Back Pay

Having recently inherited an uncle's large selection of silent films, I fell in love with silent diva Corinne Griffith. I managed to see four of her silent films (The Divine Lady, Black Oxen, The Garden of Eden, and Classified) and was totally astounded by her. We are very fortunate that talkies did not come in earlier, for we would have never gotten a glimpse at some great artistry. Many people claim that a great many silent stars were not good enough actors to survive in talkies. This is a shaky claim. Sound cinema and silent cinema are two totally different mediums. Acting techniques popular in the talkies would have not been effective in silent films. Hypothetically assuming that we had gone the other direction, from talking films to silent ones, it is quite legitimate to think that many talking stars would not survive in silent cinema: this is not, however, enough to claim they were not good enough at acting itself. Its just that they were not good at a particular type of acting. Case in point: Back Pay, a perfectly horrid vehicle for Corinne Griffith. It is stiff and stagey, poorly acted by all involved (especially the male lead), and preposterous. Griffith actually acts quite well in certain scenes, but not for the most part. She plays Hester, a woman who is board with her life and becomes the mistress of a big city magnate. She leaves her true love, Gerald, and when he goes blind in WWI, she realizes she loves him and decides to nurse him in his final days. Although remarkably short, (only about 50 minutes), the film drags on and one feels as if Gone With the Wind had played five times by the time its over. It is invaluable, however, as perhaps the best example of why some stars didn't make the transition to talking films. See it, you'll be happy you did just to get an idea of the times, but don't go out of your way.

Instead, see The Divine Lady, her best film, or The Garden of Eden, which has suddenly become easily available.

A reviewer has said "Back Pay is Griffith's only surviving talkie so it's impossible to tell if she was playing a part or if her voice was really her voice." I would like to answer that. In the late '70s I was at a film event that had King Vidor as a guest of honor (at least I think it was him, to the best of my memory). Mr. Vidor (or whoever it was) said that Corrine Griffith wasn't successful in talking films, "because she had a southern accent, and so it was good-bye Corrine!" That part I remember distinctly. This would indicate to me, that the voice in the film is really hers, and that is how she actually talked. As to the opening scene, I get the impression they have her singing "They Didn't Believe Me" in order to establish the period in which the story was supposed to be. That song was a huge hit during the teens and 1930 audiences certainly would have understood the time frame by that--since the clothes don't give anyone a clue. Finally I would like to say that no matter how good or bad the film is--any time we have a talking film of a silent star, it is priceless in the sense that we can know what they sound like. I think of how Mabel Normand and Fatty Arbuckle made so many pictures together. Fatty made several shorts in the 1930s just before he died, so we can know what he sounded like. Mabel never did make any talkies, and so we don't know how she sounded. Now someone might say, "Well who cares how they sounded?" Well, I like to know what people sound like, don't you? I think that's just natural curiosity and it's nice when it can be satisfied.

This movie is not the disaster some have made it out to be, and although only 55 minutes in length it felt like a well-made, complete picture. To my mind Corinne Griffith was quite good, even singing during a charming early scene. Her costars ranged from adequate to good, but never bad enough to sink the picture. Because this may turn out to be her only surviving sound picture, it is a must see for film historians. I cannot thank the studios enough for making so much of their old inventory available for viewing, and I encourage everyone to show your appreciation by continuing to purchase titles from any archive collection.The plot of this one was probably dated even in 1930, but it is earnestly acted nonetheless. I do agree that there appear to be anachronisms throughout, mostly relating to clothing/vehicles, but that was not fatal to the picture for me. Overall, a charming curio, nicely photographed. The print has some damage but is surprisingly good overall. I think I'd give Back Pay 3 stars out of 4.

Corinne Griffith was a big star in silent films. She made a handful of late silents with talking sequences and then two all-talking films. Both bombed. In 1932 she made a last stab at talkies in an English film and it bombed too.

Back Pay was Griffith's last Hollywood film. It's based on a Fannie Hurst novel and should have been a showcase for her talents as an actress, but the 55-minute film seems a mangle from the beginning. Directed by William Seiter, Back Pay never seems to settle. It's so obviously set in 1930 (clothes, cars, songs, decor) but pretends to be pre-WW I.

Griffith plays a hick from Demopolis, VA who works in a department store. She's in love with a fellow worker (Grant Withers) but yearns for more. She exits on a train out of town. Next scene has her in New York City as a rich man's girlfriend. She has lost the hick accent and is wearing expensive clothing. The lover (Montagu Love) seems nice man and gives her whatever she wants.

