La carte fatale

... and yet he still commands your attention. Here, Chaney is part of some secret society that apparently summarily executes people whom they think have "lived too long". And I'm not talking about nonagenarians in poor health. They have made that decision against some industrialist who they say "failed to make the world better". They get a close-up view of him by posing as waiters even a portrait painter, and report on his perceived state of mind. So these people are essentially terrorists and anarchists without ever using those words. What a bold theme about which to make a movie in 1921, with the very recent Red Scares.

So the group always decides who carries out these executions by drawing cards until the Ace of Hearts is drawn. The group is very egalitarian in that even the one female member could be chosen. You see, all of the members of the society are men except Lilith (Leatrice Joy) and she does NOT look like Emma Goldman. Farallone (Chaney) and Forrest (John Bowers) are in love with her, and thus want to compete for her affection by drawing the card. Anybody who draws the card could be killed in the assassination attempt, since the device to be used is a disguised explosive device with a supposed time delay, but would it work or just instantaneously ignite?

You'll have to watch and find out if the morality of all of this deciding life and death extra-judicially is ever discussed. I will say that the film creeps along at a snail's pace and the acting technique is rather broad and antiquated for one from the 1920s, even the beginning of the twenties. It is worthwhile to see Chaney effectively use his acting chops in a film that isn't quite up to his talents. For Chaney fans, probably the best scene in the film is Chaney, spending the night on a park bench in a blinding storm, soaked to the bone, diligently keeping a vigil of sorts from a distance.

An anarchist group decides that one man has lived too long. His executioner will be determined by chance. One of the group deals out cards to the rest. The one who gets the ace of hearts becomes the assassin. Two young men (Lon Chaney and John Bowers) desperately want that card. They are both courting the sole female member (Leatrice Joy), who thinks of nothing but The Cause. When Fate deals her own hand, one of the suitors (Chaney) must determine if he really loves the girl—or merely wants to possess her.

The themes of love, honor, unrequited love and self-sacrifice pervade this fine suspense thriller. The script, written by Ruth Wightman from a story by Gouverneur Morris, and directed by Wallace Worsley, is extraordinarily deft at creating and maintaining suspense. All the details—what we see and don't see; what we are told about this anarchist group and what we're left to guess; and the moment when a certain character is at last introduced—are well chosen. The film only loses its footing briefly during the fatuous intertitles near the end ("Love is construction!").

Lon Chaney is a great actor, but that doesn't mean he's perfect. He has a great face and a way of compelling our attention and sympathies. I think his main defect is best demonstrated by the scene where Lilith shows up at the door, and he expresses shock. He was clearly expecting this "shock." Lon Chaney is not always what actors call "living in the moment"—feeling things as the character feels them without anticipating the next line in the script. His ability to concentrate on his performance is said to have been intense; but he doesn't always live with his character moment by moment. The trouble is not his era's acting style. Even though people have knocked silent movie acting since the days of silent movies, the exaggerated expressions and gestures are really very powerful. So they are with Chaney.

This excellent silent film was given an enormous boost in 2000 when Vivek Maddala won a competition and was hired to write the score, a job he performed beautifully. My high rating applies to the 2000 version of this film.

I think it's a mistake to compare silent movies in general to modern films. The medium is just plain different- subtlety isn't a strong point- kind of like vaudeville. This movie is a great little snippet of history. The story- about anarchists preparing to assassinate a "bad man" is very current for its time- only 3 years after WWI- caused by the assassination of a world figure by an anarchist. So, the message of the movie, that love trumps anarchy was current, and timely. Lon Chaney was a master of silent emoting- and yes, perhaps the acting seems stylized and mannered, but taken in context, it's a great deal of fun. It's also an interesting portrayal of a woman within a political movement- first as an ideologue detached from love and romance and then as a woman consumed by her passion and ready for her husband to abandon his principles to remain at her side. She's in some ways the villain of this piece- and in some ways the hero. Very nice shades of ethical grays.

This tense, interesting drama features a story full of suspense and a typically fine performance by Lon Chaney. The combination of an assassination plot with a romantic rivalry is hardly unique, but it works particularly well in this setting, and it is used to bring out a number of ideas with significance that go beyond the events themselves. Although set in its own era and to some degree connected with political concerns of the early 1920s, it probably works even better when it is removed from the historical context, since this allows the plot to work on a higher level.

