#Maurice Elvey

[gatutor]

Diana Dors-Dominic Roche "My wife´s lodger" 1952, de Maurice Elvey.

[auxoubliettes]

The Late Edwina Black, dir. Maurice Elvey (1951)

[schlock-luster-video]

On May 21, 1922, The Devil's Foot debuted in New York City.

[letterboxd-loggd]

The Clairvoyant (1935) Maurice Elvey

April 15th 2022

[margotfonteyns]

Mill workers clocking off - Hindle Wakes (1927)

[thisobscuredesireforbeauty]

High Treason (Dir.  Maurice Elvey, 1929).

[hjfoley]

Nelson;The Story of England’s Immortal Naval Hero 1918 Timed to bolster public morale at the end of the Great War, Maurice Elvey’s biopic of Nelson frequently steps out of its period setting to give us historical background or contemporary relevance.

[veidtveidtveidt]

The Wandering Jew (1933)

And a happy 125th birthday to Hans Walter Conrad Veidt! Hope you’re all celebrating it accordingly by watching/reading/creating something with him in :)

I’ve just added a new, HD version of The Wandering Jew to the masterpost. 1.6 GB .mkv, 720p. And *effusive* thanks to my long-suffering friend @versaphile for bringing this treasure to us. Unseen, previously censored Veidt--scenes no one has seen since the 30s--with him doing what he does best: being a devil and a saint at the same time! And in HD at that!

But! My fellow Veidt fans! Don’t delete the earlier copy you’ve got, because it’s a bit complicated: while the HD version is 24 minutes longer and includes entire characters and scenes that were cut out of the older version, the older copy we have has several lines and bits that are missing in the HD version! So if you want All The Connies (and you should, as it’s one of his most amazing performances ever with a massive load of range and and and), I suggest you watch the older copy first and then the HD version to know what the characters are saying. Because in the HD version, the censors, for some bizarre reason, didn’t cut out blasphemous bits (the way they’re cut in the older rip, like him laughing maniacally at a crucifix for two minutes there), but they cut out lines referring to murder.. mid-dialogue. So, for example, the scene where Gianella says something like “were you to kill me now, I should still be with Him” becomes something like “Were-[ABRUPT CUT]-I should still be with Him”--even if, bizarrely, we can *clearly* see he’s holding a dagger to her back! Likewise, when Matathias tells his servant that he shouldn’t like even the knight’s death to disturb him, the word “death” is cut out. And then when he sprawls really obnoxiously on the bed, we don’t see the full obnoxiousness... and they’ve cut out some really beautiful body acting from Connie all over the place. Like this bit where he pounces out of his seat and creeps towards the door like a panther, and this bit where he slowly turns his head to glare at the Spanish Inquisition--the entire turn is missing (and it seems like they use entirely different takes in the trial scene anyway).

So, *exhales*, I suggest you keep both copies, watch the older/shorter/ropier one first, and then compare. Here’s a link to the original E. Temple Thurston play (the least censored edition I could find), to help you figure out what goes where.

Anyway, enjoy!

[filmforfancy]

[aikainkauna]

(HQ)

[gatutor]

Cartel película "Luna de miel agitada" (Is your honeymoon really necessary?) 1953, de Maurice Elvey.

[seen-said]

Most Prolific Filmmakers*

Masahiro Makino (1908-1993) 260

Wui Ng (1913-1996) 212

Sam Newfield (1899-1964) 208

Jess Franco (1930-2013) 195

Maurice Elvey (1887-1967) 179

William Beaudine (1892-1970) 178

Michael Curtiz (1888-1962) 169

J.P. McGowan (1880-1952) 161

Wong Tin-lam (1928-2010) 138

Allan Dwan (1885-1981) 136

Phil Rosen (1888-1951) 135

Lesley Selander (1900-1979) 134

Chow Sze-luk (1907-1964) 130

George Archainbaud (1890-1959) 129

Chor Yuen (1934-) 124

Raoul Walsh (1887-1980) 120

Teinosuke Kinugasa (1896-1982) 119

Christy Cabanne (1888-1950) 119

Frank McDonald (1899-1980) 119

Joseph Kane (1894-1975) 116

*By approximate number of feature-length films 

From the “Trivial Top 20″ in the Jan/Feb 2016 Film Comment

[moviessilently]

Eille Norwood’s acclaimed take on Sherlock Holmes is the subject of today’s review. The mystery? A well-to-do businessman is seemingly murdered by a beggar and Sherlock Holmes is called in to discover the truth. In spite of its dark premise, this is one of the lighter stories in the Holmes canon.

Home Media Availability: Released on DVD.

Sponge bath.

In our last exciting episode, we took a look at the very first authorized film adaptation of Sherlock Holmes, the unintentionally hilarious French version of The Copper Beeches. (And, as a gentle reminder, the hilarious acting of that 1912 film is not typical for that year. There’s no need to be polite, Sherlockians, go ahead and guffaw.) Holmes author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle reobtained the film rights to his character and decided to try again with a new motion picture company. This time, Doyle opted to stay with the British and Stoll Pictures won the right to produce the Sherlock Holmes series.

