The Film Daily (1921)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

Sunday, January 9, 1921 sfe^ DAILY 17 Below the Average. Doesn't Entertain H. B. Warner in "WHEN WE WERE TWENTY-ONE" Jesse D. Hampton — Pathe DIRECTOR Henry King AUTHOR H. V. Esmond SCENARIO BY Not credited CAMERAMAN Victor Milner AS A WHOLE Commonplace production given to adaptation of stage play; never comes near being entertaining STORY All real "movie" type situations that don't boast of even an original twist DIRECTION Very ordinary PHOTOGRAPHY All right LIGHTINGS •• Satisfactory CAMERA WORK Average STAR Isn't called upon for very much SUPPORT Christine Mayo unconvincing vamp; Claire Anderson seemed lost and others just act their parts without registering anything unusual EXTERIORS None INTERIORS All that are required DETAIL , Fair CHARACTER OF STORY Youth who jilts fiancee for vamp LENGTH OF PRODUCTION About 5,000 feet Nat Goodwin may have been successful in the stage play of "When We Were Twenty-One," but it's a matter of some doubt whether or not H. B. Warner will gain much for himself through his picture of this play. But this isn't to say that it's Warner's fault. He does all that is required of him in the part of the guardian who tries, unsuccessfully, to manage a young man of twenty-one who is "sowing his wild oats." But those who had the actual production on their hands have not made a picture that entertains. It is hopelessly dull and it's typically "movie" formula has been maintained to the letter. No effort has been made inject a little originality and the cut-and-dried mercenery vampire plus innocent youth and jilted sweet■ heart plot is retold without the slightest new twist. Henry King is capable of much better things than this. His handling of the cast is, at times, noticeably lax. There are three characters, men, called the '"Trinity." They are seen running on and off and occasionally they are noted "registering," by a shrug of the shoulder or nod of the head. The principal characters other than the star just go through the requirements of the role but that's all. Dick Carewe seems to be more than anxious that Phyllis marry his ward, Richard Audaine, knicknamed the "Imp." Phyllis really loves Dick but agrees to marry the Imp because she thinks it will please Dick. But the "Imp" is just twenty -one and "sowing his wild oats." He is enfatuated with Kara, a vamp who believes the youth is rich and when in a drunken state he asks Kara to marry him she accepts. The Imp returns home and the next morning Phyllis finds a note from Kara which she believes is meant for Dick. For the time being and for the sake of covering up the Imp Dick admits he is to marry Kara but when the Imp is approached he insists that he loves Kara. Then Dick plans another way to "save" his ward. He agrees to pay Kara a sum of money to make it appear that he (Dick) is in love with her. But in the meantime the vamp has married the youth and Dick's plan fall through. Then Phyllis finds out that the note was intended for the Imp. And she isn't a bit sorry because she loves Dick and eventually tells him so. Kara then learns that her youthful husband has no money in his own name and so she goes off with an old admirer who has just made a lot of money and the Imp seeks Dick's forgiveness. Star's Name May Help But Don't Promise Anything Box Office Analysis for the Exhibitor The fact that this is the screen adaptation of a stage play in which Nat Goodwin made quite a hit may make it worth while playing, but the production provided is so ordinary and the acting generally so commonplace that it will not satisfy in the better class houses. If you cater to a cheaper class of picture patrons, the downtown houses, then you will most likely get away with it well enough. It's the sort of picture formula that appeals to them. Catchlines will let them know what to expect, so unless you would rather let them come in and then find out, you could say: "He was twenty-one and sowing his wild oats. See how the love of a pure young girl was sacrificed by a youth who got in with the wrong society." Or, "All the older men said: 'Too bad we didn't meet a girl like her 'When We Were Twenty-One,' but the youth who did meet her threw away the chance."