Amor, Luxo e Riqueza

I put off watching SALLY OF THE SAWDUST for years. Comedy was never Griffith's best genre and the 1920s were not his best decade. However, it turned out to be better than I expected, though that might be more because of WC Fields than anything else. He's funny, though decidedly lacking the misanthropic edge he had in his great 1930s work (the man warmly hugs a child in an early scene so you know you're not dealing with pure Fields here). The story is a 1920s take on Dickens' style melodrama: an eccentric con-man tries to reunite his adopted daughter with her rich relatives. The plot is stretched out, but there are charming episodes throughout and I was never bored.

Carol Dempster is quite mixed. I tend to find her unremarkable in most of her work and she only tended to shine in less glamorous/winsome roles (see ISN'T LIFE WONDERFUL for a genuinely great performance from her). Here, she veers between outright badness and inspired in what might be the most uneven performance of her short career. It often does not feel like she's playing a character so much as employing several facial tics repetitively in front of the camera: she winks, she coos, she does little dancing motions. It's supposed to come off as peppy but it often grates. Her emotional scenes are disastrous, complete with shameless mugging. However, Dempster excels in the physical scenes, like when she escapes a courthouse through a high window or when she's interacting with an elephant. I maintain that Dempster was best at playing active, everyday characters and not the Victorian girl-women Griffith liked to populate his movies with.

SALLY OF THE SAWDUST was one of Griffith's last films and is quite unlike anything else in his filmography. It's definitely worth seeing, though if you've never seen a silent movie before, I would not make this one your first.

SALLY OF THE SAWDUST is not a major Griffith film, but it is quite good for the most part. The story has been described well in other reviews, so I'll limit my comments to other aspects of the film. WC Fields shows the beginnings of his trademark cantankerous persona; indeed, the movie survives mostly due to his presence. Fields shows natural ability and is an asset to all of the scenes in which he is present.

However, he was not the "star" of this movie. That title would go to Carol Dempster. Dempster is something of a polarizing figure for silent film fans. Many have labeled her as a talentless and unattractive Lillian Gish wannabe whose supposedly awful performances led to DW Griffith's creative and commercial downfall. It's true that Dempster could be inconsistent as a performer, but when she was good, she was superb. Dempster really appears to enjoy this role, and it shows. She is by turns irreverent, spunky, feisty, happy, and touchingly sad; you can see the ache in Sally's heart as she yearns for the love of family. Dempster is highly expressive and uses her trademark athleticism and dancing skills to great effect. She radiates a kooky charm throughout and many of her facial expressions are amusing. I personally thought she carried the role very well, and I have watched this movie multiple times in order to relive moments from her performance.

As a movie overall, the film has its strengths and weaknesses. Griffith had obviously mastered the art of cinematography and there are some nice sequences at the circus, as well as the protracted chase scene near the end of the movie. The editing, as has been noted above, is comically bad. The most outstanding example is when the cops come to bust McGargle's shell game operation and take Sally away, it's clearly night time, but the cut to McGargle's escape is in broad daylight! Also, as has been noted, Griffith was NOT a comedy director. One can only imagine the zaniness that Buster Keaton or Hal Roach would have brought to the chase scene, but Griffith doesn't have the right feel for it. The movie is more amusing than laugh-out-loud funny. Whatever does work in the movie is more due to the cast (minus Alfred Lunt, whom I found very bland as the would-be boyfriend) than the script or direction.

In conclusion, SALLY OF THE SAWDUST, while not a "great" film, has two great performances (by Fields and Dempster) and is an agreeable way for silent movie fans to spend two hours.

From a modern prospective, this is a most underwhelming film. Carol Dempster (as Sally) would seem, athleticism being one of her strengths, to be a natural choice to play a circus performer; she is, however, mostly unremarkable. W.C. Fields (as Professor McGargle) is more graceful; however, without his distinctive voice, he is somewhat disappointing. And, Alfred Lunt (as Peyton Lennox), known for his brilliant stage presence, is difficult to appreciate. Of the three, Mr. Fields is the most watchable.

