13 Nights of Shocktober: The Phantom of the Opera (1925)

by A. J.

This is my favorite time of year, second only to Christmas. Autumn has arrived, the weather is cooling down, and October becomes the month-long celebration of scary movies called Shocktober. There are a lot of horror movies out there, but as a genre, horror is still looked down upon by some mainstream critics and moviegoers. It doesn’t help that, admittedly, there are so few quality horror movies made but, like comedy, it’s a very difficult and subjective genre. So, in the days leading up Halloween I’ll be posting some recommendations for scary movies to help you celebrate Shocktober.

Night 1: Silent Horror Night: “Feast your eyes! Glut your soul on my accursed ugliness!”

The Phantom of the Opera (1925)

I always like to include at least one silent movie in my Shocktober viewings. While they lack the violence and intensity of modern horror movies, they are rich in eerie, moody atmosphere and spooky visuals. The Phantom of the Opera (1925), is no exception. Though not as widely seen as other silent horror films like The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) and Nosferatu (1922), The Phantom of the Opera contains one of the most famous and instantly recognizable shots in film history. Even if you’ve never seen this silent version of the Phantom story, you’ve likely still seen the image of a young woman unmaking the Phantom revealing his disfigured face while he plays the organ. Upon the movie’s initial release this moment reportedly so shocked some audience members that it caused people to faint. Those claims may or may not have been part of a marketing scheme, but, then again, it should be kept in mind that audiences in those days were not accustomed to such visual scares.

Based on the novel by Gaston Leroux, The Phantom of the Opera tells the story of a mysterious masked figure who haunts the Paris Opera House and uses sabotage and murder to make the object of his obsession, Christine, a star. Lon Chaney plays the titular Phantom and he created and designed the special makeup effects the character himself. His visual transformations from film to film made Chaney known as “the man of a thousand faces” and with his look as the Phantom he created his most famous face. The big reveal of the Phantom’s face comes at about an hour along and the movie does a good job of building up suspense and mystery for that moment.

Mary Philbin plays Christine, an opera singer whose career is on the rise but her suitor, Raoul, wants her to marry him and give up the opera. Christine does not want to trade the opera for married life and finds herself under the spell of a mysterious admirer. She doesn’t realize that her secret admirer and the dangerous Phantom are one in the same. 

The sets of the opera house and the Phantom’s lair in the catacombs are extravagant and impressive. Color filters were commonly used by all silent movies to convey time of day or setting (yellow for outdoor daytime scenes, blue for night scenes), but in silent horror movies these color filters also add an eerie, surreal feeling to the scenes. This is certainly true for the scenes of the Phantom taking Christine to his lair beneath the opera house. Stylish visuals abound on their descent, from Christine riding on horseback through the catacombs to the Phantom rowing a gondola. The visually impressive scenes above ground come at the Bal Masque de l’Opera, which are in two-strip technicolor. The color looks unreal, especially happening so late in an otherwise colorless film. It also shows off the costumes and sets nicely. There is even a mysterious person in red wearing the mask of a skull claiming to be the Red Death; a nice reference to Edgar Allan Poe’s Masque of the Red Death.

The Phantom causes all kinds mayhem at the opera house for the sake of his obsessive love: leaving threatening notes, lurking in the shadows, forcing the producers of the opera to give Christine the lead instead of the current prima donna, and dropping a chandelier on the audience. This may not seem like the stuff of horror movies, but Chaney’s grand performance as the maniacal, menacing Phantom, along with his makeup effects, create a film of shocks and thrills. If you haven’t seen many silent films, horror or otherwise, The Phantom of the Opera is a good place to start.

13 Nights of Shocktober: Nosferatu, A Symphony of Horror (1922)

by A.J.

This is my favorite time of year, second only to Christmas. Autumn has arrived, the weather is cooling down, and October becomes the month long celebration of scary movies called Shocktober. There are a lot of horror movies out there, but as a genre, horror is still looked down upon by some mainstream critics and moviegoers. It doesn’t help that, admittedly, there are so few quality horror movies made but, like comedy, it’s a very difficult and subjective genre. So, in the days leading up Halloween I’ll be posting some recommendations for scary movies to help you celebrate Shocktober.

Night 1: Silent Night,
“Does this word not sound like the midnight call of the Bird of Death?”

