Forfaiture

A venal, spoiled stockbroker's wife (Fannie Ward) impulsively embezzles $10,000 from the Red Cross charity she chairs and desperately turns to a Burmese ivory trader (Sessue Hayakawa) to replace the stolen money.

So upon release, the lead actor was playing a Japanese man... but this version has since been lost. The change of the character's name and nationality were done because Japan was an American ally at the time. Robert Birchard, author of the book Cecil B. DeMille's Hollywood, surmised that the character's nationality was changed to Burmese because there were "not enough Burmese in the country to raise a credible protest." You might think they would celebrate having an Asian actor, but I guess not.

Allegedly the film cost $16,540 to make, and grossed $137,364. By today's standards, that may not be much. But in those days it was a small fortune. Think of it: it was almost enough to finance ten more films. Sounds like the gift that keeps on giving, and no doubt lead to DeMille getting bigger and bigger.

Even those who have never seen this rather lurid film will probably be aware of the infamous 'branding' scene. Indeed this particular scene and the shooting that ensues still pack a punch over a century later. This is mainly due to the superlative 'noirish' cinematography of Cecil B DeMille regular Alvin Wyckoff whilst the films distinctly 'modern' look is courtesy of Art Director Wilfred Buckland.

It is alas the far from modern style of acting from leading lady Fannie Ward that weakens the film. This is essentially a vehicle for Miss Ward who has come straight from the stage. Neither she nor the director have made the slightest attempt to adjust her performance for the camera and not only is she too long in the tooth for the part, her histrionics resemble a grotesque parody of Victorian melodrama. This is in stark contrast to the minimalist acting of Sessue Hayakawa as a seedy, sinister ivory trader who literally believes in striking while the iron is hot, originally Japanese but later changed to Burmese after protests from the Japanese community. Hayakawa described his acting style as 'absence of doing' and he is utterly mesmerising in the role. One is hardly surprised that his exotic/erotic persona caused such a fluttering of female hearts. One observer has noted that Miss Ward's acting is of the past whilst Hayakawa's is of the future.

Some forty years later he played Colonel Saito in 'Bridge over the River Kwai'. Despite acting in a bubble, learning his lines phonetically and needing endless retakes he astonished director David Lean by being nominated for a best supporting Oscar. This goes to prove that if you've got it, you've got it.

"East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet." Fannie Ward (as Edith Hardy) is an extravagant socialite who is told by husband Jack Dean (as Dick Hardy) she must cut down on spending, as he meets with business failures; instead, she takes $10,000 from the Red Cross fund she is entrusted with, and gambles it on a "sure thing" - sure enough, she loses the money. Desperate to replace the money, Ms. Ward turns to wealthy party host Sessue Hayakawa (as Tori aka Arakau), who is secretly attracted to her. Mr. Hayakawa gives Ward the money, but wants a sexual encounter the next night. Then, Mr. Dean makes a Stock Market killing, and is rich again. Ward takes $10,000 to pay off Hayakawa, but he won't bargain...

This is a lurid melodrama, filled with sex, race, and sadism; but, it is redeemed by several factors. Cecil B. DeMille directed artfully; his use of light and shadows is notable. The portrayals of Fannie Ward (as "The Cheat" Edith Hardy) and Sessue Hayakawa (as Tori aka Arakau) are among the finest of the era. You'll want to watch this film with the remote nearby, as there are a few scenes you may want to see re-played immediately.

The Japanese community objected, understandably, to the film's racially prejudicial appeal; so Hayakawa's character was changed from Japanese Hishuru Tori to Burmese Haka Arakau, for a 1918 re-release. Presumably, the Burmese community was not amused.

********* The Cheat (12/13/15) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Fannie Ward, Sessue Hayakawa, Jack Dean, James Neill

The Cheat (1915)

America was not at war yet, even though WWI was well under way in Europe. So there is a detached charm to the events--Red Cross charities, parties, men heading out for a game of golf. And the characters, part of an early Long Island set: a stock broker happily trying to make money, his rich wife who isn't rich enough (she wants more gowns!), and an Asian ivory merchant. The wife is played with early frank energy by Fannie Ward, pretty well known in her day, and in fact married to the man playing her husband.

More eccentric is the Asian man, legendary Japanese actor Kintaro Hayakawa. The title cards originally had him as a Japanese merchant, but when Japan protested (they were allies with the US in wartime), it was altered in the 1918 release to a Burmese merchant. This is a little stretching it because he is so obviously Japanese (the tatami mats, the paper sliding doors, etc.) but since he's really just a Long Island eccentric it works out okay.