The breathtaking beauty of earlier D.W. Griffith-directed films is noticeably absent. While some of the shots are lovely, nothing equals the artfulness evident throughout many past Griffith efforts. "Sally of the Sawdust" is beautifully preserved (if only all Griffith prints were as well preserved); and, it is an enjoyable comedy (certainly more so in 1925). It was adapted from Dorothy Donnelly's popular play "Poppy" (1923), with Madge Kennedy and W.C. Fields. It was re-filmed as "Poppy" (1936), with Rochelle Hudson and W.C. Fields. Norma Talmadge's popular film was an altogether different "Poppy" (1917), and did not co-star W.C. Fields.

***** Sally of the Sawdust (8/2/25) D.W. Griffith ~ Carol Dempster, W.C. Fields, Alfred Lunt

Seems to have been made as a vehicle for W.C. Fields and Carol Dempster and they dominate it. Fields already has his film character well developed. Carol Dempster seems to dance through the film and her acting reminds me of Mary Pickford, who also worked a long time under D.W. Griffith. Typical of later Griffith films technically.

Later remade as Poppy (the original title) with Fields in the same role.

It's not often realised how strong the links were between silent cinema and the theatrical entertainment world of Vaudeville. W.C. Fields, like many Vaudeville comedians started out in pantomime – juggling, pratfalling and other staples of silent comedy. Fields would later add dialogue to his act and cultivate his now familiar persona, eventually progressing onto full-length comic dramas. Sally of the Sawdust, his first feature-length movie creates an odd shift in his career. It is adapted from his most recent stage hit Poppy, and yet the very different medium of pre-talkie cinema meant he had to rely upon the old routines from his pantomime days.

The picture sees him teamed up with pioneer director D.W. Griffith, now sadly long past his glory days. Griffith was never really much of a comedy director. He doesn't seem to have the confidence in his performers to let them do their stuff and allow the scenes to play out. Instead he seems stuck in the Keystone Cops mode of slapstick, which is always very frenetic, with lots of cuts. In a way this works out well because Griffith could at least direct a good action sequence, and scenes like the punch-up at the circus even if not very funny are at least nicely timed and escalated. Besides, even if the comedy fails the general air of irreverence stops the picture from getting too mawkish.

It is also rather nice to see Griffith returning to a simple, human story, as his usual epics with ride-to-the-rescue finales had been getting a little stale of late. Sally of the Sawdust more than any other harks back to the short films he made in the early teens for the way he focuses on individuals rather than wider social processes. There are some good examples of the way he builds up an emotional story. In the prologue, when the daughter is kicked out, we see the mother and father turn away from each other to face opposite walls, the camera well back in the large space, a perfect evocation of this cold, fractured household. And Griffith is still so good at expressing a feeling with the most delicate of close-ups, showing us for example Carol Dempster's hand clutching at the grass as she canoodles with Alfred Lunt. Acting performances vary immensely across Griffith's body of work, but the relatively restrained turns from Dempster and Elfie Shannon as old Mrs Foster add immensely to the poignant final scenes.

But what of W.C. Fields himself? We here and there see him going off into some bit of comedy business, but the truth is as a slapstick comic he is nothing really exceptional. He doesn't have the energy or flexibility to keep up with the wilder slapstick, and sequences like the one where he keeps knocking off his own hat just look out of place. Of course there is a lot more for him to do in Sally of the Sawdust, and Fields is at his funniest when simply acting out bits of the play (presumably kept intact from the original stage version) in his own characteristic manner. When trying to evade the police, he emerges from his hiding place wrapped in a cloak disguised as an Indian, and it is the way he strolls towards the camera, nonchalantly puffing on a cigar, that makes the moment funny. Still, there is clearly something missing from the act – the delivery, the voice, not to mention the opportunity to develop a curmudgeonly character without having to occasionally play the clown. It is no wonder his screen career never really took off until the arrival of the talkies.