She and her friends decide to motor to Hot Springs, a mere 30 miles from Demopolis. Griffith gets a yen to seen the old town and runs into Withers. They chat and she is amazed how good the old town looks. Next scene takes us to Lake Placid where a wistful Griffith is still thinking about Withers.

Back in the city she gets of rush a emotion when WW-I soldiers are marching away to war. Next we see Withers get gassed on a battlefield. Blind and dying from gas poisoning Griffith visits him, gets another rush of emotion, and marries him when she learns he has but weeks to live.

Withers dies on Amistice Day and Griffith is a better woman for it all and even refuses to go back to her old life as a mistress. The End.

Back Pay is Griffith's only surviving talkie so it's impossible to tell if she was playing a part of if her voice (think Zasu Pitts) was really her voice. In any case she comes across very badly. Withers is even worse.

Montagu Love is fine as is Louise Beavers (as the maid), but everyone else is just dreadful. Vivien Oakland (the friend), Hallam Cooley (the traveling salesman), Louise Carver (the masseuse), Virginia Sale (the secretary), and Geneva Mitchell (Babe) are all bad.

But let's blame the director. The film is hideously directed and paced, and the editing is terrible, Was this cut to shreds at some point? Does that explain the abrupt transitions? Seems doubtful. There are so many anachronisms it's hard to believe this was a better film but badly edited.

Griffith was excellent in the few silent films I've seen her in (The Divine Lady, Garden of Allah) and by the end of the silent period was a huge star. She even supposedly won an Oscar nomination for The Divine Lady--a fact inconsistently reported in Oscar histories. But she is not very good in Back Pay.

Griffith is another silent star whose birth year varies widely in different various sources, anywhere from 1894 to 1898. Her first film was in 1916 so she could well have been born in 1898, but if she was born in 1894 she would have been 36 when she made Back Pay--way too old for the part of Hester.

Well no matter. Griffith was a great star in the 1920s--the Orchid Lady--and rivaled Gloria Swanson, Lillian Gish, Greta Garbo, and Mary Pickford in popularity. She was often compared to Norma Talmadge for the kinds of roles she played. And, ironically, like Miss Talmadge, faded from the screen after only a few attempts at talkies.

To be fair Corinne Griffith should be remembered for her great film successes during the silent era and not for the few misguided talkies she attempted. Note: Griffith's memoir became the hit film, Papa's Delicate Condition, in 1963. Griffith appeared in more than 65 films and produced a dozen.

The copy of "Back Pay" that is being shown now on TCM is apparently a very truncated version. Over 20 minutes is missing--as some studio types thought this change would make for a better feature. It also is often a sign that a film is in trouble and the studio was desperate to make it more marketable. So, this review is only for this short version.

"Back Pay" starts with one of the most unintentionally funny musical scenes I can recall. Corinne Griffith is singing to her boyfriend but it seriously looks as if she is a zombie!! I have NEVER seen anyone sing with less energy or conviction. Heck, her lips barely even move nor does she even twitch! And, her boyfriend lies there as if he is dead! Seriously--you just have to watch this opening to believe it. Now I know this is an early talking picture--but even by the standards of 1930 it's pretty awful. And this gets me to the single biggest problem that ruins the film. Although I might have expected an early sound film to be stilted and have lousy acting, by 1930 this was NOT a problem in most films. So, had the film come out in 1928 or even 1929, I might have cut the film some slack. However, the director must have either been insane or totally incompetent as the actors (particularly but not exclusively Griffith) had poor delivery and many of the scenes should have been re-shot. Surely any sane director would have noticed the zombie-like delivery at the film's beginning--but this one apparently did not. And, repeatedly, the actors seemed to have little in the way of delivery--and they were allowed to give such lackluster performances. They either talk too fast, too soft or look stilted. As a result, the movie sucks. I know this sounds mean, but it irritated me that Miss Griffith was allowed to give such a bad performance--along with a cast of folks who seemed to have little idea how to act in a talking picture.

I you STILL decide to see this film, a few things to look for apart from Griffith's awful singing is the masseuse who can barely be understood, the scene with her old boyfriend where the actors keep talking over each other's lines as well as when actors inexplicably talk too fast in some scenes. Some might blame the actors, but isn't it the director's job to notice this and re-shoot these awful scenes?!