Pictures and the Picturegoer (Jan-Dec 1925)

34 Pictures and P'chjrepoer JANUARY 1925 Harold Lloyd-Live Wire VINCENT DE SOLA Harold Lloyd seems to be one of the staple idols of the films, and perhaps this is due in some measure to his own stability. His rise was slow and gradual, as screen successes go. Not one vehicle, but a great many, raised him to a position which, it is fairly certain, he will retain as long as he ohooses. In this face one finds nothing of the philosophical sadness of Chaplin, none of the superior comedian's richness of human comedy, but there is much in common in the faces of both men. Both have come to the fore by creating a character of wistfulness, somewhat baffled and helpless, and have repeated that figure with unvarying repetitions for successive years. There is so much that is unassuming in Lloyd's features tihat it is easy to sec that this part came natural to him. Idealistic as is the brow, his face lacks vanity and romantie illusions. He sees himself in a rather plain, matter-offact way, and his humour concerns itself with the vacillations weaknesses, and compromises which underlie even the most pompous or ferocious of surfaces. It is a portrait which humanity readily recognises, and the kindliness of its satire is infinitely appealing. A good deal of Harold Lloyd's ^^ character goes into this portrayal, but there are sides of him which his film playing never reveal. And most dominant of these, it would seem to me from my analysis, is his peculiar cunning in any sort of conflict or difficulty. The alert eyes have at once the signs of frankness and inscrutability. The mouth is flexible, ready to assume a variety of expressions, and the face, when apparently in repose, shows, nevertheless, the readiness of this character to switch with alarming suddenness to an unexpected course. He " This face," says De Sola, " is diplomatic, observant, and full of a nervous vitality. In it, however, one finds nothing of the philosophical sadness of Chaplin." would strike in the least expected quarter like a good general, and there is enough inquisitiveness in him to discover just which that quarter is and where the weakness of his enemy lies. But with all this, I do not mean that Lloyd is pugnacious. He is far from that. His lips and eyes show the conciliatory type plainly. Although the mind is more practical than creative, there is no doubt he is possessed of some inventive ability, and is unusually resourceful. f~\f the eternal traits of human character present in his features, I would accent his analytic ability, his jealousy in emotional matters, his physical courage, and his level and sane mentality. He has a humour that is touched somewhat with irony, but is without conscious cruelty. His attitude and opinions towards the difficulties of existence are concerned with ways of overcoming them rather than discovering their sources and meaning. He is, in a word, not philosophical in type, but is, rather, objective and active. He is one, I deduce, to whom games requiring peculiar skill, and elements of a surprising nature, have a strong fascination. T_Je is good-hearted, though his sympathies are not particularly deep. A stoic himself, he can bear suffering so well as not to feel deeply the sufferings of others. There is something of a gambler's spirit revealed in his face. So sure is he of his own powers to extricate himself from a difficult predicament that he would gladly test his ability by taking chances. His code of action is an extremely simple one, and he is somewhat conventional, though adapting himself generally to the conventions of environment. He is tolerant, and can forgive anything that amuses or interests him, without condemning it. I mark his lack of self-consciousness and a freedom from sham which must naturally result from his own matterof-fact acceptance of himself. Only in his ingenuity would he find cause for self-esteem or vanity, and this would be of a harmless kind. He is somewhat domestic in type and requires a background of familiar thing? to feel completely happy.