The Villain Still Pursued Her

I hate melodrama, but had reservations about this satire of the genre nonetheless. I thought it would be one of those films Buster Keaton only appeared in order to garner a paycheck. My qualms quickly diminished as I watched this unheralded classic. I have watched it a few times since I first obtained a copy, and it never fails to make me laugh throughout. Keaton is superb, as is the rest of the cast, and the comedy stands up very well. As long as we have soap operas, "The Villain Still Pursued Her" will always be funny!

This movie is a painful viewing experience. I don't know if its because the humor has all been ripped off by later films or because its just awful, either way I can't recommend this film to anyone.

the idea of the film is that its a film version of the melodrama that things like Dudley Do Right makes fun of. With "Boo Hiss Villains" who twirl their mustaches and Heroes you cheer on. Indeed the film begins with Billy Gilbert saying that the audience should feel free to boo and cheer as they see fit. The problem is this sort of thing is so close to parody now (and even then) that making fun of it, unless you're very clever, doesn't work, or rather doesn't work for more than say a 15 minute sketch. This film runs out of steam wall before that and we are left with a film that is neither fish nor, or rather just foul. yes it works occasionally but I'd be hard pressed to tell anyone to sit down and watch this film in order to find them.

Avoid this film.

This absurd parody of Victorian melodramas watched in the right frame of mind is very enjoyable. The cast attacks the material with the proper degree of whimsy playing it broadly, the only reasonable approach to something designed to be this silly.

The director and studio were wise to cast character actors with a talent for either farce or slapstick and then give them free rein to dig into the ridiculous situations with aplomb. The biggest surprise is probably Anita Louise, an busy and very lovely actress until her retirement but not especially known for her comedic skills. In this she jumps right into the mood of the proceedings playing a character that can only be described as an imbecile in her naiveté. By playing it straight and never winking at the audience she makes the woman an object of sympathy no matter how dumb she seems.

If you start watching this expecting anything but an overblown bit of ridiculousness you will either be disappointed or irritated.

This is an excellent example of parody. People that like the later humour in Airplane might see a few early hints of it here. Keaton and the villain were especially good.

Hollywood movies killed the type of melodramatic social message play that was popular in American theater at the turn of the 20th century. In the teens and twenties, it had both copied it and satirized it to the point that it lost its audience. It simply could not be appreciated by a more sophisticated audience weened on sophisticated Hollywood productions.

It would seem that 1940 would be too late to be satirizing a style of theater and acting that had gone out of style 15 or 20 years before. Still, the majority of Americans past 30 had grown up with such fare and could appreciate the satire. Today, of course, this style of theater and acting is unknown except for the theater and film buffs. 21st Century audiences can only find this film a bit boring and very bizarre.

There are three ethereal performances in this movie - Anita Louise, Margaret Hamilton and Richard Cromwell look like they are in a trance. Joyce Compton is also hilariously effective as a deranged woman. Billie Gilbert and Hugh Herbert do their typically funny bits.

Like me, most people who watch this movie will probably do so to see Buster Keaton. One has to feel a bit disappointed that Keaton just delivers his lines, but hardly does anything really Keatonesque. Yet the whole film, because it was directed by Keaton's friend, Eddie Cline, has a Keatonesque quality to it.

It is hard to imagine the style of acting portrayed in this movie being a real and popular style. The actors seem to avoid all facial expression after reciting their lines. Yet this was considered good acting before the Stanislavsky Method revolutionized theater at the dawn of the 20th century.

This movie should be especially studied by actors and directors for its record of a long gone acting style. It may not be as funny as it once was, but it is more fascinating with the passage of time.