Wid's Films and Film Folk (1916)

Thursday, June 1, 1916. the brother comes too. In a weak moment he confesses his love to the wife, the husband overhears, misunderstands and orders his wife from the house. She takes to the stage and secures a part in which she enacts the real story of her life. Her husband sees the play, understands the true situation and there is a happy reunion. As the brother from Australia, Carlyle Blackwell is acceptable, but not particularly forceful. Paul Mc-Allister, as the factory owner-husband, has some big scenes and handles them beautifully. In advertising this offering I would make a lot of fuss about Ethel: Clayton. Her recent successes, such as “Dollars and the Woman” have established her as one of the greatest stars of the screen in WID'S emctional roles and I am sure that you can make no mistake by emphasizing her presence. in this is fine enough to make the film, without considering anything else. You mav also promise some wonderful snow scenes because some of the bits in this are exceptionally artistic. Two scenes of Miss Clayton at a snow covered window are particularly beautiful ana her expressions in these two get over a very important point without any sub-titles. There is a very good runaway and there are a number of scenes which are distinctive enough to make the film very much worth while. For a good catch line in advertising this offering you might ask, “Do you know a good woman when you see her?” Her work © DISCONNECTED MELO, VERY WELL PLAYED, WITH EMPHATIC MELO TITLES Robert B. Mantell and Genevieve Hamper in THE SPIDER AND THE FLY Fox Film DURE Gil © Rave nes ee eee J. Gordon Edwards SOI Ne Nie eo... a Franklin B. Coates CAMERAMAN ©. o.<i.0... ..\. See ee Phil Rosen ASPAuWHOLEE seen ee Disconnected “melo” STORY. 2.56 cee. te cle cates « Had good spots DIRECTION. ..¢....°-... ee Very good PHOTOGRAPHY =. ....... seers ae Good LIGHAINGS Sora. ce oe Too strong at times CAMERA WORK |... .... ee Good STARS kirike eas feo.> ere ee Good SUPPORT fe... Pol: ee Very good EXTERIORS: 92....0:.:.. See ee -Good INTERIORS) 2025...0055.. :. ie ees Good TA as cet ak ssn + «ee Very good DEEN GT es oes «oc nce 8 +, ei eee Five parts T is the work of the principals as well as that of the stars and the splendid use of the cut-and-flash technique which will make this a successful offering. The story is very melodramatic, and it is burdened with scores of very long and very emphatic melodramatic titles, which will register big with some audiences and seem funny to others. _ There is plenty of incident in this offering but the incidents are decidedly disconnected and this jars quite a bit, taking away decidedly from the effect of the whole. The frequent appearance of titles coveririg lapses of time, “A week later,” “A few weeks later’ and “Six months later,’ made necessary by the jumps of the story interfered rather seriously with the offering because these finally became rather funny. They were laughed at towards the later part of the offering by the audience which sat in when I saw the film. We certainly have some good dramatic work on the part of Miss Hamper and Mr. Mantell, Miss Hamper being beautiful as always and there being a few scenes where Mr. Mantell had very good opportunities. 620 The supporting cast was particularly good, the — work of Stuart Holmes being distinctive and tre mendously impressive at all times, with Claire Whit ney, Walter Miller and Little Jane Lee registering © some very good moments. As a sample of the excellence of the cutting in this film and the splendid use of the cut-and-flash technique, | might mention the fact that there was one time where Mr. Edwards had two women close up in a scene, which was rather dramatic, and he cut from this closeup to a long shot of Miss Hamper pulling a bell-rope to summon a servant and then he cut back immediately to the closeup, the long” shot used being only about a two or three-foot flash. I consider this splendid cutting for tempo because © is ao SD it was only necessary to show the long shot just © long enough to get over the point. through most of the scene, and consequently lost most of the dramatic value of the expressions of the two characters. Many directors — in making this scene would have used the long shot | It is a question as to the advisability of the use — of titles as strongly worded as these were because, © while the extravagant phrasing will appeal forcefully — with some audiences, it will jar badly with others. We have a lot of “sex” stuff and wickedness in this, but Mr. Fox has covered over this part of the offering by putting in a repentent touch at the finish by several titles which tell of the glory of the repentent sinner and consequently there can be no objection on the part of the censors. This is the second time that Mr. Fox has offered us “sex” stuff sugar-coated, the last time being the case where he had some pretty raw stuff covered over by a scenario which brought it ’round: as a dream on the finish. Except for the fact that this story is decidedly © disconnected, | would say that this offering would — undoubtedly register as quite ‘‘worth-while.” It surely has plenty of action and a very capable cast. It holds the interest all the way and for those who like melodrama it is a very good offering. With audiences which do not care for ‘‘sex” stuff and violent melodrama this will not appeal. Others in the cast were Stephen Grattan, Will Gerard, Henri Leone, Franklin B. Coates, Genevieve Blinn, Ethel Mantell and Louise Rial. PRS OK 2 ee ated mw ites pb s