At just under an hour, the movie never has a chance to catch its breath, which is great. There are nice sections tinted yellow/orange or blue. (The second time I watched this it was all black and white, which was not as satisfying, if you have a choice.) The score is a bland small orchestra accompaniment, neither here nor there (this is what the Netflix streaming copy has). The plot is slight, in reality, with money lost and a desperate and sometime scandalous effort to get it back. A shocking moment two thirds of the way is its famous climax, a bit early maybe, followed by a trial. The movie didn't cost much to make (the same year as the hugely expensive "Birth of a Nation"), but it went on to great success, and is well preserved.

The title implies more than the movie lets on internally, but the implications are realized in some double crossing. The heroics of the leading man are important even if he's an unlikable stockbroker. In fact, one of the weaknesses here is the fulcrum of the emotional twists and turns-a stock deal gone bad. But as the movie goes, it gathers complexity. If director DeMille is known for his grandiose blockbusters later in life, this is one of his silent dramas (from before about 1923) where he has a great feel for content, human drama, and fast plot. You might even say there is a soap opera excess here-in the best sense. That's what keeps these movies alive. Improbable at times, and certainly about people leaving large, the plots of each, including in this one, are great to watch. The leading female here, Fannie Ward, is good in this kind of role without nuance. More interesting at times is the larger scenes, like the angry crowd at the trial (a wonderful moment involving a huge number of actors).

See it, yes. A great, straight up entry into silent films about domestic upper class problems, and therefore without historical or exotic quirks that would otherwise dominate. An early Cecil B. De Mille film.

Given that the film came out in 1915, it's a brilliant film despite its MANY deficiencies. The story was complex, featured excellent (for the time) production values and was quite entertaining---and was a heck of a lot better than the average feature-length film of the day. Unfortunately, it is also filled with stereotypes that would no doubt offend people. While not as bad as his glorification of slavery in BIRTH OF A NATION (also 1915), the image of the Asian in the film is quite vile--though at least DeMille does have an actual Asian actor play the part--something very unusual in Hollywood through the first half of the 20th century.

A well-to-do man is frustrated at his shallow and awful wife, as she spends far in excess of what he earns. She is constantly trying to keep up with her rich society friends and MUST have all the latest fashions. Despite her being told by him that they can't afford it, she spends and spends and the audience no doubt comes to hate the woman. Later, she gets an idea to take money entrusted to her as treasurer of the Red Cross Relief Fund and invest it--thereby getting enough to keep buying herself clothes and returning the money, no one the wiser. Unforuntately for this idiot, her investment tanks and she now owes the fund $10,000!! Not wanting to get caught, she goes to her Asian friend (Sessue Hayakawa) to borrow the money.

Shortly after this, the lady's husband announces that his investments paid off handsomely and they are now rich enough for her to afford all her extravagances. So, she takes $10,000 and tries to pay off Hayakawa--who then tells her he does NOT want the money. Instead he announces that he owns her and is going to brand her to prove she's his property!! This leads to an intense, frightening and violent fight scene where he ultimately brands his mark on her shoulder! In retaliation, she grabs a gun, shoots him (non-fatally) and runs. Her husband then finds the bleeding man and is accused of having tried to kill him. Why Hayakawa doesn't tell the truth is beyond me and the innocent and stupid husband goes on trial. I say "stupid" because he knows his wife did it, but he decides to take the rap instead. Now had she NOT been a selfish fool, I might have understood this, but in this case he just seemed like a chump. I would have let the court hang her had she been my wife!

When the hubby is found guilty by the court, the wife jumps up and announces her own guilt--showing the judge the brand on her shoulder. The judge dismisses the case and the couple is left to live happily ever after. However, at this point, every "decent white man" in the courtroom attempts to kill the evil foreigner and the film ends as a riot ensues!!!

Technically speaking, this is a wonderful and entertaining film. The implication that Asian men are "white slavers", that wives can be shallow idiots and that it's up to decent white men to ignore the law and beat the Asian guy to death is pretty sick--and pretty indicative of the times. That same year brought Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION, in which the "good white men" in the film can't get justice from the courts so they resort to forming the KKK and teaching the Blacks a lesson, and in this one they don't even bother with the robes--they try to kill the man right in the courtroom!!!

UPDATE: I just watched the 1931 remake of the film and was not the least bit impressed. The silent is clearly a better film--mostly because the crazy plot worked better in the old days. By 1931, it seemed very dated and a lot less scandalous...and a bit silly. So who says that talkies are always better than silents?!