Wid's Films and Film Folk (1916)

Thursday, June 1, 1916. WIDS GOOD PRODUCTION OF FINE IDEA KILLED BY AWFUL TITLES Walter McGrail and Leah Baird in THE LIGHTS OF NEW YORK Vitagraph—V. L. S. E. DIRECTOR Win . nis sre eters wr Van Dyke Brooke AUTHORZ62 Ss coc) ace cen Charles L. Gaskill CAMERA’ MAN....2....:... depen ce Max Held AS A WHOLE... ccc... «cme Killed by titles STOR Yee ee ot eee: ee Good central idea DIRECTION)... 0c... eee Good PHOTOGRAPHY 9.0.0.0. .:. Sater eet: ate ete > Good LIGHTINGS) 3). 6. sss. eee Good and fair CAMERA, WORK *2) i ..:). .ciemeteels ote eel Good STARS eo... vos. bcsturs. ss.» \ ene Very good SUPPORT. ..25¢%. ia. Gh. is) Se Oe ee Good EXTERIORS 4.00.6 cae ooo. ee Acceptable INTERIORS. 3... 000.843): -. SR een ee: Good DETAIL: . ois. ckis ee os). Be: Good LENG THe, ol igh td he Ss ee Five parts HIS is one of the most painful examples I have ever seen of the terrible things that a bad editor can do to a fairly good film. This production has a very good cen tral idea. It has been rather well pro duced and well enough acted to make it register as quite “worth-while.” It has been positively ruined by the titles because these have been burdened with some of: the most painful melodramatic ‘Laura Jean Libbey” phrases that I have ever seen on the screen. The central thought of this story had to do with the manner in which idle society women in New York carelessly accept the atttentions of clever, good-looking strangers whom they meet in cabarets, This condition is certainly a true one and it has been particularly well presented in this offering, except for the fact that it has been dragged into_a little too much footage. The film would have been a very good production, however, if it had been intelligently edited and titled. As a sample of the awful wording of some of the titles in this I will give you the finish of one which was telling of the determination of a young woman to go to a cabaret despite the fact that her mother did not want her to. After several lines getting over that information, the title finished: ; Oh, the will of a woman is woeful when she knows not the wiles of the wicked.” There were scores of titles almost as bad as this, as to the wording, all through this offering, -they being so numerous that I got tired trying to remember them, so I just marked down the one and let it go at that. In fact, the titles are bad enough that it almost sounds as if they were intended for comedy. Walter McGrail, as Hawk, a young crook who decided to become a gentleman crook when he saw how easy it was to “separate” the: women in the cabarets who trusted so implicitly the strange young men they might accidentally meet, gave an exeptionally impressive and convincing performance. His characterization in this production marks him as a man who can do this sort of thing and do it particularly well. Leah Baird, as the young heiress who had been brought up in a quiet home only to later become the victim of this polished crook, did very well with her part. Adele De Garde, as the step-sister of the crook, was rather pleasing, although too much prominence was given to her scenes. The other members of the cast were acceptable. In a number of places better editing would have helped this offering, as to the assembling of scenes and better arrangement for tempo, but it can truthfully be said that without the cutting of any of the scenes this offering would have been quite a satisfactory production and one that would be interesting because of the central thought, had the rice been human. I have seen in my time, many bad titles, but never before have I seen one film filled with so many bad ones as this one is. Don Cameron, as the good young hero who wanted to marry Miss Baird, was quite painful. He was stilted and conscious of the camera and decidedly unimpressive. His work in this character made the part of the crook seem truly that of a hero. Others in the cast were Arthur Cozine, Blow, Agnes Cameron and Edwina Robbins. Leila SPLENDID MYSTERY MATERIAL ONLY FAIRLY PRODUCED AND EDITED Sheldon Lewis in THE PURSUING VENGEANCE Unity-Sales—State Rights DIRECTORS 2S. 3. a.lscccck.. . eee Martin Sabine AUT UO Rita ee, cc ess Burton E. Stevenson CAMERA MAN =...:.......... eee Mr. Brown AS-A WHOLE ..)....:.:..... ee Interesting STORY rdeshtie sett nd: se Good mystery stuff DIRECTION) ..0.222....0..... ee Mery ordinary PHOTOGRAPHY .......:... ae eee Fair LIGHTINGS «. .3.4..5.30.3.... eee Poor CAMERA WORK. ........... Ree Ordinary STARs eth face ¥e ced... .. ar Very good SUPPORT? 2... o52..00-2-:2.. oe Ordinary EXTERIORS ..e2hs0.0..:.... ae Acceptable INTERIORS &).).00.0:.. i... ee Fair DETAIL G2. oa... ...-.... oe Mysterious LENGTH seo Gisisie ems oss... Five parts HIS is a rather good mystery subject because of a story which has a number of unusual situations, the feature having been produced from a successful novel written by Mr. Stevenson. Sheldon Lewis, as a master-criminal, is a distinctive figure and works with an ease which is decidedly impressive. The support ing cast was quite ordinary, many of them being rather amateurish. None of the supporting cast were distinctive and some of them marred the performance because of their stilted work. The productiog was badly edited and poorly titled, with the result that many of the situations were not nearly so forceful as they would have been had the film been assembled better. There were too few close-ups and practically no use of the cut-and-flash method in putting over the more important dramatic situations. The produc 612 PPR BION ys e 4