Artivels Undescribable Perfection

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

GManfred Period piece based on the novel by George Eliot. And what a period piece it is! MGM must have spent a ton of money recreating the costumes, atmosphere and architecture of 15th century Florence. The detail is meticulous and lends the feeling of a modern production taking place 6 centuries ago. I have not read the book but I wonder if it reads better than it translates to the big screen. The film is long - longer than most films of the silent era, and at times tends toward tedium. In fact, it is downright dull in spots, and those spots overtake those of interest. Makes you think it could have a used a little heavier hand in the cutting room. The cast is excellent, and once again William Powell plays the villain of the piece and steals the show. The Gish sisters never looked more attractive, especially Dorothy. Ronald Colman was stalwart but overshadowed by Powell. On whole, it is entertaining and sumptuously mounted but be aware of above-mentioned lapses in the narrative.7/10 - The website no longer prints my star rating.

Steffi_P Adaptations of novels made up a large proportion of motion pictures in the 20s, as the medium of cinema began to see itself as continually more prestigious and legitimate. The trouble is they were still figuring things out when it came to translating from one narrative form to another. Romola is taken from a novel by the brilliant 19th century author George Elliot, and her work is typically rich in character detail and interwoven subplot. However this movie version pares the story down to a basic melodrama, with a handful of simple characters flitting from one plot point to the next. As if to compensate, the action is peppered with lengthy title cards, which while they preserve little snatches of the original text, break up the flow of visual storytelling.But all is not lost. The language of images was well developed in Hollywood. Romola's director is Henry King – not a well-remembered figure, although he ought to be. King's shots are consistently stylish, and he has a good handling of space and framing. Take for example when Dorothy Gish is abandoned amid the festivities after her sham wedding. We see a close-up of her, distraught, while the dancing revellers around her make a wild, blurry backdrop – far more effective than some expressionistic process shot, because it is realistic as well as evocative of mood. But what was really King's greatest strength at this point was the slow, methodical performing he encouraged from his cast. It is this that really brings out all those layers of character that are missing from the screenplay. Look at the scene in which Lillian Gish gives the ring to her father to examine. The camera is simply held in mid-shot as the old man turns it over in his hands, and so much more comes out of that moment as a result. And the strength of the mise-en-scene is proved as for some key scenes those pesky intertitles disappear altogether – such as when Powell proposes to Lillian. It's a pity so few directors these days are bold enough to simply performances play out like that.And this approach really suits star Lillian Gish. After parting ways with her old mentor D.W. Griffith she briefly formed a production company with King and, while it's rarely acknowledged, she did some of her best work with in their handful of pictures together. In an age when overt mugging and gesture were the norm, Gish is beautifully subtle, the emotions drifting across her face like clouds across the sun. The villainous turn from William Powell is also nicely understated. Powell is probably better remembered for the series of jolly father-figures he played in the sound era, but as a young man his thin lips and piercing eyes marked him down a bad guy. But here he refuses to live up to the stereotype, portraying Tito as a villain by his deeds and not by his mannerisms. There are some nice touches from even the smallest parts in Romola, and it is generally very well cast. The only disappointment is ironically Gish's younger sister Dorothy, who up to this point had mainly been confined to comedy shorts. She seems never to have learnt the subtlety that Lillian mastered, and for someone designated a comedienne she isn't actually very good at being funny either.There was never really much hope that this production could capture the depth or sensitivity of a George Elliot novel, but it at least has a grace of its own that is very cinematic. If its makers had only cut down further on text and allowed the images and performers even more free reign, they would have moved it further from text-based narrative but they would also have captured just a little more of the spirit of the original. After all, well-written prose should conjure up strong images in the mind of a reader, and visual storytelling is not necessarily contrary to telling stories with words.

wes-connors In Florence, Italy, during the Renaissance, Lillian Gish (as Romola) lives with her blind father Bonaventura Ibáñez (as Bardo Bardi), who is a friend of Savonarola, Michelangelo, and Leonardo da Vinci. Although they are not too wealthy, the Bardis have one of the world's best libraries. Young sculptor Ronald Colman (as Carlo Bucellini) is interested in the lovely Lillian, but she is interested in more scholarly pursuits; this makes her an easy mark for shipwrecked sham scholar William Powell (as Tito Melema). Before Mr. Powell cleans up for his meeting with Lillian, he meets simple street maid Dorothy Gish (as Tessa). Dorothy is quite taken with the dashing Powell; then, so is Lillian. Can he marry them both? Henry King's "Romola" makes a fine silent film, thanks to lavish location production values, and a winning cast. The title notwithstanding, the film focuses on the intermarrying three characters played by Lillian Gish, William Powell, and Dorothy Gish. Close to the film's end, the three have some great on screen conflict time together; and, Lillian performs a cathartic moment exceptionally well. An exciting ending follows. Curiously, Powell's "Tito" character seems to be the story's main protagonist, arguably, until the end; surely, the original George Eliot novel was more focused on "Romola".

brian-40 I guess this isn't an awful film, but after recently viewing it, I was struck by how it really needed that Griffith touch. Especially since the script was something Griffith would have done. But they missed out on any chance for true suspense by neglecting everything they should have learned from Griffith about climactic cross-cutting.Wow...I feel like I'm turning into a film geek or something. (I guess I like Griffith more than I thought...or I've just seen too many of his films.)Anyway, if you want to see a movie worth watching with the Sisters Gish (and who doesn't??), watch (or re-watch) Orphans of the Storm. View this only as a comparison as to why Griffith was truly a master.