rescue of the man's wife after a storm brings everything to a satisfying conclusion.

Oh, yes and speaking of Rin Tin Tin. I brought up the German Shepherd because I also finished Susan Orlean's book (hey, two book references in one blog!) Rin Tin Tin: The Life and Legend, where she discusses the German Shepherd's rise to be the biggest movie star in Hollywood in the 20's. So I was really knocked out when I was watching Sunrise and there is a scene where the husband is taking his wife out on the boat to do her in. His dog goes crazy at this turn of events, breaks his tether and swims out to the boat and the husband has to take his dog back to shore and start his plan over again. But thanks to the dog's diversionary action, the man has time to change his mind. The hero dog is (of course) a German Shepherd.

But which of these two films was the real winner that year?

The answer is...none of the above 

"It is a painful irony that silent movies were driven out of existence just as they were reaching a kind of glorious summit of creativity and imagination, so that some of the best silent movies were also some of the last ones."-Bill Bryson

Al Jolson sings for his Mammy in The Jazz Singer.

Yes, the real winner of the 1927 sweepstakes was The Jazz Singer, forever remembered as the first movie that talked.

"The Jazz Singer was by no means the first sound movie. It wasn't even the first talking picture-but that was a nicety lost on its adoring audiences. For most people, The Jazz Singer would be the picture that made talking pictures real."-Bill Bryson

The story is about Jack Robin (Al Jolson) who forsakes singing in the synagogue for his Rabbi father to embark upon a career in show business. Though much clumsier than the other two films listed above, the artistry of any silent picture simply couldn't compete with Al Jolson singing "Toot Toot Tootsie" or "My Gal Sal." It really is a silent movie (very heavy on the cue cards) with a few songs and some dialogue here and there. It's entertaining in an antiquated way and the movie's relationship between Jack and his parents does have some moving moments.

One thing for sure, movies were never the same.

THE LAST LAUGH (1924, GERMANY)

     In the beginning...She Blinded Me With Silents (Post 11 of 12)

                                          

The Last Laugh

F. W. Murnau's  The Last Laugh, the story of the character disintegration of a porter/doorman after he is relieved of his job and uniform, is yet another movie I first saw in my History of Film class and watching it today there are three things that stand out to me. 

The first, and one of the reasons the movie is looked at in a film class is the point of view of the camera which is sometimes distorted and never plays it straight with its narrative point of view. We get the inebriated view of the doorman when he drinks and the distorted and overblown laughter of his neighbors when they are mocking him. The camera moves quickly and sharply when the porter is doing his job and in his element. When his gets his dismissal letter, the film slows down and the vision of the porter is blurred, not wanting to read what is on the paper.

The second way to look at this film is as a character story. The doorman/porter is relieved of his job and stripped of his duties and the whole world crumbles as he becomes a lowly (in his eyes) washroom attendant. Emil Jannings plays the porter as an overly proud man who struts around like a peacock. It's partly to Janning's credit that we nevertheless feel such sympathy for him when this once strutting peacock becomes a washing room attendant and seems to barely now possess the capability to even move.  

The third way to look at the film is the ending. The real ending of the movie has the ex-doorman at his depth of despair in the washroom, not too far from the end. But there is a tacked on epilogue that begins with a title card that says something to the effect that the ending of this movie that you are about to see is basically nonsense, but we're going to show it to you anyway. So, the doorman is given an inheritance that is given to him because he was nice to a millionaire in the washroom. We see the now rich ex-doorman eating caviar, being waited on and living a happy life.

If the movie had ended in the washroom, perhaps it would have just been too bleak for the audience to accept. But since the ending is so far-fetched, perhaps they could have cut to one final shot of the old man dying with a smile on his face, with the part with him getting rich being shown as just a happy dream and the last thought he would ever have. But who am I to re-write The Last Laugh?

BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN (1925, SOVIET UNION)

In the beginning...She Blinded Me With Silents (Post 10 of 12)

Battleship Potemkin

Sergei Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin (a film on the rebellion of of a Russian battleship and the subsequent reprisals from the czar's army),  is yet another silent I first encountered in The History of Film class I took during the 80's. It makes me nostalgic for my "textbook" A Short History of the Movies by Gerald Mast.