Nosferatu, A Symphony of Horror (1922)

It is not an exaggeration at all to state that German director F.W. Murnau’s silent film Nosferatu is one of the most influential horror films of all time. It is one of the first vampire films and one of the first film adaptations of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Murnau could not get permission from Bram Stoker’s widow to adapt the novel for the screen so he changed some plot points and the names of the characters. Count Dracula became Count Orlok and the setting became Wisborg instead of England. Despite the changes, the plot of the film will be instantly recognizable to anyone that’s read the novel or seen any movie version of Dracula. Nosferatu along with Murnau’s 1928 drama Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans cement his status as one of the early master filmmakers. 

Some of the most iconic images of horror cinema and the silent era are found in this film. If you’ve never seen Nosferatu, or even if you don’t watch horror films, you would recognize scenes or images of Max Schreck as the monstrous vampire, Count Orlok. This vampiric count is unlike any other portrayal of Dracula that has ever been put on screen. This vampire is not a seducer, lover, tragic figure, or antihero. Orlok is the vampire as Monster. He is hideous and frightening in appearance. There is no allure to this vampire. He is simply an unstoppable force of evil. Orlok is oddly thin, stiff, pale and ghostly white, with features only resembling those of a human. He wears an overcoat, not a cape, buttoned tight, and moves slowly. His fluid movements resemble those of a snake. There are too many memorable shots of Orlok to list but I’m sure you’d recognize the shot of his monstrous silhouette moving up a flight of stairs with his thin arm outstretched, knifelike fingers leading the way. In another shot Orlok rises stiff as a board out of his coffin. Every time we see him is eerie and chilling. Orlok is the most frightening vampire I’ve seen on film.

F.W. Murnau wanted Nosferatu shot outside of the studio in real, existing locations because he thought the film would be more frightening if it took place in the real, recognizable world. However, there are traces of German Expressionism, a visual style that rejected realism and sought to portray the world in a skewed and dreamlike way, in Nosferatu's eerie imagery and atmosphere. The night scenes are tinged in blue, which was a common way for silent movies to signify a night scene, but it also adds to the overall eerie tone of movie. The font of the intertitles is skewed slightly so even these add to the atmosphere of the film. The stop motion effects look dated but still effective. This movie uses atmosphere and eerie, unearthly imagery to engage and frighten the viewer. The scene of Orlok loading up his carriage with coffins, then getting in one of the coffins, followed by the lid moving on its own to seal him in, and then the carriage taking off on its own is genuinely eerie and creepy to watch. The film is sped up so that Orlok moves with an inhuman speed. There is no violence or gore in this movie, but there are plenty of spooky and creepy scenes. If you are skittish of horror movies but still want to watch something spooky this Shocktober, Nosferatu, A Symphony of Horror is a great film to watch once the sun goes down. 

Best Pictures #23: 1928-29 Academy Awards, My Pick for Outstanding Picture

by A.J.

Best Pictures #23: 1928-29 Academy Awards
My Pick for Outstanding Picture

No film won more than one award at the 2^nd Academy Awards for films released between August 1^st 1928 and July 31^st 1929. The ceremony was held on April 3^rd, 1930. It was broadcast over the radio and every Academy Awards ceremony to follow would be broadcast on either radio or television. Like the rest of the film industry, it seems that the Academy didn’t quite know what to do about talking pictures. According to 85 Years of Oscar by Robert Osborne by Robert Osborne, the official history of the Academy Awards, there was serious debate about having separate categories for sound and silent movies. Ultimately there would not be separate categories and no nominations were publicly announced. The films and persons listed as nominees for the 2^nd Academy Awards have been determined by historians using in house records.

It is clear that the Academy still acknowledged the quality work being done in silent films but they overwhelmingly favored the talkies with nominations and wins. Many theaters at this time were still only equipped to show silent films, so there was still a demand for silent movies. Many films at this time, The Broadway Melody included, had a silent version made simultaneously as the sound version.  Movie posters advertised “100% ALL TALKING” and “HEAR WHAT YOU SEE!” to distinguish them from silent movies with some bits of sound added in like The Patriot and the previous year’s Unique and Artistic Picture winner, Sunrise. That demand however would drastically wane and by the time of the 3^rd Academy Awards silent movies would be a thing of the past.

The language of cinema would now contain an audio element, but this new tool would take time to master. The technical sophistication achieved by cinema thus far would be set back dramatically. Noisy cameras had to be housed in giant immobile metal boxes so their sound wouldn’t be recorded by the microphones. Those microphones had to be hidden in the set and actors could not be too far away from that area of the set. Cinema would bounce back and continue to grow and mature thematically and technically but not for a few years. It would be many years before the camera once again had the freedom of movement as it did during the silent era. Just a year before the 2^nd Academy Awards there was no such thing as the “silent era,” there was only “the movies.” Now, a distinct new era of cinema had begun.

