Silent Studies in the Kino – According to Tara

For a long time I thought I didn’t like silent cinema. It’s easy to be prejudiced against an era or a genre of film when your first encounter had you looking through the wrong keyhole.

It was about seven or eight years ago that I went to a silent film screening in Bristol. I can’t remember which film it was but I know it was a slapstick comedy with either Chaplin or Keaton, and it featured blackface. I was horrified and, quite honestly, shocked. I’d never seen a film with blackface exhibited publicly before and there had been no trigger warning before the screening. There was no context given and there I was, amidst a room full of white middle-class folk laughing their asses off.

On a less serious but still ultimately off-putting note, the music was poorly matched to the film. It was jaunty, whimsical and upbeat all the while. I hated everything about the screening and, as a result, was pretty much turned off silent cinema for life.

Or so I thought.

Several years later I met Dr Peter Walsh. He’s a feminist and a film scholar. His expertise is in early and silent cinema. He seemed immediately like a great guy who doesn’t endorse jaunty, inappropriate, crap music – or blackface. So, I thought, maybe there’s more to this silent cinema malarkey than I’ve given it credit for…

And so, with curiosity and hope, I invited Pete to run a silent cinema course at Flicks. I was first to enroll.

alice-guy-1_5341507

The course exceeded the foolishness of my keyhole metaphor and opened an actual door to previously inaccessible cinema. Throughout the course I was introduced to The Silent Feminists: America’s First Women Directors (1993) which included the totally amazing Alice Guy who experimented with Gaumont’s sync sound system known as the Chronophone until such time as she got married and had to resign. She continued to work elsewhere after Gaumont gave her the boot but her husband kinda got in the way.

While a woman being nudged out of the way by dudes is an all too familiar story in film history it was great to at least hear about some of the women who made a mark before the patriarchy pushed them aside because documentaries (un)like this one far too often have us believing that women were altogether absent. Turns out it’s not just funny white dudes doing blackface after all. In fact, Lois Weber, who also features in the documentary, refused to work on one particular film, taking a stand against blackface – yep, there were heroes fighting for what’s right even in the early era.

postcard

Course, I can’t help but wonder why The Silent Feminists, a forty-five minute documentary about women in a field where women are often absent from the dominant historical narrative, has yet to be released on DVD or BluRay. Please, BFI, help a sister out?

I also discovered that not all silent cinema is scored with unimaginative organ playing (like The Lost World, 1925) or jaunty piano. Having seen clips from Georges Méliès’ A Trip to the Moon (1902) many times before, I was amazed to discover that I have never seen the full film, restored, coloured, and gloriously scored by Air. I was also amazed at how many inappropriate scores have been recorded and released with Dziga Vertov’s Man With a Movie Camera (1929). Personally, I like it properly silent: no score. We also had a series of great, and divisive, discussions after watching Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) with a Giorgio Moroder score.

images

Perhaps most surprisingly was that I chose, of my own volition, to watch silent movies at home – not so much for homework or even extra curricular viewing, but just for the fun of it and with a genuine interest. Jean Painlevé’s wonderful sea urchins on our old never-before-rented VHS of Surrealism and Science (1925) and a beautifully scored, visually exciting and honestly suspenseful Swedish horror film, The Phantom Carriage (1921) were two such treats.

Silent Studies in the Kino was our first foray into adult education courses at Flicks and, from the perspective of both student and course administrator, I can honestly say that it was so darn good it not only makes me want to schedule more classes in the Kino but it also changed my previously rigid opinion of an entire era of cinema. Cheers, Pete.

Dr Peter Walsh is Co-director and Co-curator of South West Silents and can found on twitter as @soylent_grey.

 

South West Silents Speak Up! Ben Hur: A Tale of the Christ (1925)

“There will be no further reason for a future production of Ben-Hur for the screen… Ben-Hur is a picture for all times!” Variety, 1925

ben-hur-1925-us-poster-and-ramon-navarro-and-francis-x-bushman-in-their-roles

It’s hard to think of the name Ben-Hur without thinking of the two accompanying names Charlton! and Heston! Even as Paramount Pictures and MGM are about to hurl another incarnation of Lew Wallace’s novel Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ (1880) at us (now the fifth adaptation of the book to be made into a feature film) it is still very hard not to think about that tall, blond haired, big jawed, gun loving American superstar.

