Forfaiture

A venal, spoiled stockbroker's wife (Fannie Ward) impulsively embezzles $10,000 from the Red Cross charity she chairs and desperately turns to a Burmese ivory trader (Sessue Hayakawa) to replace the stolen money.

So upon release, the lead actor was playing a Japanese man... but this version has since been lost. The change of the character's name and nationality were done because Japan was an American ally at the time. Robert Birchard, author of the book Cecil B. DeMille's Hollywood, surmised that the character's nationality was changed to Burmese because there were "not enough Burmese in the country to raise a credible protest." You might think they would celebrate having an Asian actor, but I guess not.

Allegedly the film cost $16,540 to make, and grossed $137,364. By today's standards, that may not be much. But in those days it was a small fortune. Think of it: it was almost enough to finance ten more films. Sounds like the gift that keeps on giving, and no doubt lead to DeMille getting bigger and bigger.

Granted I haven't seen too many De Mille silents, but I just watched my new Kino edition of The Cheat, and it has now become my favorite De Mille silent! Very bizarre and dark story that must have had undertones of some hidden fantasies that were going on at the time. I assume this because I have never seen another silent like this one! Sessue Hayakawa was the embodiment of those fantasies, very menacing and naturalistic in his acting style. His every thought played across his face with seemingly minimal effort! He really stole the show from Fannie Ward, whose acting I considered over the top until the last courtroom scene, where it became quite effective in showing her outrage over trying to be possessed like an object by an Asian man. In this scene, she did an excellent job of conveying her affront and humiliation.

The lighting was used to great advantage, immersing the character in a single source of side lighting, which made me think of later movies by some of the German masters. Robert Israel's score was perfect as usual.

A melodrama, but with a twist that makes it fascinating to watch!

Funny how one can be transfixed by a shadow made nearly ninety years ago. I found myself watching this for handsome Sessue Hayakawa's character, half all-American young-man-about-town, half exotic (and oh yes, evil) Oriental despot. Fannie Ward's character doesn't look much better, a woman so insecure and vain that when her husband cuts off her clothing allowance (four hundred 1915 dollars for a negligee!!), she embezzles Red Cross funds and takes a flyer on the stock market. Indeed, the only character who comes out looking remotely virtuous is her long-suffering husband, who tries to protect his bubble-headed wife by confessing to a crime she committed. Yes, it's a period piece, but as those go, it's not bad.

It's notable that right away 'The cheat' establishes use of stereotypes to build the foundations of the narrative. Richard (Jack Dean) is obsessed with his work, portrayed as somewhat neglecting his wife in the process, while Edith (Fannie Ward) is a spendthrift insistent on maintaining her status. I understand there was some controversy as well in Sessue Hayakawa, prominent early Japanese-American actor, depicting an antagonistic figure, thus leading to a change of the character's nationality in the interstitial cards - as if that meaningfully alters the criticism.

The story on hand is simple and of a slant not unfamiliar to contemporary audiences, but duly compelling for the intrigue at hand. There is an issue in my mind that the pivotal crux of this tale - the nature of the bargain - is not actively recounted in interstitial cards, or otherwise presented plainly on-screen. It's expressed only through nuance of body language - easy to miss altogether unless one is already familiar with the plot - or discerned by reading between the lines that are between the lines. As a result 'The cheat' feels less cohesive than it is otherwise, and this flaw also gives the writing the appearance of a significant plot hole. This is unfortunate because all that was required to lift this film out of that mire would have been more clarity.

If you can look past its faults, however, 'The cheat' is quite enjoyable. Set design and decoration, and costume design, are commendable, and complete the setting well. More importantly, the film makes use of lighting in ways that seems advanced for cinema in 1915. There's substantial emphasis on shadows, and spotlighting in generally dimly lit scenes, that does much to bolster the film.

And the performances are pretty great. This is true for all the cast, but goes most of all for Hayakawa, whose deft subtlety of facial expression is essential to his character. And Ward, as Edith, showcases a detail of emotional range that defies the presumptive limits of film-making equipment of the time. These two in particular carry the picture, leading into the dramatic and genuinely exciting climax. Putting aside an ineffectively articulated story beat, the narrative writing is broadly capable.

'The cheat' isn't a perfect movie, but its problems don't outweigh its ability to entertain. The technical craft of the film and the performances are most eye-catching of all, and help to paint over the blemishes. I wouldn't necessarily say one should go out of their way to find 'The cheat', but it's a worthwhile view if you come across it.

Given that the film came out in 1915, it's a brilliant film despite its MANY deficiencies. The story was complex, featured excellent (for the time) production values and was quite entertaining---and was a heck of a lot better than the average feature-length film of the day. Unfortunately, it is also filled with stereotypes that would no doubt offend people. While not as bad as his glorification of slavery in BIRTH OF A NATION (also 1915), the image of the Asian in the film is quite vile--though at least DeMille does have an actual Asian actor play the part--something very unusual in Hollywood through the first half of the 20th century.

A well-to-do man is frustrated at his shallow and awful wife, as she spends far in excess of what he earns. She is constantly trying to keep up with her rich society friends and MUST have all the latest fashions. Despite her being told by him that they can't afford it, she spends and spends and the audience no doubt comes to hate the woman. Later, she gets an idea to take money entrusted to her as treasurer of the Red Cross Relief Fund and invest it--thereby getting enough to keep buying herself clothes and returning the money, no one the wiser. Unforuntately for this idiot, her investment tanks and she now owes the fund $10,000!! Not wanting to get caught, she goes to her Asian friend (Sessue Hayakawa) to borrow the money.

Shortly after this, the lady's husband announces that his investments paid off handsomely and they are now rich enough for her to afford all her extravagances. So, she takes $10,000 and tries to pay off Hayakawa--who then tells her he does NOT want the money. Instead he announces that he owns her and is going to brand her to prove she's his property!! This leads to an intense, frightening and violent fight scene where he ultimately brands his mark on her shoulder! In retaliation, she grabs a gun, shoots him (non-fatally) and runs. Her husband then finds the bleeding man and is accused of having tried to kill him. Why Hayakawa doesn't tell the truth is beyond me and the innocent and stupid husband goes on trial. I say "stupid" because he knows his wife did it, but he decides to take the rap instead. Now had she NOT been a selfish fool, I might have understood this, but in this case he just seemed like a chump. I would have let the court hang her had she been my wife!

When the hubby is found guilty by the court, the wife jumps up and announces her own guilt--showing the judge the brand on her shoulder. The judge dismisses the case and the couple is left to live happily ever after. However, at this point, every "decent white man" in the courtroom attempts to kill the evil foreigner and the film ends as a riot ensues!!!

Technically speaking, this is a wonderful and entertaining film. The implication that Asian men are "white slavers", that wives can be shallow idiots and that it's up to decent white men to ignore the law and beat the Asian guy to death is pretty sick--and pretty indicative of the times. That same year brought Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION, in which the "good white men" in the film can't get justice from the courts so they resort to forming the KKK and teaching the Blacks a lesson, and in this one they don't even bother with the robes--they try to kill the man right in the courtroom!!!

UPDATE: I just watched the 1931 remake of the film and was not the least bit impressed. The silent is clearly a better film--mostly because the crazy plot worked better in the old days. By 1931, it seemed very dated and a lot less scandalous...and a bit silly. So who says that talkies are always better than silents?!