My Pick for Outstanding Picture 1928-29: The Broadway Melody

For the 2nd Academy Awards there was only one Best Picture category, still called Outstanding Picture. The selection board of judges, still made up of only 5 people, chose the MGM musical The Broadway Melody for Outstanding Picture, and I once again agree with the Academy. The musical is a type of movie that could not exist before the advent of sound. Though the musical had by this time achieved a maturity on stage, it would take years to mature on screen. The Broadway Melody is a good start for the genre. I can’t give a full and complete judgement of the nominees since The Patriot is sadly lost, but of the films I was able to see the most entertaining and enjoyable was The Broadway Melody, though it is an uneven film.

The Broadway Melody is not without its share of flaws, including a less than likable leading male character, flimsy character motivations, and a mostly stationary camera. It feels a bit unfair to criticize the immobile camera of early sound films given the technical limitations of sound recording, but it is difficult not to compare the cinematography of these early sound movies to the limitless movement of camera in the silent movies from the previous year. That is still only a minor complaint for me. I’d rather watch a still camera shot with entertaining content than visually interesting but meaningless camerawork. This movie moved along at a steady pace since scenes did not drag on just for the sake of hearing the actors speak as they did with In Old Arizona. The Broadway Melody is filled with great songs, written by Nacio Herb Brown and Arthur Freed, that have since become classics. However, my favorite thing about The Broadway Melody is that with Hank, played wonderfully well by Bessie Love, it has the most competent, interesting, and quasi-independent female character I’ve seen in any early Best Picture nominee thus far.

While watching The Broadway Melody, you are aware that you are watching the root of the movie musical. It has a simple story, but this movie is really about the musical numbers. If its plot and set pieces seem clichéd now, it is only because they have been repeated, reworked, and improved in musical after musical. I would recommend ignoring the unfairly low score on RottenTomatoes.com and seeking this film out, especially if you are a fan of musicals.

Best Pictures #21: 1928-29 (2nd) Academy Awards Outstanding Picture Nominee, The Patriot (1928)

by A.J.

Best Pictures #21: 1928-29 (2nd) Academy Awards Outstanding Picture Nominee

The Patriot (1928)

Ernst Lubitsch’s 1928 film, The Patriot, was the only silent nominee for Best Picture at the 2^nd Academy Awards and it was the last silent Best Picture nominee until The Artist in 2011. The Patriot also has the most unfortunate distinction of being the only Best Picture nominee that is a lost film: no full length print of the film exists. So, it is technically impossible to watch every Best Picture nominee, though this point can be argued since The Patriot is not an official nominee as no nominations were publicly announced for this year. The films and people listed as nominees for the 2^nd Academy Awards were determined later from in-house records by Academy researchers. I have read in numerous sources that the vast majority of silent films are lost to history. The Library of Congress estimates that 75% of all silent films are lost. This is a very dismal statistic for movie lovers.

I certainly cannot review a film I haven’t seen, so instead I will share some of the information I was able to find on The Patriot. Set in 18^th century Russia, the film is about the mad Czar Paul and the plot kill him and save the nation. Czar Paul is played by the first Best Actor Oscar winner, Emil Jannings. The planned assassination is led by the Czar’s closest and most trusted friend, Count Pahlen, played by Lewis Stone, who attempts to enlist the Czar Paul’s mistress, Countess Ostermann, played by Florence Vidor, in the plot. Count Pahlen is naturally conflicted because he wants be a good and loyal friend but knows that the Czar must be removed from power.

The most valuable resource for information on The Patriot I could find is the glowing review from the New York Times, written by Mordaunt Hall, published on August 18^th, 1928. Hall lauds the film with praise like: “This motion picture is indeed a credit to the screen… There is, as a matter of fact, hardly a flaw to be found in the whole picture… It is a gripping piece of work with subtle touches….” The only minor criticisms all concern the film’s synchronized soundtrack. Hall writes that the synchronized music score is too loud for certain scenes. A scene in which Paul cries out for Count Pahlen, with synchronized dialogue (appartently the only scene of synch speech in the film), would have been more effective in silence, and the sound of the Czar’s laughter “might better have been left to the imagination.”  Hall has heaps of praise for Jannings' performance as the mad Czar: “Jannings gives the addle-brained despot all the moods one could hope for, and in the last moments of fear Mr. Jannings brings to the screen something that is unrivaled.” The rest of the cast also receives high praise, especially Stone who is “capital” as Pahlen and also credits Lubitsch for his “skillful guidance” with Stone’s performance. Stone was under consideration for the Best Actor award that year, as was Lubitsch for Best Director.