But that gives you some idea of the importance Ben-Hur has had on the history of cinema and how much the 1950s’ version is burnt into our cultural consciousness. After all, every Bank Holiday we get the opportunity to see it on our television screens (that or The Great Escape (1963), The Sound of Music (1965),  or Zulu (1964) – it was always Zulu in my house to be honest.)

ben-hur-1925-fred-niblo-4

But forget about those Bank Holiday TV schedules because when it comes to the history of film, Ben-Hur has always been there; Ben-Hur systematically appeared at every changing moment of cinema’s history, all the way back to the birth of cinema (the unofficial 1907 version,   At the height of the silent era there was the faithfully titled Ben-Hur a Tale of Christ (1925), and at the peak of the Hollywood Studio system there was William Wyler’s version (1959) – through the ages the words BEN HUR were always there.

This is why the new adaptation has been a long time coming; you would have thought that a new 21st Century Ben-Hur would have been announced straight after the success of Gladiator (1999). On the band wagon films like Troy (2004), Alexander (2004), King Arthur: Director’s Cut (2004) and even Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven (2005) went into rapid production, shortly after the release of Gladiator, and yet, Ben-Hur didn’t.

Poster - Ben-Hur (1959)_17

Maybe the 2003 animated version of Ben-Hur (Heston’s final acting role; he voiced Judah) which was already in production stalled all possibility of making another live action version for quite some time. Whatever the story Ben-Hur is back on the big screen this August (2016) and from the look of the trailer it most certainly has the hint of a 21st Century adaptation; it’s loud, screaming-in-your-face and seems to have even more animation than the actual animated film from 2003.

And yet, when watching the trailer for Timur Bekmambetov’s all-screaming and all-chariot-racing Ben-Hur, you can almost hear that old saying in your head, “Well, they don’t make ’em like they used to!” But, to be honest, it’s more than likely people would have said the same thing about William Wyler’s 1959 version had they seen Fred Niblo’s earlier silent version from 1925.

Ben-Hur-MGM

There are slight differences in both versions when it comes to the storytelling; the 1925 version gives far more screen time to the connections between Judah and Jesus than in the later Wyler version, which is understandable as Niblo very much stuck to Wallace’s book, unlike the later adaptations. But, alas, this particular element slows down the 1925 version at certain points, particularly in the scenes just after the sea battle – it has to be said that the sea battle and the infamous chariot race are extraordinary! Truly extraordinary in fact!

This is what I really want to flag when it comes to talking Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ. Many have asked us over the years what makes the silent film era different from any other in the history of cinema? While obviously the classic quote from Gloria Swanson, “We didn’t need dialogue, we had faces!” from Sunset Boulevard (1950), springs to mind, but one other major factor makes the silent era different from any other era in cinema: they built everything for real!

Cabiria (1914), Intolerance (1916), Robin Hood (1922) and Napoleon (1927) are titles that secure the legend that when it came to money, they threw it in front of the camera. If anything, Ben Hur is another classic example of this. Nothing is left out.

Ship-Smoke1-wideFX

When watching the 1925 silent version of the sea battle it seems far more extensive than the later Wyler version, after all, the silent version has real boats to crash and burn! These real size Galleys and Roman Trireme were completely seaworthy and very capable of reacting to a full-on sea battle that would include plenty of local Italian extras armed to the teeth and all in suited up in armour. In the end, the filming that took place included smashing one of the galleys into the Roman Trireme and setting the Trireme alight (which is all in the book). But the action got out of hand on the shoot and the production lost control of the fire and lost the entire Trireme before they could finish shooting. All the extras had to throw themselves into the sea to escape being burned. The 1959 film can’t touch that – understandably, they ended up using model boats!

But what about Ben-Hur’s famous chariot race? Surely the 1959 film wins hands down. Well, possibly. It’s incredibly exciting but have you seen the 1925 version? What can I say? The 1925 production had already built one Circus Maximus in Rome, a set which was later abandoned due to spiraling production costs. The production then expanded on original plans and a bigger version of the Circus Maximus was built set just outside Hollywood. They prepared for one of the biggest shooting days in Hollywood’s history.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

