Anyway, I have three movies to tell you about tonight: Broken Blossoms (Griffith, 1919), Way Down East (Griffith, 1920) and Within Our Gates (Micheaux, 1920). I have to say that they are all really unusual (besides the concept that Griffith was still to learn how to work with the conventional 90-minute movies) and interesting. So fasten your seatbelts and enjoy the ride!

Broken Blossoms is one of the finest Griffiths ever. It is so delicate and unpretentious that  it is difficult to associate with Griffith, especially after watching mega productions such as The Birth of a Nation and Intolerance. But it is easy to understand the transition in between movies when Intolerance was intolerated by audiences and Griffith almost got bankrupted.

Lillan Gish was just wonderful as the girl opressed by an abusive father (he is a boxer that doesn’t have a punch bag at home… what do you expect?) There are some classic scenes, like the one where she is seating by the dock, where her skin is whiter and softer than you could ever imagine to be possible. The scene as a whole is soft and dreamy. A beautiful setting for an impossible love in between the poor girl and the Chinese immigrant.

I can’t forget to mention the superb job done by Richard Barthelmess when interpreting the Chinese immigrant. The actor is not Chinese but with makeup, costume and lots of good acting he ended up making me forget his real self. Of course everything was so exaggerated (as always in the silent movies) but done gracefully and in conjunction with all the other pieces of the movie.

I can’t forget to mention about one particular gesture done by Lillian Gish everytime she was asked by her father to smile. Since life was difficult and the girl couldn’t find a reason to smile, she would create a smile by using her fingers. I thought the act was amazing and it reminded me of Chaplin so much! The small details are the ones that I love the most on silent movies and Lillian Gish just imprinted her acting on my soul by doing that little movement.

If you feel like checkin Broken Blossoms up (you really should!), take a look on youtube:

Way Down East follows the same line and doesn’t bring three thousand actors and lavish scenarios. Lillian Gish is once more the innocent and pure girl in trouble, ready to be save by prince charming. Oh, well… La-di-da… At least the girl is Lillian Gish and prince charming is Richard Barthelmess.

In these two Griffith’s movies there are little or none technical experimentations. The only thing I really got excited about was the final scene of Way Down East, when Barthelmess is rescuing Gish. She was running on a snow storm, at night, without proper clothes and fainted by the river. The block of ice where she was on cracked and she started to float down the river, straight to a waterfall (the perfect situation for rescue!). Then prince charming comes along and, after jumping from block of ice to block of  ice, takes the princess in his arms and runs back to land. It sounds ok but it was so well done that you really fear for their lives! I was really tense while watching this scene because everything was so unpredictable. I hope actors made millions at that time… especially when you don’t have CGI to do the dirty job for you.

If you’ve got interested in checking the movie go to youtube:

The last movie I’ve seen today was Within Our Gates, by African American director Oscar Micheaux. The movie is groundbreaking not only because it was made by an African American in 1920 but because of its content. After the controversial The Birth of a Nation, Within Our Gates sounds like a response to the misconceptions brought by Griffith to the big screen.

The movie was so controversial and ended up disappearing for decades. It shows the injustice and atrocities commited by whites in the south. The leading lady, Sylvia, was an educated African American who fought for the right of her people to have access to education. That sounds mild but when the movie goes on a flashback to tell us about her tragic story, the picture changes. First, her father was wrongly accused of killing a white man. Then, after being on the run for days, Sylvia’s parents are lynched by a mob of white people. Sylvia’s brother is shot while running away but still manages to get into a horse and scape. Sylvia, who was hidden on some friend’s house, is found by the brother of the white guy killed and ends up almost being rapped.

I think this is a movie to be watched for the historical importance it has. Besides that, there’s nothing else to be observed. The movie is really boring at times and the acting really bad.

Check the movie out, if you are curious about it:

I guess that’s it for today, folks! See you soon!

715 days and 992 movies to go

I started the day having my breakfast while watching “Intolerance” (Griffith, 1916). The movie is the most well know work done by D.W. Griffith, helping him to get his name in movie books while bankrupting his production company (they spent 2 million dollars – about 41 million today – to produce the movie while not making much in the box office).

There are a couple of reasons that make the movie so important. First of all, the sets and costumes are incredible. Like he had done in “The Birth of a Nation”, Griffith tries to be realistic and true to the historical facts when telling a story. You can clearly see this when the  scene showing the Babylonians celebrating after the first batle against Cyrus opens. The shot starts with a high camera angle showing a gigantic set,  extravagantly decorated and filled with properly dressed people. It is incredible! It is hard to imagine that the movie was made in 1916 after this shot. And the most unbelievable part? The camera, postioned on a high angle, starts to descend – yes, it moves down! We have the first crane shot ever!