Some segments of The Patriot have survived the degradation of time. Certain crowd scenes were reused for the 1934 film The Scarlet Empress and one reel of the film is preserved at the Portuguese Film Archive. A few clips and the complete trailer are preserved by the UCLA Film Archive. In the trailer, which is available to watch online, Emil Jannings looks like he does a good job performing Czar Paul’s mad, manic fits and his cowardly paranoia. The ornate sets and costumes look impressive and give the impression that The Patriot was an epic period piece; The Patriot’s art direction also received an unofficial nomination. There is a melancholic irony in watching an advertisement for a film that you can never see, especially since, from the trailer, The Patriot looks like it might be a good movie. There is no way to know for sure or make your own judgement. I can only wonder how The Patriot would hold up today. Good or bad, a part of film history is forever lost, which is an incredible shame because every film, good or bad, deserves to be able to be seen.

Nominee: Paramount Famous Lasky

Producer: Ernst Lubitsch

Director: Ernst Lubitsch

Screenplay: Hans Kraly, from the play by Ashely Dukes, and the play “Der Patriot” by Alfred Neumann, Paul Iby, and Dmitri Merezhkovsky

Cast: Emil Jannings, Florence Vidor, Lewis Stone

Release Date: August 17^th, 1928

Total Nominations: 5, including Outstanding Picture

Win: Writing-Hanns Kraly

Other Nominations: Actor-Lewis Stone, Director-Ernst Lubitsch, Art Direction-Hans Dreier

Best Pictures #8: 1927-28 (1st) Academy Awards, My Picks for Unique & Artistic Picture and Outstanding Picture

by A.J.

1927-28 (1^st) Academy Awards
My Picks for Unique & Artistic Picture and Outstanding Picture

There would never be another Academy Awards like the first awards. The films eligible for nomination had to have been released in the Los Angeles area between August 1, 1927 and July 31, 1928 (the reasoning for this seemingly arbitrary time-period is lost to history). The winners were announced to the press in February of 1929, and the ceremony was held on May 16, 1929. Individuals could be nominated for a particular film or for their body of work in the qualifying year. For example, Janet Gaynor won the first Best Actress award for her performances in Sunrise, 7^th Heaven, and Street Angel. The award for Best Titles was given to Joe Farnham for his body of work; however, that category was omitted the following year because the birth of talkies had rendered title cards unnecessary. Winners received a statuette, which picked up its nickname “Oscar” sometime in the first decade of the awards. Runners-up and honorable mentions received plaques and certificates. The selection board of judges was made up of only 5 people, some of which were studio heads, including MGM studio boss Louis B. Mayer. There were two categories for Best Director—comedic and dramatic and, most notably, there were two categories for Best Picture: Outstanding Picture (awarded to Wings) and Unique and Artistic Picture (awarded to Sunrise). Both Best Picture categories were considered equal, but when the Unique and Artistic Picture category was eliminated and only Outstanding Picture continued for the 2^nd Academy Awards (to be renamed Outstanding Production for the 3^rd Academy Awards), people came to think of the Outstanding Picture award Wings won as the top Best Picture award and the Unique and Artistic Picture award as a sort of specialty award. This might lead people to think of Sunrise as the more substantial, quality picture and Wings as the well-executed, big budget spectacle. There certainly is some merit to that perspective, but it also discredits both films of the sum total of their different qualities.

Among the nominees of both Best Picture categories we see the types of films that the Academy would often show favor in years to come: socially and politically relevant films (The Racket), historical epics (Wings), sentimental romantic dramas (7^th Heaven), art films and films about personal struggles and pains (The Crowd, Sunrise), and even odd, peculiar, but popular films (Chang). It is also clear that silent filmmaking was at its zenith. Film stories and techniques had reached an incredible level of sophistication since the birth of the medium just over 30 years before the first Oscars. In less than a year, it would all be over.