A call out was made for (if studio publicity is correct) 7,000 extras for a single day’s filming. Almost all of Hollywood left the city on Saturday 7th October 1925 to see what all the fuss was about. They arrived at the Circus Maximus set (which had apparently cost the studio $500,000) and were given a full day’s entertainment of chariot racing. The likes of John and Lionel Barrymore, Harold Lloyd, Douglas Fairbanks, Mary Pickford, John Gilbert, Colleen Moore, Marion Davies, Sam Goldwyn, and Lillian Gish were all noted being as in the crowds, as well as celebrated directors such as Henry King, Reginald Barker, Clarence Brown and George Fitzmaurice. They, like the rest of the crowds who had arrived to be part of the auction, were stunned by the sheer size of the set. Someone else stunned was  assistant director, William Wyler, who, 34 years later, would end up directing the 1959 version. In 1963 Wyler explain to film historian Kevin Brownlow,

“I was given a toga and a set of signals…. The signals were a sort of semaphore, and I got my section of the crowd to stand up and cheer to sit down again, or whatever was called for. There must have been thirty other assistant doing the same job.”  

At the end of the day, 42 camera operators had filmed roughly 53,000 feet of film. Filming continued on the Maximus set for another month, filming close-ups as well as stunt work. In the end, Editor Lloyd Nosler had to compete with 200,000 feet of film for the chariot sequence alone. But what a job Nosler did when it came to the completed sequence. In the end he did such a good job that it influenced framing and editing of the later adaptations for not only Wyler’s version but also for the animated 2003 version. Let’s see if it influenced this newest adaptation!

At a cost of $3.96 million the 1925 version of Ben-Hur claims to be the most expensive silent film ever made. If it is the most expensive film of the silent era, it most certainly shows it.

051-ben-hur-theredlist

So if you want to see the REAL Ben-Hur! Look no further than Fred Niblo’s 1925 Ben-Hur: A Tale of Christ. You won’t be disappointed!

Recommended Reading:

The Parade’s Gone By: Kevin Brownlow

Lion of Hollywood: The Life and Legend of Louis B. Mayer: Scott Eyman

Written by James Harrison of South West Silents for 20th Century Flicks

South West Silents Speak Up: Mark Fuller on Piccadilly (1929)

I’m a particular fan of British Silent Film; for many decades ill-served by critics, historians and archives, to the extent that few bothered watching them, even while decrying them in print, relying on hand-me-down opinions propagated by twenties and thirties intellectuals with political axes to grind. Although this attitude lingers on in places, the fight-back began around fifteen years ago when a small group of women historians and archivists who knew better, founded the British Silent Film Festival, and a radical reappraisal begun. Long-time unseen films were finally being discovered by new generations who saw how dazzling, inventive and progressive British film could be before the sound era.

Piccadilly Quad poster ART

Even now, however, British Silent Film is fairly ill-served on home entertainment formats; aside from Hitchcock’s rightly lauded silents, few are available with decent prints and thoughtful scores….but an exception is the BFI release of Piccadilly, a late silent made in 1929 by an international team, combining British and American actors, with German direction, design and photography, in a British production.

The resulting Piccadilly (1929) is a stunning film, a prototype film noir, with two femme fatales; Shosho (Anna May Wong), the young, beautiful Chinese girl washing dishes at the nightclub where Mabel (Gilda Gray) is the ageing star turn. The club’s boss, Valentine (Jameson Thomas), also Mabel’s lover, discovers Shosho, sets her dancing in the club, where she is an immediate sensation, and falls for her.

The story is not the most original, but has fine observation and some killer lines. But the film is a must-see for its visuals; German expressionist flavourings run throughout, featuring the designs of Alfred Junge (best known for his work with Powell and Pressburger in the ’40s), creating a look that would dominate Hollywood films in the forties and fifties – in 1929.

Piccadilly Wong 003

The acting is stunning; Jameson Thomas is a seedier Ronald Colman, trapped between the two women who want him; Gilda Gray goes from awful prima donna to a sympathetic, tragic figure with great conviction, and Anna May Wong is breath-taking, utterly convincing both in the nightclub and in Limehouse, growing from timid girl to full-fledged sexual predator! You simply cannot take your eyes off her: even in the plain clothes she wears at the beginning, she has a cool, almost 1960s quality. The German director, E.A.Dupont, somehow manages to combine all these disparate acting styles, moments of high drama and touches of comed, with deft little bits of business informing us about the people behind their public masks, and about the layered nature of London society. The sequences in the old East End offers a particularly fascinating look at the sexual and racial politics of the time. If you were lucky enough to attend South West Silents’ screening of Dupont’s Varieté (1925) at The Cube late last year you will know already what a fine filmmaker, and handler of actors, he was.