Griffith also uses colores filters to add some emotions to some scenes. He was successfull in some shots – like when “the boy” and “the girl” are in Coney Island and the filter is red, but overall I still like what Feuillade did in “Les Vampires” a lot better.

The way the story was told was another revolutionary aspect of the movie. Griffith pasted together four different stories that took place in four different times in history. He did it in such a way that I was extremely confused in the begining and hopelessly curious by the end. Each story would be told in parts, like chapters, purposefully ending at a crucial moment (any resemblance to soap operas is purely coincidental…) I don’t have to mention that he got audiences really confused with this masterpiece, do I?

If you want to take a look in the movie you can opt for the good and faithful youtube:

The other movie I watched today is one of my top ten movies of all time – “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari” (Wiene, 1920). Shadowy, nightmarishy and completely distorted, the movie is one of the best examples of the German Expressionism period.

The movie drags you in a kind of frightful nightmare that reveals itself little by little. Not without sending you warnings, of course. There are the sets, clearly made out of cardboard, showing creepy and slanted houses and tents. The angular walls, positioned in such a way that they seem to be claustrophobicaly enclosing the characters . The furniture, disrproportional and irregular. The strange graffiti on the walls, looking so colorful in a black and white movie. And the shadows, you can’t pretend you didn’t see them. Watching Cesare killing Alan through the shadows on the wall can be more traumatic than watching blood squirt from the screen in contemporary horror movies.

Besides the wonderful aesthetics of the movie, there were not many technical experiments going on in “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari”. The camera is completely still for the entire movie and the characters appear on the shot like actors on a stage. There is a lot of fade in and out throughout the movie, and I haven’t noticed this technique beind used in the other movies I’ve watched so far. Colores filters are also used and help to set the mood in some scenes.

You can also check this movie on youtube:

After four hours and ten minutes worth of  silent and black & white movies I’m ready for tomorrow. The book shows me that I have two Griffiths in a row now: “Broken Blossoms” and “Way Down East”. At least they bring Lillian Gish and are not three-hour long historical epics. Argh!

723 days and 995 movies to go

Today I had some extra time and went on to check that the movie is not completely available on Netflix or youtube! Only partes 1 and 2 are there. I have to confess that I got pretty excited with the news. At least at first.

“Les Vampires” is a series of short movies (like episodes) that follow a group of criminal vampires that are being followed (and investigated) by reporter Philippe Guérande. The movies are written and directed by Louis Feuillade. Like Griffith, who brought the historical epic to the silver screen, Feuillade started the thriller with “Les Vampires”. I guess it was a little less challenging to come up with something new back then (or was it?)

The first two episodes that I watched today were engaging and visually interesting. Depending on the setting and ocasion, the director used colored filters to emphasize the mood. The framing was more tight to the characters, given them more importance on the scenes. I also noticed that the cuts were and transitions between frames were faster and more precise when comparing to what I’ve seen so far in my project. Not that you can compare with todays standards, but the movie holds on pretty well – you won’t sleep, I promise!

The story is interesting but it has flaws – of course! Who would hide a decapited head in a box above the reporter’s bed? Yeah, that was bad! But how about the man that keeps showing pictures of his three children to explain his wrongdoings? That was quite funny… Overall, the story has a good dosis of everything, including suspense, and keeps you wanting more.

If you get interested in watching the first two episodes – you run the risk of wanting more, check the links:

Episode 1 – La tête coupée (The Severed Head) 33 minutes:

Episode 2 – La bague qui tue (The Killer Ring) 15 minutes:

Right now I feel like I need to watch the rest. I’ll keep an eye on Netflix to see if they get the other episodes. In the meantime, I’ll be watching a sequence of long, long, long Griffiths. Wish me good luck!

726 days and 997 movies to go

Following the book’s advice, the movie I had to watch today was “The Birth of a Nation” (Griffth, 1915). It is long, B&W and silent. Besides this inviting details, we also have a really controversial theme going on in the movie. All these ingredients would be enough to put a movie like this away – for good! – but instead we have “The Birth of a Nation” listed on a number of lists for the best movies ever made. Did I miss something?

History says that “The Birth of a Nation” was the first historical epic ever made. That means the movie has a lot of people and big settings involved in telling the story. That’s where Griffith impressed and made history. The reconstruction of historical settings was amazing (I like the scene with Abraham Lincoln in the theater). Besides bringing an static camera for most of the movie, Griffith experiments with some camera movement by doing some tracking.