The Jazz Singer received a special Academy Award for its technical achievements. The Jazz Singer is thought of as the first sound film, but this is not entirely accurate. Only the musical numbers in The Jazz Singer have synchronized sound. The rest of the film plays like a regular silent film. The first synchronized words said on film by Al Jolson (“You ain’t heard nothing yet”) were said between songs and were recorded unintentionally. Sunrise has a complete synchronized soundtrack with music, sound effects, and even unsynchronized words shouted by a crowd. 7^th Heaven and Wings were rereleased with synch soundtracks, but no actors speaking. Silent film audiences would have been used to having sound accompany films. There would be music, and sometimes sound effects, either performed live or prerecorded, but what they had not experienced was actors speaking from the screen. It is clear that studios were hesitant for audiences to hear actors talk, but after those first few words spoken by Al Jolson there was no going back.

Many people today think of silent movies as antiques, quaint precursors to the modern films. I confess I had the same view for a long time. Silent movies are a huge blind spot in my movie watching experience. Even after watching these six films, I still have not seen many silent movies, but I realize now that silent film was a complete, sophisticated, and mature storytelling medium. The films of the late silent era had mastered this new medium of storytelling and were pushing boundaries both thematically and technically. More importantly I realize now that silent film is just another genre, like any other, with great movies, as well as mediocre and bad ones. A new and vast era of cinema has been opened for me to explore and I am very excited.

My Pick for Unique and Artistic Picture: Sunrise

The Crowd and Sunrise were considered experimental films at the time of the first Academy Awards not because of their technical approaches, but because of their subject matter. Showing characters face ordinary problems and live less than idyllic lives was considered unconventional storytelling. It is still unconventional today. These are films about ordinary, everyday people reaching for happiness, but who are surrounded by overwhelming obstacles. Both are considered masterpieces today, and rightly so, but were box office disappointments. I went back and forth many times on which one I think should have won for Best Unique and Artistic Picture, but after re-watching Sunrise, I had to side with the Academy. The Crowd delivers powerful emotional impact and pathos with its images, as does Sunrise, but the latter film also made me feel like I was watching movie magic. Not the magic of special effects and camera tricks, but the magic of living another life, of seeing and feeling hopes and dreams through images that are, for a time, as real as my eyes taking in these images and my heart feeling them. This is fiction that seems tangible. Those flickering images of two souls, the Man and his Wife, breaking and mending, create real emotions from illusion. That is real movie magic. That is what is in every frame of Sunrise.

My Pick for Outstanding Picture: Wings

I wasn’t expecting to agree with the Academy in both Best Picture categories, but of the three nominees for Outstanding Picture, Wings is the clear standout. Straight away from the opening scenes Wings has the definite style that signifies the work of a skilled filmmaker. William Wellman managed to combine mainstream Hollywood romanticism and sentimentality with creative technical flair. The characters and story run thin for such an epic movie, but overall I found Wings an exciting experience. The action scenes are as exciting as those of any film made since and the aerial sequences are thrilling even by today’s standards. Aside from its Best Picture win, Wings also won Best Engineering Effects (a category later changed to Special Effects). Wings set the standard for the big, elaborate productions that the Academy would tend to favor henceforth, for better or worse. Cinephiles and film buffs will likely come across Wings at some point, but I think that casual film fans would also be dazzled and entertained by this silent Best Picture winner.

Best Pictures #7: 1927-28 (1st) Academy Awards Outstanding Picture Winner, Wings

by A.J.

1927-28 (1^st) Academy Awards Outstanding Picture Winner

Wings

Wings, a romance and adventure epic set among WWI pilots, is the pinnacle of silent era spectacle and storytelling. Paramount executives were skeptical about hiring William Wellman to direct what would be the studio’s big road show picture for 1927. Wellman had been a flier during World War I and had seen combat, but he was younger and less experienced than the other directors in Paramount’s stable. In the end, he was able to convince Paramount producer and executive, Jesse Lasky, that he was the right man for the job. According to Welllman’s son, his father said to Lasky, “I’ll make this the best goddamn picture this studio’s ever had.” “Wild Bill” Wellman did just that and made one of the last great films of the silent era.

