O Acidente de Mary Jane

This little feature from G.A. Smith is quite entertaining, and it is also nicely put together. Although the props and details are clearly from its own period, it also features a main character who could be at home in any era.

The story is a simple one, starting with Mary Jane (played by Smith's wife) as a kitchen maid who mugs for the camera as she goes about her chores. Although her antics are simple, it does a pretty good job for the era of making most of them work well. Then we see Mary Jane's 'mishap' and its macabre but amusing consequences.

Smith's wife proves to be a decent actress, and she makes her character pretty amusing. The mishap sequence also works well, with a clever special effect, and there is a good final gag. While it's nothing highbrow, it was made with skill, and it is still humorous nearly a century later.

After a mishap with the boot blacking, a young woman uses paraffin to light the stove with fantastic, and fatal, results. George Albert Smith's silly four minute opus was quite a sophisticated film for the time, with scene changes, close-ups, split-screen, dissolves, and special effects (double exposures and substitution splices). Star Laura Bayley seems to be having fun, mugging to the camera with a shoe-polish mustache or prancing around as a ghost. One wonders if the scene of the young woman dramatically exiting the house via the chimney inspired similar scenes six decades later in Disney's 'Mary Poppins' (1964). Watch for the falling boots and the inquisitive cat. Silly fun, then and now.

Others here have praised George Albert Albert Smith for his innovative techniques in film making, and deservedly so. His experiments form the visual basis of modern screen grammar. Likewise, his wife, who played the sleepy, sloppy Mary Jane in this movie, give a performance that is tremendously advanced for the era. Clearly, Smith's experiments with close-up shots had convinced him that performers should keep their movements in strict bounds.

What the other reviewers have failed to mention is the essentially middle-class nature of this movie. It is not the lady of the house who blows the place up, but the maid-of-all-work. It's the perpetual complaint that "you can't get good help", usually with "anymore" appended. Not like when I was a youngster and people would murder each other to work for my grandfather. He would whip them daily, and they were grateful for it!

I used to hear the same thing when I was a child and no one thought I was listening.

This film is cute and watchable even today--and that's something you CAN'T say about many of the very early movies--particularly those of George Albert Smith. Most films of the day are of pretty mundane topics or are only about one or two minutes long. This film, in contrast, is longer and actually tries to have Mary Jane try to be a slapstick comedienne. She is a cook and doesn't seem to do anything right. While not great or amazing like the contemporary films of Georges Méliès, this is still pretty good and watchable--particularly the slapstick ending! Plus, films like this eventually led to films like those of the later and much more famous slapstick comedians, so historically it's pretty important.

George Albert Smith directed this rather silly comedy starring his wife playing a bucktoothed maid who lights the stove with paraffin. It is a very creative film for 1903 and using special effects and some very funny acting, it works very well.

The story-telling technique is also pretty important. While many films of the day (Melies's included) seldom used any sort of cutting to closeups and were normally very stagy, this short frequently cuts to closeup views of Mary Jane, such as when she accidentally rubs shoe-polish on her upper lip. This use of cutting makes it easier to see her facial expressions, which makes it all the more amusing. Laura Bayley does overplay the part a lot, but this sort of overacting was typical and is part of what makes the film work even today. D. W. Griffith is mostly known for innovating this kind of filmmaking, but as evidenced by this, Smith is equally important and needs more recognition.