Going back to what makes “The Birth of a Nation” controversial, it is important to discuss what is the theme of the movie. “The Birth of a Nation” talks about the American Civil War and the Reconstruction of the South, using some novels that romanticize the Ku Klux Klan. Hum, you get the point, right? Instead of basing “The Birth of a Nation” on facts, Griffith wanted to experiment with a novel. Oops! The result is a movie that brings the Ku Klux Klan as the salvation for the opressed white population of the South, while showing African Americans through racist lens.

Besides the controversial thematic of the movie, we have to praise Mr. Griffith for the achievement. And just to prove my point, I also watched today “Spartacus” (Kubrick, 1960). This is a more recent movie, with colors, tons of talking and the historical epic size of 3 hours and 15 minutes. And you know what? Griffith’s epic holds on pretty well. And now listening to the sentimental bla bla bla is a relief when you want the facts. At least they had Kirk Douglas and I could look at the dimple on his chin for 3 hours and 15 minutes…

I watched “The Birth of a Nation” on Netflix but you can enjoy the wonders of youtube and watch it for free:

I guess that’s it  for today. Tomorrow I have an even bigger movie to tackle. Surprise, surprise!

729 days and 998 movies to go

The first movie recommended in the book is “Le Voyage dans la Lune” or “A Trip to the Moon”, by Georges Méliès. The book says that the movie is 14 minutes long but doesn’t explain that the lengh is considering 16 frames/second. When I went to youtube (one of my reliable sources for movies) I only found 8 -10 minute versions. After some research I’ve found out that in 25 minutes/second the movie would be 8 minutes long.

Besides the technicalities, I have to say that I still enjoy this movie a lot. I’ve seen it in the past but everytime I rewatch it feels like there are some new aspects to be observed. This time I enjoyed to pay attention in how the camera never moves and the whole movie looks like a staged show. The actors come in and go out like in a theater. In fact, because of the music accompanying the scenes, it was almost like watching an Opera. Of course it had to be some weird opera, without the singing and with some exaggerated acting.

Another interesting thing I’ve noticed this time around was the two landings on the moon. First, the group of scientists lands on the eye of the “man on the moon”; afterwards, they appear landing on a more flat surface on the moon. Everything Méliès needed to make sence of his magical show. Wasn’t he well known for being a magician? I guess there’s no better place to be a magician than in the movies.

The second movie I watched today was “The Great Train Robbery”, by Edwin S. Porter. This is still in incredible movie, that holds on really well besides its 106 years of existence. It is hard to compare with “A Trip to the Moon” because they are very different: the first one is more like an abstract dream that makes some kind of sence while the second is straightforward and clear.

I’ve seen “The Great Train Robbery” in the past and was happy to see it again. Like I said, every time you rewatch this movies you learn something new. This time around I’ve decided to focus my attention on the still camera as well, so I could make a point of comparisson with “A Trip to the Moon”. So, I’ve noticed that in “The Great Train Robbery” the actors also come in and out of the shot but, differently than “A Trip to the Moon”, the whole thing doesn’t feel like a play. The movie has a lot of exterior scenes where the camera is posioned on the top of the train or on a spot close to the moving train. The camera might not be moving but the whole thing is! There is a lot of action and suspense, and you might even not notice that the film is silent.

By the end of the movie, Mr. Porter even experiments with some camera movement, following the robbers down a hill and then running to their horses. It is a rudimentary camera movement but you can notice how much of a difference it makes.

I hope you can enjoy watching both movies on youtube. It is there, for free, and you can watch anytime you want. Make sure you take advantage of that.

My next movies are a little more challenging since we are getting into D.W. Griffith (yes, the guy that inspired Peter Jackson to work on movies that are 3 hours long instead of 1 1/2 hours). Good luck for me, right? I know…

730 days and 999 movies to go. Some progress made.

I have to confess that a movie inspired me with the theme for my blog. But then, different from the blogger in the movie, I can’t cook (1). I can’t, end of story. So what should I write about? Movies! I love movies and they don’t require any cooking – besides the delicious popcorn I’ll be making.

So the idea is to write about movies. To be more precise, 1001 movies (minimum!). I’ll be watching the movies sugested in the book “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die” and discussing them. But let me put it this way: I won’t be playing the film critic here. The book has lots of them writing really well about the movies. I will only be enjoying (or not) them and telling you about the experience. C’est fini!

Ok, but I guess that’s not all. Since I have plenty of time (about two years) I’ll be writing here about other movies I happen to see in the middle of my journey. For the good or the bad, I’ll be here.

So, let the fun begin!