What sets Wings apart from any other war film, then or now, is its astonishing aerial sequences. For the close ups in the cockpits, actors Charles “Buddy” Rodgers and Richard Arlen actually flew their own airplanes. Arlen had flying experience from WWI, but Buddy Rodgers had to learn how to fly. A number of adventurous stunt pilots flew planes for the dogfight scenes. The planes fly very close to each other and dive straight towards each other and towards the ground. The fire from plane explosions and machine gun barrels are in color, which was painted in later. The shots of planes crashing to the ground are as real as they can be. In one shot, a stunt pilot broke his neck when the plane did not hit the ground in the way intended. The pilot survived and returned to the shoot six weeks later. The U.S. Army cooperated in the production by supplying hundreds of planes, tanks, pilots, and soldiers to be extras. A field was bombarded with real artillery to give it the right look of a battlefield. Perhaps most important of all, Wellman knew that the planes would only appear to whiz and zip through the air at incredible speeds if the sky was filled with big puffy white clouds to provide perspective for the audience. He halted production for 33 days waiting for clouds to appear over Kelly Field outside of San Antonio, TX to shoot the aerial combat scenes, much to the chagrin of Paramount executives. The wait proved to be a wise decision. The scenes in the air are thrilling and beautiful and you feel that the sky is full of peril. The final air battle sequence is incredibly elaborate; everything on screen looks hectic and dangerous.

The plot of the movie is about the friendship of Jack (Rodgers) and David (Arlen), two young men from the same town that dream of flying. Unbeknownst to each other, they are in love with the same girl from back home, Sylvia. Clara Bow plays Mary, Jack’s neighbor who harbors an unrequited affection for him. She enlists as an ambulance driver and crosses paths with Jack again in Europe. The romance in Wings is its weakest element, probably because it was added into the script last, to give Paramount’s biggest star, Clara Bow, a role in their big-budget roadshow production. Bow receives top billing and is appealing as the sweet girl-next-door Mary, but she did not like her role. She thought her character was merely a decoration and said Wings was “a man's picture and I'm just the whipped cream on top of the pie." She still gave a good performance along with the rest of the cast, both major and minor players. One notable standout is Gary Cooper, as Cadet White. He only has one scene early in the movie, but it demonstrated his considerable screen presence and launched his career.

Wings has a few cinematic “firsts” aside from its Outstanding Picture/Best Picture win. Wings was the first widely released film to feature, albeit very briefly, nudity—nude men are briefly seen from behind in a medical exam room at the recruitment office. Later in the film, a pair of military policemen walk in on Clara Bow changing and she is topless for a second. Wings is also the first of only four films to win Best Picture without also having its director nominated (the other films are: Grand Hotel, Driving Miss Daisy, and Argo).

For years Wings was thought to be a lost film until a print was found in the archives of the Cinematheque Francaise in Paris. It was selected to be preserved in the National Film Registry by the Library of Congress in 1997. In 2012, it was restored by Paramount Pictures. I am so glad that Wings was not lost and is readily available to watch on DVD because this is a film that everyone should see not only because of its place in film history, but also because it is an exciting and thrilling movie. It showed audiences something they had never seen before and presents flying as a dazzling adventure and also a seriously dangerous adventure. Wings leans heavily on spectacle and melodrama, but it is not an outdated antique. The story is simple, but when combined with technical mastery Wings becomes a film that would influence numerous great war films yet to come.

Nominee: Paramount Famous-Lasky

Producer: Lucien Hubbard
Director: William Wellman

Screenplay: Hope Loring and Louis D. Lighton, story by John Monk Saunders

Cast: Clara Bow, Charles “Buddy” Rogers, Richard Arliss

Release Date: August 12^th, 1927

Total Nominations: 2, including Outstanding Picture

Wins: Outstanding Picture, Engineering Effects-Roy Pomeroy

Best Pictures #6: 1927-28 (1st) Academy Awards: Outstanding Picture Nominee, The Racket (1928)

by A.J.

1927-28 (1^st) Academy Awards Outstanding Picture Nominee

The Racket (1928)

The silent crime film The Racket was based on a popular Broadway play which starred Edward G Robinson as a mob boss. Robinson was subsequently brought to Hollywood by Warner Brothers to star in several of their gangster pictures, while the rights to the play were purchased by Howard Hughes. The film was produced for the Caddo Company and Paramount Famous-Lasky under the direction of Lewis Milestone, but without Robinson. The story centers upon honest policeman captain McQuigg and his clash with the powerful gangster Scarsi, who is protected by corrupt politicians. The implied setting of the film is Chicago, though the city is not named, and mob boss Nicholas Scarsi is a reference to real life Chicago gangster Al Capone, who was nicknamed “Scarface.” Both the play and film portray Chicago’s politicians as corrupt and police force as ineffective, as well as corrupt. The Racket was a hit with audiences and critics, but it was banned in Chicago (the play had also been banned by the city).

