Petite princesse

This was two movies slashed together.

One is the much adapted "A Little Princess"(most famously by Cuaron in the 90s and Shirley Temple's 30's version) , which is about heiress Sarah and her stay within Miss Minchin's boarding school before and after his father's death AND a weird 20 min sequence of Arabian Nights, added as a midnight 'story' subplot - which might had been another movie/short that they felt needed to add an element of 'adventure' to the film. It literally is a different film that captured ~20% of the film.

Firstly, both Zazu Pitts and Mary Pickford looks old old for their parts. They were practically in their 20s playing ten year old but to their credit, they acted WELL for whatever that script was. You kind of see why Pickford played this juvenile roles to death. She has that youthful persona that really glisten on the screen.

Again, the script is so weird. It practically stops midway to add an irrelevant subplot AND the filmmaking does not really help. So its not really anything to write about. Its stagy, and pretty much standard of the film of the time. Very large sets and ungodly large props which seems to cater the larger actress lol. Then the ending just drops.

Let's just say 1hr is not enough for the film's material.

Not recommended.

This simple but pleasant story is mostly worthwhile as a vehicle for Mary Pickford to play the kind of role that made her popular. Here, she is a young heiress trying to get used to her new surroundings at a school for girls, when a sudden tragedy changes everything. There isn't a lot to the plot, and so much of the screen time is simply used to show how charming young Sara (Pickford) can be. Pickford, of course, knows just how to make her character sympathetic. Most of the other characters are simply stock figures, except for a young Zasu Pitts, who gets a lot of screen time as Sara's friend. It's not one of Pickford's more memorable films, but it's a pleasant way to pass an hour.

This version of A Little Princess has some very fine moments, particularly when little Sarah is saying goodbye to her beloved father, but it would have been much better with a tighter script and more character development among the children at the school.

There is a story dream sequence in India which takes up a big chunk of this movie which I considered superfluous and unnecessary. That time would have been much better utilized showing more in-depth interaction between Sarah and her special friends at the school, and her relationship with her adversaries, and the maid, Becky. The ending also comes upon the film too quickly, with hardly any time devoted to showing the real suffering that the character of Sarah Crewe endured.

The DVD version has a pleasant piano score that complements the film very well. All in all a nice film, but the later versions of this story on film, even Shirley Temple's, which took quite a few liberties with the original story, are more enjoyable, especially the most faithful adaptation, the 1986 Wonderworks version starring lovely Amelia Shankley.

The favoured status of the daughter of a wealthy widowed soldier at a school for girls is abruptly withdrawn upon his death, and she is reduced to working as a scullery maid in the school. An entertaining enough tale if you can get beyond a 25-year-old woman playing a ten-year-old child, and the way that director Marshall Neilan constantly focuses on the wonderful wonderfulness of Mary Pickford. The main story, based on the novel by Frances Hodgson Burnett, is easily outshone by a fun Arabian Nights fantasy sequence.

Though there are always exceptions, one can consistently rely on films from the silent era for certain things. The filming locations will be lovely, and more than this, the production design and art direction are exceptional, a feast for the eyes. The costume design, hair, and makeup work are quite fetching; with such necessary emphasis on the visual element, of course one should hope so. Sure, the acting in much of the silent era was characterized by exaggerated body language and facial expressions, holdovers from the stage, to compensate for lack of spoken dialogue or otherwise sound. Yet this trait shifted over time toward more natural, nuanced expression generally, and even at that I don't think there's much arguing against the skills of those in front of the camera, especially for the demands that were placed on them in comparison to the modern cinema we know today. There is still room for considerable subtlety in performances from the 1910s or earlier, and likewise for the imagination with which writers could approach intertitles to relate dialogue or exposition

'A little princess,' starring early screen icon Mary Pickford, most assuredly carries all these facets with it, and is as well made as could be said of any of its contemporaries. Just as importantly, sincere storytelling is adjoined by light humor to provide the entertainment, and even a tinge of adventure as a fair portion of the length includes a recounting of the tale of "Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves." Filmmaker Marshall Neilan demonstrates capable direction, and Frances Marion's adapted screenplay feels gratifyingly well-rounded even in so small a runtime, not least in communicating the friendship between Sara and Becky. Where modest effects and tricks of the camera or editing are employed, they all look pretty terrific, with the latter possibly feeling a tad advanced for 1917. Not least of all, the cast broadly turn in commendable acting, with Pickford and ZaSu Pitts particularly leading the pack in their foremost roles. The end result is really rather entertaining - perhaps not super special, all things considered, let alone essential among silent classics, but fitting neatly among its contemporaries and ably providing a good time for one hour.

None of this is to say that 'A little princess' is wholly perfect. Even by Hollywood's standards of casting, that Pickford, then 25-years old, was portraying a preteen child requires powerful suspension of disbelief. Hand in hand with that characterization and the setting, there are aspects of the film that are extra ham-handed. Like no few other titles from the era, this one is also a tad questionable when it comes to portraying non-white characters, nevermind cultures outside the predominant "western" purview, and this is specifically a bit dubious when it comes to the conveyance of a story from 'One thousand and one nights.' To that point, the story within a story occupies so much of the runtime that one risks forgetting there's a plot outside Ali Baba; this would have benefited from a more concise screenplay. Even setting all this aside: for as fine as the craftsmanship here is at large, there are some moments that really kind of spotlight the ethos of "simpler entertainment for a simpler time"; the direction, narrative, and acting all seem oversimplified at points, if not weirdly outright inauthentic. All this is to say that for as well done as this picture may be, it may not be the silent classic that will change the minds of anyone who has difficulty abiding those traits common to the era.

Still, despite indelicacies or idiosyncrasies, more than not this is quite suitably well done, and fairly fun such as it is. So maybe it will most likely to appeal only to those who are already enamored of its contemporaries; this is hardly the only movie for which that is true. Even with that in mind this feature offers steady entertainment, and while nothing revelatory, successfully meets its goal. There's no need to go out of your way for 'A little princess,' but if you happen to come across it, this is a worth checking out.