Monkeyshines, No. 2

The second film of the three shot by W.K.L. Dickson and William Heise for the Edison Laboratories, again featuring G. Sacco Albanese. Here he is shown stretching and failing his arms in exaggerated movement, so that they new invention would be able to pick me up better. You can also see Albanese take off his hat towards the end.

There is a slight improvement upon the first Monkeyshines, but of course the quality is still very poor. Again not much of a film, but of important value to the history of film.

Again, it rates as a 2 out of 10, with its historical significance being its only redeeming quality.

Having made Monkeyshines No 1 earlier the same year and discovering it to have failed in capturing motion and photography in the way he had envisioned, inventor Thomas A. Edison sought to improve his Kinetograph to perfection by continuing to play with the invention. Thus, after more tampering and messing, the camera was ready for the next test, which resulted as the follow-up to the earlier Monkeyshines movie. Here, it is clear changes to the instrument proved successful: the body of Albanese (if that's him again--it almost half looks like a woman) is not as blurry, more detail can be sensed and the movement is much smoother and does not make the worker look as if he's changing shape constantly.

Yet, there was still work to do. The blurriness of the character was still apparent, and, what's more, the movement wasn't quite enough refined. Ultimately, these still unsatisfactory results led to yet a third experiment, remembered now as Monkeyshines No 3. The details of this third test are, unfortunately, unknown as it either no longer exists or is simply unrestored. Nevetheless, it was presumably after this third, apparently more improved short that Edison began testing movements in other ways: the slow, smooth movements of W. K. L. Dickson as he moved his hat from one hand to the next in greeting; the quick movements of a young Newark athlete as he swung Indian clubs; the swift movements of two so-called boxers as they throw punches at eachother. By the time these experiments came around, the camera had wonderfully improved--and after another year, the Edison company would finally be able to publicize the new fad for the first time in America.

While I'm at it, let's fully explain why this trilogy of experimental shorts was given the title of 'Monkeyshines'. Since these shorts were all mere camera tests, it's quite obvious they were never really given a title at all. Drawing these conclusions (and this is only a guess) let's assume the people of the Kino International company thought to put them on the movies begin set with a proper title and settled on calling them 'Monkeyshines' since the definition of this word translates to 'mischevious behavior' (the attitudes of which the factory worker shows in his comedic prancings before the Kinetographic lens). This would thus explain why the titles of the camera tests are put in brackets since they may never have had true titles. But this, of course, is merely an assumption and unless you're a film historian or a member of the company, we'll probably never be sure.

Monekyshines, No. 1 (1890)

Monkeyshines, No. 2 (1890)

These two films by Edison, as well as a third one I haven't seen, are believed to be the very first to be shot in the United States. None of the three were meant to be seen by the public as Edison was just trying to test the cylinder of the Kinetograph format. William K.L. Dickson and William Heise are created with trying this experiment in June of 1889 or the last week of November 1890, experts debate which date is correct. Needless to say, outside a historic level, there's nothing much here to see. A few images flicker in front of our eyes and on the whole I'd say No. 2 is better as we can actually see the figure. The first test is pretty brutal and hard to figure out exactly what you're looking at.

First of all, and how I say in summary title, this movie is first sequel of any movie in history of movies. And that what is not a rule and it is unusual for modern times is that the movie is better that original/first part.

We can see a little improvement in camera quality compared to 'Monkeyshines no1'. We can see a more details, but some details are still not visible (contours of face, more face details...).

It is not clear to me, is that same person from Monkeyshines No2? This person looks like a woman and I can't fully agree that person in G.Sacco Albanese.

I have an endearing respect for all these early attempts at filmaking and yet they do not all possess the same amount of interest. With Monkeyshines (whether Mos. 1 or 2) I hardly know what it is I am looking at. Though the image in No.2 is slightly more clearer.