Though The Racket was a hit at the time, I think that this film stands out among all the nominees as being least worthy of a nomination – in either of the “best picture” categories. Straight away the movie has a conventional look and feel that lacks the artistic flair of the Unique and Artistic nominees, or even the other two Outstanding Picture nominees. There is one interesting visual effect in a scene set at a gangster’s funeral: as Scarsi looks at all of the other gangsters holding hats on their laps, the hats dissolve away to reveal that the men are all holding guns under their hats, ready to shoot. Aside from that moment, and a quick shot using silhouettes of police officers in the station, the cinematography is not noteworthy. In a film as dialogue and plot-heavy as this one, a degree of visual style is essential for keeping the viewer engaged.   

The film begins with Captain McQuigg and Scarsi not-so-casually meeting after McQuigg has been involved in a shooting. The two have obviously met before and they refer to each other by their nicknames: Mac (for McQuigg) and Nick (for Nicholas Scarsi). Scarsi makes a few gestures to try to charm McQuigg. He tells the policeman to stay clear of a street corner where Scarsi’s men plan to rob a rival gang and also invites McQuigg to his kid brother’s birthday party. We then see each man go to his office where it is clear each one is the boss of his respective racket. Scarsi’s office is in a brewery with bootleg barrels of alcohol. McQuigg’s office is, naturally, the police station. McQuigg later shows up to the street corner he was warned about where there is a shootout and he arrests one of Scarsi’s men. McQuigg eventually arrests Scarsi, but the gangster uses his political connections to get himself and his men freed from jail and to get McQuigg transferred.

As soon as there are reports of a shootout, the press arrive and they offer good comic relief. There is a humorous scene of reporters from rival newspapers sizing each other up, all of them trying to get the scoop on McQuigg’s sudden transfer. The reporters are all hoping for something to spark another fight between Scarsi and McQuigg, even if they have to start it themselves.

The Racket is a top-heavy film; the scenes on the streets and in night clubs, as well as the shootouts and car chases are all in the first half of the film. Once the arrests are made, McQuigg hatches a plan to put Scarsi away once and for all before his transfer, but the action and pace of the film go into low gear. The film begins to resemble a stage play with the plot advancing through dialogue, rather than action, and the characters are confined to a couple of different rooms making the film visually uninteresting. Throughout, the film uses mostly medium and wide shots, which sometimes makes it difficult to tell which characters are speaking, especially since the policemen all wear uniforms and the reporters and gangsters are dressed in similar-looking suits and hats. Since there are few to no close ups, it is difficult to distinguish the faces of minor characters. This is all very unfortunate since the story in the last half of the film depends so heavily upon the dialogue.

It was very difficult to find a copy of The Racket. For many years it was considered a lost film, but after Howard Hughes’s death the only existing print was found in his film collection along with another film he produced, Two Arabian Nights (also directed by Milestone in a more interesting style). It was restored by the film department of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and occasionally airs on TCM. The only copy I could track down is part of a DVD collection of early Best Picture nominees called Academy Collection: The Envelope Please Vol. 1. I could find no other legitimate sources for watching The Racket, aside from catching it on TCM whenever it happens to air. The picture quality is not very clean, but it is acceptable; however, there is a DVD distributor watermark in the lower left hand corner of the film, which, while unobtrusive, is still annoying.

I wonder what about this film struck a chord with audiences and critics of the time? Perhaps it was The Racket’s portrayal of the ubiquitous crime and corruption caused by Prohibition, which was then in effect. Because the story was inspired by news and events of the day, it probably felt unfortunately true-to-life and had an immediate resonance. It shows an honest man’s struggle against seemingly insurmountable corruption and how trying to change just one part of the system means taking on the whole machine. But it’s all in a day’s work for good policemen like McQuigg.

Nominee: The Caddo Company, Paramount Famous-Lasky

Producer: Howard Hughes

Director: Lewis Milestone

Screenplay: Bartlett Cormack, based on his stage play; scenario by Del Andrews

Cast: Thomas Meighan, Louis Wolheim, Marie Prevost

Release Date: November 1^st, 1928

Total Nominations: 1, including Outstanding Picture

Best Pictures #3: 1927-28 (1st) Academy Awards, Unique & Artistic Picture* Nominee, The Crowd (1928)

by A.J.