336837

The restored print is stunning, rarely showing its age, more often showing the beautiful cinematography by Werner Brandes, ex-UFA – the sequence where Shosho debuts in the club being one of the most beautiful I have ever seen on film, although the tinting and toning of the restoration seems a bit bold to my eyes, so you may want to turn the colour settings down on your TV.

The extras on the DVD include text biographies of Wong and Dupont, a howlingly bad sound prologue for the film, but most importantly a briefing by Neil Brand about his thinking for his new score, but which also, incidentally, acts as an illuminating commentary and analysis on the film itself . The film’s background is a jazz club of sorts, and the score is a jazz-based one, but he has (thankfully) resisted the temptation of a Charleston-fest, and gone for a style that actually fits the style of the film, the emotions at work; restrained, cool, languid, but with an underlying tension. It works brilliantly.

piccadilly

If you are wary of Silents, or think they begin and end with Nosferatu (1922) and Metropolis (1927), or perhaps think Film Noir started around WWII, then this is an approachable, beautiful and thrilling entry point to a whole area worthy of discovery. Enjoy…

Recommended Reading:

Destination London: German-Speaking Emigres and British Cinema, 1925-1950 by Tim Bergfelder and Christian Cargnelli

Reframing British Cinema, 1918-1928: Between Restraint and Passion by Christine Gledhill

Written by Mark Fuller of South West Silents for 20th Century Flicks.

 

South West Silents Speak Up! SPIONE

“Almighty God… what power is at play here?” Spione

Spione DVD Cover

It probably doesn’t come as much of a surprise that I’ve decided to write about Fritz Lang’s Spione (1927) again. After all, I have written more about this great super spy thriller than probably any other film in the past decade. The reason for this? There are many reasons to be honest, but one key factor is that I still believe the film isn’t celebrated enough, if it is celebrated at all. Even now, after a very successful commercial release by Masters of Cinema, Spione is still eclipsed by the films Fritz Lang made before (Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler, Die Nibelungen, Metropolis) and shadowed by the ones he made after (Frau im Mond, M, Das Testament des Dr. Mabuse).

So why am I flying the flag once again for Spione? And why now? Well, it’s all down to the fact that a member of British Intelligence is returning for his 24th cinematic outing this month, apparently his name is Bond, James Bond or something!

1$_V?_Job Name

Anyway, with the release of Spectre (2015) not only do we see the return of Bond we also see the long awaited return of that most devious of devious criminal and terrorist organizations: ‘the Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion’, or, better known in short, SPECTRE (the clue of a return is in the title of the film, btw). And with that we could (I say could) see the return of SPECTRE’s head honcho Ernst Stavro Blofeld. It is worth briefly noting at this point that EON Productions have not publicly stated that Blofeld is actually in SPECTRE, but, throughout the publicity campaign one particular character seems to be singled out as a possible candidate for the cat-stroking-Mao-suited super villain. But, I am not planning to name names here –  after all, I’m supposed to be writing about Spione!

Spione

Now, when it comes to Spione’s wheelchair bound villain, Haghi (played by Rudolf Klein-Rogge) and Blofeld there does seem to be a connection, a feeling that these two characters are almost cut from the same cloth. To be honest, they aren’t really villains; they’re more like super-villains in my eyes. And, when you watch Spione, you will begin to notice the connection as well. Both characters are always ahead of the game when they battle our heroes and they usually have the final say… most of the time.

Spione 2

But let’s not get too serious here. Both characters are great fun to watch and continually dominate their scenes. Haghi, with his Lucifer looks and full black suit, and Blofeld (depending on which actor you are thinking about) with his trademark white cat and Mao suit are most certainly well-groomed visually for the cinema – so well-groomed, in fact, that their characteristics continue to shine through even today.

Blofeld

For instance, Blofeld has had his fair share of mimics over the years, from the Austin Powers films to Police Academy (that’s Police Academy 6: City Under Siege (1989) for all the nerds out there) and God only knows how many times Blofeld’s trademarks have appeared on television depicting a villain of sorts; even Alan Partridge gets his shoe-in (that’s Knowing Me Knowing You with Alan Partridge for the even bigger nerds). All of the above shows the popularity of a character like Blofeld, not bad for a character who has appeared on-screen for nearly forty years. But could this be because of the continuing success of the Bond films?

