(Contains possible spoilers)
I just loved this movie. Part of the excitement is watching a resurrected film, lost after over 80 years. It's like finding buried treasure.
This movie, however, would interest almost everybody, except experts who're jaded by years of cinematic criticism. Some points:
1. Swanson and Valentino are both beautiful to look at; Valentino is miscast, however. Swanson ages in concert with the screenplay, while Valentino doesn't; he photographs too young next to Swanson, especially in the later parts of the movie.
2. The costumes will make you wonder. Some are ridiculously elaborate. This is high regalia 20s-style. I wonder if they'd even be possible to make today? This is the best movie I've ever seen for parading 20s fashion.
3. Performances are subtle, nuanced, and believable throughout.
4. All the various stages of nitrate composition are evident here--first, the blurring, then the "freckles", then the "moldy cheese" look, then, finally, the disappearance of the image. On the other hand, some of the scenes are so crystal clear that you can see the details on the costumes. If you want to learn about nitrate decomposition, this film is a good teacher.
5. Swanson's tango dance, and the dress that was" talked about for a year", did not survive nitrate decomposition. Contrary to many reviewers' opinions, stills exist for the tango dance. The dress in question is probably the one she wears on stage, for less than a minute, during the pageant sequence. Unfortunately, because it's a long shot, we don't get to see it in any great detail.
6. The modern soundtrack is often off-putting, but during the second decomposing sequence (during the pageant), the somber, dramatic, heart-beating tune matches the action on the screen, while at the same time, dramatically draws attention to the decomposition itself. Was this purposeful? It's as if the composer was saying,"Listen, you fools! These films are disappearing. Just watch this sequence and see for yourself!"
7. While the plot is ridiculous today, it was the norm in 20s society. Elinor Glyn sold millions of books. What entertainment do we have today, that will be laughed at 80 years from now? (Rap music is a possibility.) It's too easy to look at films like this through the lens of today's sensibilities, and lose perspective.
8. About four minutes of film is missing; it's easy to pick out where, because the plot continuity reveals it.
9. Close attention to the sets will reveal that the same room, redecorated several ways, is used several times. For example, Valentino's library, and Swanson's husband's library, in the scenes after the pageant where the letters have been switched, is the same room redecorated.
For all these reasons, see the movie. If you're not enthralled by something in the film, you're jaded. All the rest of us little folks will love it--it's just plain fun.
I just loved this movie. Part of the excitement is watching a resurrected film, lost after over 80 years. It's like finding buried treasure.
This movie, however, would interest almost everybody, except experts who're jaded by years of cinematic criticism. Some points:
1. Swanson and Valentino are both beautiful to look at; Valentino is miscast, however. Swanson ages in concert with the screenplay, while Valentino doesn't; he photographs too young next to Swanson, especially in the later parts of the movie.
2. The costumes will make you wonder. Some are ridiculously elaborate. This is high regalia 20s-style. I wonder if they'd even be possible to make today? This is the best movie I've ever seen for parading 20s fashion.
3. Performances are subtle, nuanced, and believable throughout.
4. All the various stages of nitrate composition are evident here--first, the blurring, then the "freckles", then the "moldy cheese" look, then, finally, the disappearance of the image. On the other hand, some of the scenes are so crystal clear that you can see the details on the costumes. If you want to learn about nitrate decomposition, this film is a good teacher.
5. Swanson's tango dance, and the dress that was" talked about for a year", did not survive nitrate decomposition. Contrary to many reviewers' opinions, stills exist for the tango dance. The dress in question is probably the one she wears on stage, for less than a minute, during the pageant sequence. Unfortunately, because it's a long shot, we don't get to see it in any great detail.
6. The modern soundtrack is often off-putting, but during the second decomposing sequence (during the pageant), the somber, dramatic, heart-beating tune matches the action on the screen, while at the same time, dramatically draws attention to the decomposition itself. Was this purposeful? It's as if the composer was saying,"Listen, you fools! These films are disappearing. Just watch this sequence and see for yourself!"
7. While the plot is ridiculous today, it was the norm in 20s society. Elinor Glyn sold millions of books. What entertainment do we have today, that will be laughed at 80 years from now? (Rap music is a possibility.) It's too easy to look at films like this through the lens of today's sensibilities, and lose perspective.
8. About four minutes of film is missing; it's easy to pick out where, because the plot continuity reveals it.
9. Close attention to the sets will reveal that the same room, redecorated several ways, is used several times. For example, Valentino's library, and Swanson's husband's library, in the scenes after the pageant where the letters have been switched, is the same room redecorated.
For all these reasons, see the movie. If you're not enthralled by something in the film, you're jaded. All the rest of us little folks will love it--it's just plain fun.