Cendrillon

My score of 10 is relative to other productions during this very early era in film as well as director Georges Méliès' other films. If you were to compare it to later silent films, then CENDRILLON will come up very, very short due to its very archaic style. And this type of comparison just wouldn't be fair, as non-stationary cameras, composition and detailed scripts were well in the future. But, for 1899, this is amazing because it introduces dissolves to go from one scene to another, a plot telling an actual story, as well as actual sets--things not used much around 1900. Most of the films circa 1900 were dull and short--only a minute or two long and featured people doing horribly mundane things--like feeding a baby or watering the lawn (seriously).

Now this story, while amazing for 1899, is not without many problems. The first portion that set the context for the story seems to either be missing or Méliès just assumed the audience understood it and skipped it. Also, while the first moments of the film are hand-colored, this disappears very quickly--perhaps it comes from piecing two or more copies together to make this film. And additionally, at times the people had no idea what to do, so they did some weird things--like have lots and lots of clocks and elves (why?!?!) as well as a somewhat impromptu dance number at the end. Rough? Yes, but still compared to what else was out there, this was the best sort of film available...period. For film historians, this and the rest of Méliès' films are a must.

By the way, to see just how far films had progressed, try also watching the 1914 version starring Mary Pickford. It stands up much better today and is a truly magnificent film even almost a hundred years later.

Cinderella (1899)

*** (out of 4)

aka Cendrillon

The poor Cinderella gets a visit from her fairy godmother but the fun ends at midnight. There were earlier versions of this classic story but who better to bring it to life than George Melies? Melies brings his normal magic to the film and the special effects are pretty good. The highlight of the film is during the beginning when the godmother shows up and for a brief second we get some hand colored sequences. The coloring here is a lot better than what we've seen from this period. Since the film only runs five minutes not all of the story gets shown but the director does a good job at filling the screen with all the high points of the story. This certainly isn't as good as the 1914 version with Mary Pickford but it's still a winner.

This is the earliest surviving of Melies super-productions -- the best known one, of course, is his Trip to the Moon -- and the story begins right where Melies can strut his stuff with the appearance of the Fairy Godmother. Some of the earliest sequences are beautifully hand-tinted.

Of greater technical interest is Melies' experimentation with film grammar: he uses a fade to get from Cinderella's garret to the ball. And of course, there are lots of his combinations of stage and film magic, as mice are transformed into footmen, pumpkins appear out of nowhere and the fairy godmother leaves by being lowered into the stage. Tremendous fun and far more watchable than any other version through the 1920s.

This is one of the many previously lost or infrequently seen Melies pictures that have been made available by Serge Bromberg, David Shepherd and a myriad of other hands in the newly issued DVD set GEORGES MELIES: FIRST WIZARD OF CINEMA. Required viewing for anyone interested in the history of movies ..... and a lot of fun.

This is a nice and quick version of the Cinderella story... it's worth watching if you have 6 minutes to spare for it. Not all the story is shown but it get to the point of the story fast - too bad this one wasn't a bit longer.

8/10

The earliest known adaptation of Perrault's fairy tale. One of the first films to utilise multiple scenes. The first use of the "dissolve transition" technique. And the only film in the 1800s (from what I've seen) to physically convey a story through a cohesive narrative. Cendrillon was a milestone for both cinema and Méliès. Granted, you will most likely need to know the source material first as this short film is somewhat illusory for its own good. And yes, some scenes were unnecessarily long just to showcase the innovative production design, particularly the entirety of Méliès as the genie of the midnight clock (absolutely cuckoo, if you pardon the pun). However the basic narrative outline is present, with Méliès conveying vital plot points whilst evoking pure imagination. You just have to give him credit for condensing a story into six minutes, even at the consequence of losing character depth. The pioneering editing allows the film to have that little additional essence of magic. The acting was splendidly exaggerative and contemporaneous, where Méliès had to employ a Chief Extra just to manage all of the over extras. Grand, lavishly designed and quite simply extraordinary. His first endeavour into narratively-charged films would lead him to create his magnum opus three years later.