In Haghi’s case, to my knowledge, his persona only appeared in Walter Forde’s Would You Believe It (1929), Britain’s most successful British comedy of the 1920s; however, it is a clear indication of how popular the Haghi character had become within the year of Spione’s release.

Blofeld 1

But while Haghi is very much forgotten by most cinephiles today, his influence can still be seen in modern-day cinema; he is almost a template for later cinematic super villains such as Die Hard’s Hans Gruber, Se7en’s John Doe, Darth Vader, The Joker or even more recently Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men (2007).

So the next time you sit down and watch a Bond film, preferably one with Blofeld in, don’t forget that he is part of a pantheon of super villains which goes way back to a film like Spione, from a time when the villains didn’t really need white cats!

Written by James Harrison of South West Silents for 20th Century Flicks.

South West Silents Speak Up: Fantômas

Welcome to the first in a series of posts from our friends, South West Silents.

While we here in the video store can talk about Hal Hartley, 1980s horror and Nicolas Cage movies until well after closing time, we’re not so au fait with the silent stuff. That’s why it’s good to have friends in quiet places. If you’re wondering where that is, it’s over here. Read on friends!

SOUTH WEST SILENTS RECOMMENDS… FANTOMAS

by James Harrison

‘The first great movie experience’ David Thompson

Fantomas_-_The_Phantom_Crook

There is no argument about it. Louis Feuillade had an impeccable track record for bringing chaos to the cinema screen. Over the course of his directing career, which only lasted just under 20 years (he made roughly 600 films between 1906 – 1924) Feuillade would bring audiences an extensive amount of assassinations, a big concentration of exploding buildings, the destruction of national monuments, bridges and the French public transport system; to be honest, Feuillade’s creations made the likes of SPECTRE look like a bunch of amateurs!

fantomas-(1913)-large-picture

And that is the fun thing about Feuilade’s first major serial, Fantômas (1913-14). You hardly ever find yourself rooting for the good guys such as Inspector Juve (played by Scottich born Edmund Breon) or his collaborator, the reporter Jérôme Fandor (Georges Melchior). You are always rooting for the bad guys. In this case, the master criminal Fantômas (René Navarre) who is not only incredibly ruthless and cunning but also very well dressed throughout (apart from the full cover black suit).

img-1

The same can be said for many later villains in cinema of course, Robert Mitchum’s ‘preacher killer’ Harry Powell in The Night of the Hunter (1955), the many incarnations of Hannibal Lecter, Darth Vader in the Star Wars films, Rutger Hauer’s Roy Batty in Blade Runner (1982) as well as Alan Rickman’s Hans Gruber in Die Hard (1988); although, Gruber is a personal favourite of mine to be honest. These are all villains who, in many ways, you want to keep watching instead the main protagonists. They are all very well dressed as well, apart from Rutger Hauer I guess.

fantomas (1)

It is also worth noting that the likes of the villains listed above were cut from the same cloth as Fritz Lang’s Dr Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) and Haghi (also played Rudolf Klein-Rogge) the criminal mastermind of one of Lang’s most underrated of thrillers, Spione (1928). These earlier villains were most certainly highly influenced by Fantômas, especially when it came to the subject of bringing chaos to a contemporary society as well as the ability to dramatically change their appearance and identity within a few seconds.

There are however flaws with Fantômas. The use of the camera in particular is incredibly simple and basic. A scene which could last almost 10 minutes could well be shown in one single shot (with the odd cutaway if you are lucky). Even for 1913/1914 standards in filmmaking the camerawork in Fantômas is painfully basic for the time. Other filmmakers such as Evgenii Bauer and of course D. W. Griffith were advancing the use of the camera in every film they made. Sadly none of this transpires in Fantômas. So you have been warned.

Juve_versus_Fant_mas-626521238-large

However, do not let this turn you off. Fantômas is thrilling throughout because of what happens in front of the camera and that is the important factor here; the sense of, where are we going now? What is going to happen next? In many ways, Fantômas is one of those pioneering titles which formed the basis for future film and television serials; so your recent addition to HBO and other Television programmes could well be blamed on Fantômas as well.

If anything it’s a key title in the history of cinema, and one which establishes many themes  we would see throughout the future of cinema, even today! Enjoy!

Written by James Harrison of South West Silents for 20th Century Flicks.