1927-28 (1st) Academy Awards, Unique & Artistic Picture* Nominee

The Crowd (1928)

The story of King Vidor’s silent film The Crowd sounds simple and familiar: the joys and tragedies of a married couple as they struggle to get by in the modern world. However, a movie like this, with such subject matter and of such quality, is a rare thing even today. This film was a passion project for Vidor. Irving Thalberg, head of production at MGM, believed that occasionally films should be made for prestige instead of profit, and since Vidor had directed many hits for MGM, Thalberg greenlit The Crowd.

The Crowd is a film in two parts. The first half is an optimistic romantic comedy. John Simms grows up believing and telling everyone that he is destined for great things. As a young adult, he moves to New York City. He has a job in a skyscraper and meets Mary on a double date. They quickly fall in love and things are great, for a while. We expect a bright future for John and Mary, just like they do; one filled with happy times and easy to solve problems. The second half of the movie is a heavy drama about married life. John and Mary are befallen by small troubles like broken appliances, unfriendly in-laws, and a frustrating day at the beach followed by larger troubles like a lost job, money problems, and a painful tragedy. John’s daydreams and Mary’s pragmatism are an ill match for each other and strain their marriage more and more.

When John arrived in New York harbor, a fellow traveler told him, “You’ve got to be good in that town if you want to beat the crowd.” To our main characters “the crowd” is every other faceless person in the city equally uninterested and unhelpful in their lives and problems. The only help John can hope to get is from himself, something he is painfully slow to realize. John is, of course, as much a part of “the crowd” as he is apart from it; every average person is the main character of their own life, unbeknownst to anyone else.

MGM studio head Louis B. Mayer thought The Crowd was depressing and “obscene” because of a scene that shows a toilet as John tries to fix the tank. Mayer hated this film and urged fellow Academy judges to vote against it. I cannot deny that The Crowd is a depressing film, but it is also an extraordinary one. It is a film of major defeats and small victories. It is not a spoiler to say that the film has a bittersweet ending. Not every problem is solved, but the characters are happy and smiling. Seven different endings were shot for The Crowd. Louis B. Mayer wanted the film to end at Christmas with John and Mary and their children living in a mansion; an ending that would have been wildly out of place and too absurdly positive to be meaningful. I cannot think of a more positive ending that still remains true to the film than the one used. There are only a few other films I can think of that feel as true to the simultaneously harsh and beautiful nature of everyday life.

King Vidor received a well-deserved nomination for Best Director, Dramatic Picture (there was also a Best Director, Comedy category). The Crowd is shot with such skill that it is clear the filmmakers are not only masters of their craft but also creative and inventive minds. In the most famous shot of the film, indeed one of the most famous shots in cinema, the camera pans up a monolithic skyscraper then dissolves to inside and glides over a sea of uniform and anonymous desks aligned in perfect rows before finally pushing in on the desk of John Simms #137. It is a truly beautiful piece of cinema and has been repeated in homage, albeit on a smaller scale, in Billy Wilder’s The Apartment (1960) and Cameron Crowe’s Jerry Maguire (1996). There are number of other visually interesting shots in The Crowd. On John and Mary’s date at Coney Island we see them and their friends slide down a big slide right towards the camera. The production design of the city is impressive and captivating. It is plain and void of character, but seems vast, futuristic, and imposing; it reminded me of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, also from 1927.

The Crowd is a rare kind of film which is powerful and moving while also entertaining. It is loaded with pathos and catharsis for audiences yesterday and today. The Crowd does all of this while being artistic, inventive, and thematically challenging. The Crowd is unfortunately a hard film to track down. It was never issued on DVD and is only available on VHS. However, there is hope for the preservation of this movie. It was one of the first films selected for preservation in the U.S. National Film Registry by the Library of Congress. A most wise choice.

Nominee: MGM

Producer: Irving Thalberg

Director: King Vidor

Screenplay: King Vidor & John V.A. Weaver

Cast: Eleanor Boardman, James Murray, Bert Roach

Release Date: February 18th, 1928

Total Nominations: 2, including Best Unique & Artistic Picture

Other Nominations: Director, Dramatic Picture- King Vidor

*The 1st Academy Awards had two categories for Best Picture: Unique & Artistic Picture and Outstanding Picture. The Outstanding Picture category is widely considered to be the forerunner to Best Picture since the Unique & Artistic Picture category was discontinued the following year. Since at the time each category was thought of as equally the top award I have included the Unique & Artistic Picture nominees as Best Picture nominees.