caldoni

I have little or anything to add the comments of others who have spotted this movie for what it is, a story-vehicle for Mary Pickford, which is okay.

The story itself isn't worthless but it feels a little worn in. I did however appreciate the messages ingrained in about families not being traditional, it's mediations on alcoholism, vigilantism and even pedophilia are interesting peaks into a time and a place we missed, but they don't occupy a lot of screen time. Some of the cinematography is great, but really the supporting cast is excellent, in particular the drunk old dad.

The most relevant story convention is that of the indigent people ousted by cruel capitalist bent on their land, but that story is told better in both "Tess of the Storm Country" and "Heart O' The Hills" (this movie is featured on Milestone's "Heart O' The Hills DVD release.)

Look, no movie is without flaws, and this film is far from an exception to that rule but often while watching it-I'm an aspiring film maker myself-I felt a major rush of excitement a feeling a get sometimes when watching silent films where one suddenly goes "That's where that convention comes from!" It never fails to shoot adrenaline up my spine and put a smile on my face. As a lifelong fan of Mary Pickford, this film is good meter of her abilities. I think it's easy to write her off as "America's Sweetheart" and it's true-plenty of Pickford vehicles were insipid messes, that showcased her own cuteness more than anything else. A friend of mine once said, "She wore the masks of silent film and wore them well but that's about all." While that may be true she also had some real talent. In this film-I won't bother summarizing-Pickford walks a delicate line between cynicism and innocence, which isn't an easy task. There are also some more subtle choices, I personally feel that Pickford was far ahead of her time as far the idea of "microperformance" goes. There's a scene where she's packing some things into a saddle bag and just before loading in her deceased father's Bible she runs it under her nose to smell it. This isn't a big moment it's not a major point of focus and only a little bit of emotion crosses her face as she does, it doesn't feel forced and I would be shocked if it was scripted, it feels a little like Marlon Brando picking up the white glove and trying it on in "On The Waterfront." It doesn't tell you much about the story but volumes about the character.

I could rant all day about how great Mary Pickford is, but honestly while she's more than up for the task there's an abundance credit due to most angles of the production. The photography is world class for it's day throughout and in moments still striking by even the most modern of critiques. The cast is universally wonderful, i can't complain too much about any one character's acting, which isn't not a usual comment I'd make about a film from 1919. Moreover though, I'd like to mention the themes of the piece, they seem advanced far beyond that pale of most film from the early 1900's, or even from the 1940's or so. There's a revenge plot that feels a bit like Peckinpah storyline. There's a deep environmental angle that's as pressing now it was then if not more, development destroys the older ways of life by obliterating the land it plays out on, the canvas of culture is the earth on which it lives. The characters in Heart o' The Hills are poor, they live in Ramshackle cabins and are by all rights in need of the wealth a coal industry would bring them, but they don't want anything to do with it. And why not? It would end their existence as they know it. The second act culminates with Mavis-Mary Pickford's character-going a ride with the Klan to oust the lowlander-developers-which results in a shootout. It's frustratingly unclear what Mavis thinks about the Klan, but her grandfather seems betrayed when he asks her "You were out riding weren't you?" There's a lot balanced portrayals, of people here too. The wealthy elite of the lowlands are portrayed as having no respect for mountain life or the environment but are also seen to be forgiving and even charitable. The mountain people are portrayed as uneducated but more than capable of understanding their circumstances and the consequences of their world. Other pressing themes revolve around child abuse, classroom, and first loves and the ending of childhood.

This film has aged well and not by chance, the film makers treated the material with dignity and humanity, choosing to dwell on themes eternal and important, and yet still it can make you laugh out loud in parts.

I highly recommend this film.

I'll be honest, I loved this movie. That being said, I wouldn't recommend it to everyone or even anyone but a few arcane film technique fetishists. The movie has the feel of a lost classic, but it's so damn goofy that it's hard to figure out where it's coming from much less where it's trying to take you. People who watch expressionist films will understand the technique of "just going with it" and seeing how you feel at the end.

Maybe that's Maddlin's flaw? He forgets that modern audiences are always checking in with themselves and questioning the images they see always ready to click away from content they dislike. My friend walked out of "Coffee and Cigarettes" after the second episode, he'd given it a fair shake and didn't see any chance of it improving. But it did. Oh man it did. He would have been rewarded if he would have just went with it for a bit.

So admittedly, I was confused and alienated by big stretches of The Saddest Music In The World. It's true the characters are too ridiculous to care about much and the dissociative camera work does as much to take you out of the scene as put you in. And the brilliant Two-stripped color scenes are so bright and vibrant that the mono-tinted and black and white scenes that follow them don't have much punch. On the whole it pastiche's together more styles than a single movie should: expressionism, musical, silent, early talkie, early color, comedy, even some very documentary looking montages recalling the earliest documentaries. And the sound was as poorly mixed as any major film release i've ever seen. The film's message is obscured in it's own aesthetics so thoroughly that one can scarcely get a footing on anything like meaning or message.

I could go on and on about the flaws of this movie. As for it's graces? its genuinely funny in parts, original in others, it feels like an old distressed classic which is fun for buffs like me. But all this is cursory.

So why the hell did I like this movie so much? I liked it an awful lot. I liked it because it's messed up and it's messy. It seemed to be having fun throughout most of it and if you give yourself over to: stop asking sensible questions and try to have some fun, because really-if you do that you'll have a blast at this movie.