Most of the series was directed by British film pioneer Maurice Elvey (who, among other claims to fame, was a mentor and inspiration to David Lean) and it starred Eille Norwood. Norwood’s performance as Holmes has been acclaimed as the best the silent screen has to offer. In fact, Doyle himself was counted among the fans of his portrayal. If the original author’s stamp of approval is anything to go by, Norwood can lay claim to the title of most authentic Holmes.

Holmes and Watson are on the case.

The big questions will be whether or not Norwood lives up to the hype and how successful this adaptation is in capturing the spirit of the world of Sherlock Holmes. Let’s get started!

Sherlock Holmes (Norwood) is working a new case and he explains the particulars to Dr. Watson (Hubert Willis). Nellie St. Clair (Paulette del Baze) has reason to believe that her husband, Neville (Robert Vallis) has been kidnapped or murdered by sinister forces. The respectable businessman left for his office as usual, taking along one of the children’s toys to be repaired.

The face in the window.

Later, Mrs. St. Clair spotted her husband in the upper room of an opium den, obviously in some kind of distress. She was barred from entering but fetched the police. Inside, they found a beggar with a twisted lip and the toy her husband was supposed to repair. To make matters even more dire, Neville St. Clair’s coat was recovered from the river. The pockets had been stuffed with pennies to make it sink.

It seems that St. Clair has fallen victim to some form of foul play and his wife is understandably in search of answers. The beggar has been arrested, of course, but he has not yet told the police why he possessed some of the victims belongings and then there is the matter of the coat. With all sorts of heavy objects handy, why would money have been used as a weight to make it sink?

The solution to the mystery lies in a sponge bath.

I won’t give away the ending of The Man with the Twisted Lip other than to say that the film generally follows the original short story with a few minor changes. I will only say that this is one of the lighter tales in the Holmes canon, in spite of its dark beginning.

Elvey’s direction neatly captures the dank qualities of the seedy side of town and some of the shots of Mrs. St. Clair walking around the dimly lit streets are quite beautiful. In general, Elvey and cinematographer Germain Burger have fun with light and shadow, from the fireplace glow of 221B Baker Street to the harsh electric bulbs of the jail cell. It’s very stylish and organic. In fact, the whole picture has a Masterpiece Theater feel, if that makes any sense. We feel like we are in capable and very polite hands.

A disguised Holmes has some ‘splaining to do.

One complaint, if it can be described as such. The film begins with a series of dialogue title cards. No context or other visuals are given, we are merely shown a conversation between Holmes and Watson in intertitle form. I’m not sure if this was the original intention (it would have made the film cheaper) or if this was done by an editor or amateur collector to reduce the film’s length or to censor it. Whatever the reason, it is a very strange and jarring way to start an otherwise well-made film.

These are the only images in the opening scene:

Now for Norwood. Like Richard III, the character of Holmes tends to bring out the Hamosaurus rex in actors. Sometimes it works (Jeremy Brett) and sometimes it doesn’t (the Éclair films). There are some amazing Holmes performances, to be sure, but all too often, Holmes actors merely run about shrieking that the game is afoot or purr that the matter is elementary, my dear Watson. In short, what we think of a normal Sherlock Holmes behavior teeters dangerously on the edge of self-parody. Norwood is one of the few Holmes actors to underplay and that is one of the secrets to his appeal.

While he does not abandon the cerebral aspects of the character, Norwood allows himself some warmth, which also sets his performance apart from the more frigid (and frequently rude) standard issue Holmes. His Holmes is more lost in thought but generally a good guy, which is a welcome change from more modern portrayals that have Holmes’ unconventional behavior become downright cruel.

A nicer kind of Holmes.

The idea of Holmes as an abrupt jerk has become more and more stylish (not without reason as the character in the books could be quite brusque) but Norwood does not shy awau from positive emotions, which is relatively rare in any sort of genre hero these days, it seems. And while Holmes is sometimes shown to be nearly Vulcan in his seriousness, Norwood treats the twist ending of this mystery with considerable humor.

Any portrayal of Sherlock Holmes risks falling into cliché but the Stoll series presents him as a fully-rounded human being.

Holmes is on the case.

All in all, the Stoll Sherlock Holmes series really captures the spirit and feel of its source material and deserves its acclaim. It’s a shame that more films in this series are not available to the general public as both Elvey and Norwood could use a little more love from film fans.

Where can I see it?

The Man with the Twisted Lip was released on DVD from Grapevine, along with two other entries in the Stoll series.

The Man with the Twisted Lip (1921) A Silent Film Review Eille Norwood’s acclaimed take on Sherlock Holmes is the subject of today’s review. The mystery? A well-to-do businessman is seemingly murdered by a beggar and Sherlock Holmes is called in to discover the truth.

[filmforfancy]

Conrad Veidt on the cover of Mon Ciné (March 8th, 1934) for The Wandering Jew (1933) dir. Maurice Elvey.

[gatutor]

Diana Dors-David Tomlinson "Luna de miel agitada" (If your honeymoon really necessary?) 1953, de Maurice Elvey.