Here are some points on Battleship Potemkin from Mr. Mast:

1. Eisenstein has the visual ability to convert huge groups of people into complex and striking geometric shapes.

2. Eisenstein's montage increases the sense of movement and tension as the individual shots collide, crash, explode into each other.

3. Eisenstein's ability to alter mood: From the peaceful idyllic sequences of the striking workers at rest and play to the vicious slaughter of vicious slaughter of the workers in their tenements.

4. Eisenstein's sense of metaphor to comment on the action: the sickening slaughter of the dumb and defenseless ox, which comments on the slaughter of the workers.

5. Eisenstein's vision that the capitalistic Czarist system is  fundamentally inhuman and inhumane, an obstacle not only to physical survival but also human fellowship, family and brotherhood.

6. The power of his cutting is unmistakable (All the various shots and points of view of the sailor breaking the plate with the biblical platitudes on them)

7. For a film with a mass protagonist, the faces of individual people are strikingly memorable.

8. The film's five parts, mirroring the five-act structure of classical drama, form a taut structural whole: from the unity the sailor's build on the ship to the unity between ship and shore, to the unity of the entire fleet.

9. The most dazzling editorial sequence of all in the film is the slaughter of the innocent Odessans on the Steps.

10. The film time for the sequence on the Odessa Steps is longer than the actual time it would take a group of people to run down a flight of steps. Subjective time, the way it felt to be there, replaces natural time.

The most famous sequence in this film is definitely the murder of the innocent on the steps of Odessa by the czarist army. This has been called by many one of the most influential scenes in film history (obvious example-Brian De Palma in The Untouchables). One thing is for sure, you can't get through The History of Film class without it.

THE EAGLE (1925)

In the beginning...She Blinded Me With Silents (Post 9 of 12)

The Eagle

What I know about Rudolph Valentino:

1. They made a lot of biopics of the Italian screen hearthrob over the years. I remember seeing one starring Franco Nero during the 70's.

2. He was know for being the Latin lover during the twenties

3. He was tremendously popular with his adoring female fans.

4. His overblown acting style was often mocked.

5. He died prematurely and his New York City funeral was a mass of hysteria.

6. I know the names of his most famous movies: The Sheik, The Son of the Sheik, Blood and Sand and The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. 

So if I'm ever on Jeopardy! and get Valentino as a category, I might do all right. The problem is that I have never actually seen a movie with Valentino in it before. I was surprised when the new edition of the 1001 book listed the silent film The Eagle and I realized this was a Valentino movie I hadn't even heard of.

The Eagle turned out to be a fun adventure film. Valentino plays a Russian soldier who has to go on the run after he spurns a Czarina's advances. He also has to battle the evil nobleman who steals his families land. Valentino begins wearing a mask and takes on the avenging Robin Hoodesque persona of The Black Eagle. Of course, he falls in love with the evil nobleman's daughter which complicates matters.

My verdict is that Valentino is actually pretty good in this heroic role. If there was much overacting or exasperated mugging, I didn't really catch it. He even shows a flair for comedy. There is a scene where Valentino keeps putting pepper in his soup while admiring his great love that is almost Keatonesque.

The movie is also noted for a tracking shot at a dinner party that is very impressive.

Pretty silly title card moment: Valentino as the Black Eagle kidnaps the woman he loves, but then decides to release her and adds: "You are as free as you are beautiful, and that is very, very free."

Clarence Brown appreciation society: If you had told me there was a motion picture director that had been nominated for six Academy Awards that I could never remember hearing of before, I would have thought that you were certainly mistaken. That was before I saw Clarence Brown's resume: (Annie Christie, Romance, A Free Soul, The Human Comedy, National Velvet, and The Yearling, all nominated for Academy Awards) But he also made his mark in silents, including The Eagle. 

So note to self: See more Clarence Brown films.