Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

XoWizIama Excellent adaptation.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

bkoganbing Although John Barrymore was 44 when he played the role of Tirso DeMolina's famous libertine, the soft focus photography enabled to look years younger and really do a convincing job as the most famous seducer in fiction. In fact Barrymore plays two roles, the dashing cavalier Don Juan and his stern father who was cuckolded by his wife and imparted some cynical views on women to his young son in a prologue.When the main action of the film gets going it takes place in Rome when the Borgias were running things. Cesare Borgia played by Warner Oland and his evil sister Lucretia who has Estelle Taylor, then Mrs. Jack Dempsey playing her part. They're quite a pair, cruel and sadistic, and they've got a cousin played by Montagu Love who rivals Don Juan in the seducing department.Barrymore is ostensibly in Rome as a student, but he's way too busy with his female conquests for any academics. He and Love have their eyes on the same woman, Mary Astor, who is royalty herself, related to the Orsinis who the Borgias have kicked out of power. That rivalry is what fuels the plot of this film.Director Alan Crosland was obviously influenced by Cecil B. DeMille in directing this film. The sumptuous sets and even more the scenes of debauchery could be found in many a DeMille spectacle. And we don't get DeMille's moralizing with the film either.As for Barrymore he plays the part with the dash and verve of Douglas Fairbanks who later got to play Don Juan, but as a much older man in Faribanks's final film during the sound era. Note the dueling sequence with Love. Warner Brothers for whom this film was produced used some of the same bits in their sound version of The Adventures Of Don Juan with Errol Flynn.There is also a nice bit by Willard Louis as Barrymore's lackey, Pedrillo. Sad that he would die the same year as this film came out. He was quite amusing in the role.Still it's Barrymore's show and quite a show it is. Don Juan is a good chance to see a young John Barrymore at the zenith of his acting talent.

irearly Just saw this at The Paramount Theater in Seattle with Dennis James at the organ. This is an excellent example of what Hollywood was doing so well at the time. The costumes and sets were outstanding, the cast was incredible—Mary Astor was truly archetypal, ethereal and believable as the swooning heroine, Barrymore at his best as a swashbuckling ladies man. This is both a complex story of the "Don Juan" syndrome and a story of suffering and redemption. Several incredible sequences including the horse-mounted sword fighting between Barrymore and a horde of pursuing soldiers at the climax. After which Juan and Adriana head "east" (into the rising sun?) for the safety of Don Juan's native Spain. Don't let others dissuade you, if you get the chance see this movie!

rfells@icfa.org I appreciate the comments made so far on this film but most seem to judge this film in a vacuum and without any background on the silent film genre, a medium quite different from sound films. One commenter even criticized the film for being in black & white. Come now, that's rather silly.DON JUAN belongs to the great tradition of silent film swashbucklers during the 1920s of which Douglas Fairbanks was the King (and who self-financed his films). Beginning in 1920, Fairbanks effectively switched gears from his modern dress satires of American foibles he made during 1916 to 1919, to literally recreating his boyhood daydreams of being an action hero of Days of Old. The public responded enthusiastically and Doug made a fortune. But his films reaffirmed a kind of rigid moral system and both his character and the heroine were invariably chaste. Clearly, other film makers who were a bit more daring sensed an opportunity to go further than Fairbanks had been willing to go and Warner Bros. struck while the iron was hot in 1926 with DON JUAN.Compared to the Fairbanks films such as Three Musketeers (1921), Robin Hood (1922), Thief of Bagdad (1924), and Don Q, Son of Zorro (1925), which are to this day excellent films, DON JUAN seemed like a revelation with its sexually overt protagonist and equally overt female characters (when Lucretia Borgia first sees Don Juan, a close up shows her clearly eyeing his crotch!). In addition, John Barrymore (aided occasionally by a stunt double) provided a sufficient number of athletic stunts that would satisfy most Fairbanks fans. DON JUAN was and remains a most exhilarating film with a unique conclusion that combines a chain reaction of swashbuckling events.I must take exception to the most recent commenter's claim that actor Willard Louis, who played Juan's servant Pedrillo, died mid-point in filming. Poor Mr. Louis indeed perished from typhoid fever but either after filming had been completed or at least after his work was completed. He appears throughout the film and his presence during the film's final moments would have been unnecessary. However, if the previous reviewer wanted to question Joseph Swickard's disappearance from the film (he played Mary Astor's father), I would agree that his sudden departure from the story was strange. However, Mr. Swickard lived and appeared in films for many more years so perhaps in DON JUAN he was merely the victim of the film editor who needed to tighten up the story. At any rate, it is a great film and the original Vitaphone music score interprets the action so well that all the young composers who are hired by Turner Classic Movies to provide new scores to silent films ought to be required to see - and hear - DON JUAN to fully comprehend the relationship between silent film and its musical accompaniment.

patherto I enjoyed "Don Juan" as the first feature-length film with a soundtrack, but I just can't see how the sound could have been recorded simultaneously with the film. There's simply too many cuts, and the sound is too closely in sync, for it to be possible that the orchestra could play while filming was going on. It must have been dubbed afterward—and as a lover of early sound film I am wondering just how. Did they set up a projector at Carnegie Hall and record there? I know Warners had a studio in New York—was it big enough for a complete orchestra? I also noticed that, while the synchronization was quite good, they couldn't pull off the sword fight. For the most part the fight shows the two men separately slashing away, and only a few scenes show the fight as it would usually be done, with both actors in frame. An enjoyable film, a tad longer than it needed to be, and the hisssssss of the soundtrack gets on one's nerves after a while.