A Corner in Wheat

Early film of "social relevance" directed by D.W. Griffith. It's a little difficult to follow - apparently, Mr. Griffith is showing the contrast between the wealthy "Wheat King" (played by Frank Powell) and the poor "Farmer" (played by James Kirkwood). The farmer does the manual work, laboring in the fields. The wealth businessman reaps the profits, in luxury. In the film, Mr. Powell's character becomes more and more greedy, making the price of goods so high the poor farmers can't afford the goods they helped create. Of the supporting players, Henry B. Walthall is most impressive as Kirkwood's associate. Griffith mixes location and set nicely. Watch the wicked "Wheat King" meet a pitiful, ironic end.

****** A Corner in Wheat (12/13/09) D.W. Griffith ~ Frank Powell, James Kirkwood, Henry B. Walthall

(Note: This is the first of three short films by D.W. Griffith that I care to highlight by commenting on them. The others are "The Girl and Her Trust" and "The Battle at Elderbush Gulch".)

D.W. Griffith usually made only three types of films: melodramas, social commentary and suspense (usually either battle scenes or the last-minute rescue, or both). His features often contain all three genres. His films were often set during the Victorian age or the Civil War era, or some other turning point in American history. His films of modern setting drip of Victorian sentiments. Mostly, his films were theatrical (the stories, interior shots and acting, most consistently). Griffith's films are categorical because he, apparently, rarely used scripts and was the rare filmmaker that interacted with the scenarists, and thus invented the role of director.

"A Corner in Wheat" is simple: it is social commentary. Based on a Frank Norris story, the anti-monopoly narrative fits with a recurrent theme of Griffith's films--sympathy for the poor. (It's rather hypocritical, however, considering that Griffith worked for a member of the Motion Picture Patents Company.) The story, albeit better than its contemporaries, is not of much interest, or, rather, is not why I highlighted this short film.

In 1903, Edwin S. Porter crosscut scenes out of temporal order in "The Great Train Robbery". Parallel-action crosscutting as dissection of a scene with spatially separate actions appeared as early as 1907 in Pathé and Vitagraph films. The crosscutting in "A Corner in Wheat" is exceptional because it functions as contrast between the wheat magnate's dinner party and the wheat farmers not being able to afford bread at a market. I'm not sure who helped Griffith with the editing, but it was probably James Smith, as usual. The parallel editing is appropriately slow paced, so again in the comeuppance dénouement. As well, the final shot was a good attempt at poignancy. The rest of the photoplay, especially the camera positioning, is primitive.

For the cinematic limitations of its time, there are some good techniques in this short drama. The story, which is about a ruthless man trying to control the wheat market, is interesting though often heavy-handed - but it's the way it is filmed that makes it of interest. The actual story is preceded by a look at farmers growing wheat, and it includes a nicely planned shot of the sowers going back and forth, in a way that cleverly gets around the fixed camera limitations of the time. The main story shows good technique as well, using well-conceived cross-cutting to emphasize the differences between the world of those who rely on the wheat and the world of those who profit from it. It has an effective closing shot, too. It's pretty good drama and an interesting example of how these very old films were made.

A Corner In Wheat (1909) : Brief Review :

D W Griffith's parallels with social commentary on two opposite and inevitable corners of the society. The unavoidable fact of the society was, is and will be that, 'The Rich gets richer and The Poor gets even worse' and unfortunately the world doesn't seems to be bothered by the idea of changing this equation. D W Griffith, who has always showm sympathetic approach to the poor people in his film with one constant condition that the character has to have good and kind Nature, have used the same formula but it was far before he used it in his most popular films made years later. A Corner In Wheat is about an Alan unscrupulous and greedy capitalist speculator decides to corner the wheat market for his own profit, establishing complete control over the markets and destroys the lives of poor people. The film showcases two opposite and different corners of the society, the rich and the poor, dealing with different consequences of the same issue and at the same time. This idea of parallel narrative was loved by audience after 50s but who knew that Griffith did it almost 4 decades ago. Watch out for the scenes when he shows the rich people partying and wasting foods and drinks and on the side we see poor and hungry people in que for food and not getting it. Such a heartbreaking scene it was. And the last frame when the poor man is crying and seeding at the time, what a wonderful thing it was. Hats off to D W Griffith and his imaginative brain which was running far ahead of its time and unfortunately we didn't born in his era to experience his brilliance. Whoever is fan of the cinematic genius called Griffith just can't miss this Short flick. Don't take the rating too seriously as it is purely systematic because films made 10 decades ago just cannot be measured with modern strips. A Must See!

RATING - 7/10*

By - #samthebestest

Corner in Wheat, A (1909)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

One of D.W. Griffith's best shorts. This one deals with an evil tycoon who makes the price of wheat go up for his own profit but by doing this is causes the poor to suffer. Here's another film where Griffith takes out his anger of being poor and he hits all the right notes making this a high energy and downright dirty tale. The way Griffith shows the poor is wonderfully done and the ending is great as well. Of historical importance, this was the first film to get reviewed in a NY newspaper, which also makes the historians believe that this was the first film reviewed anywhere in the world. Films were discussed in papers before this one but this was the first to actually get its own review.