It starts with a secret society planning the death of a powerful man who in some undefined way poses a menace to society. It's both interesting and effective that the particular offenses of 'the man who has lived too long' are never detailed. Thus, instead of focusing a debate on whether or not the specific things he has done ought to be punished, the questions become broader: whether it is right to use violence to punish a dangerous or evil person outside of the law, and whether it would ever be right to harm innocent persons in the process. These kinds of questions are at least as important now as they were at the time, and the movie provides a worthwhile perspective.

Chaney's character here has little of the make-up and disguises for which Chaney was well- known, so that his considerable acting talents do the work instead. His character is at the same time a broken-hearted suitor and a vengeful member of the radical group, often with conflicting motives, which gives Chaney lots of material to work with.

The first part sets up the story in a careful and intriguing way. The middle part moves more slowly, and focuses most of the attention on the radical couple played by Leatrice Joy and John Bowers. Both are adequate, but their scenes together sometimes lack intensity, and even in limited screen time Chaney still has the stronger presence during this stretch. The couple's agonized soul-searching then sets up some very tense moments in the last part of the movie.

Although I've seen the standard Lon Chaney horror classics in the past--such as The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923) and The Phantom of the Opera (1925)--I haven't seen them for a while. This is the first of Chaney's less currently popular films that I've seen. I was very impressed. Although it wasn't just Chaney, but everything about The Ace of Hearts that "clicked" for me on this viewing.

Despite the conventional wisdom, I think The Ace of Hearts works marvelously if you don't have the background information on the story. I think that was part of my attraction to it--it's presented as something of a mystery. As shown on screen, the film concerns some kind of very solemn secret society who have decided that a particular individual is a "Man Who Has Lived Too Long".

We learn that some members of the secret society have been interacting with him--one, Mr. Forrest (John Bowers), has regularly served as his waiter for breakfast for a number of years. "The Man Who Has Lived Too Long" has been going to the same restaurant at 9:00 a.m. every day. Another, Mr. Farallone (Chaney), has been painting "The Man Who Has Lived Too Long's" portrait. We learn the procedure for the secret society's carrying out of their death sentences, which involves the executioner being "randomly" chosen by receiving the Ace of Hearts. The executioner is chosen, and he's given the tools he needs for the job as a plan is settled on. All that's left is to carry out the sentence. However, there's a snag when the executioner has second thoughts, and The Ace of Hearts becomes something of a twisted parable about morality.

As presented in the film, we never learn very much about who the main characters are, who their villain is, and so on. The story stays extremely focused on the plot, which is deceptively simple. There are only two aspects--the machinations of the secret society planning and attempting to carry out the death sentence and a love triangle between Mr. Forrest, Mr. Farallone and Lilith (Leatrice Joy), the only female member of the secret society.

Without knowing the background information that fueled the film, The Ace of Hearts is a taut, metaphorical work about "the power of love". Early in the film, one member of the secret society expresses relief that he wasn't chosen as the executioner because he has a wife and kids at home--there is a chance that the executioner may come to harm while carrying out the sentence. The eventual kink in the plan arises because of love, through an ironic plot development that was initially to give the executioner strength, or added resolve, but that ended up undermining the operation. And the final resolution of the film arises through love and a realization that the final course of action is the right one ethically.

Chaney is amazing in his ability to convey complex emotions and thought without the aid of sound. Apparently, his abilities developed partially out of the fact that his parents were deaf, and he learned how to communicate with and even entertain his ailing mother through gestures.

Wallace Worsley's direction is inventive. Goldwyn films were relatively low budget at the time, so costs were cut by keeping sets to a minimum, for instance. Worsley gets maximum mileage out of the few sets in the film. He uses a well-planned mix of economic shots to easily convey the plot. The few shots set "outside" are extremely effective, with the torrential rain and hurricane-force winds (both caused by technical limitations of the effects at the time) lending an appropriately gloomy atmosphere in crucial scenes. It's just too bad that there aren't very clean prints of the film floating around, or that spending time and money to clean them up wouldn't be justified financially.

Another big factor that helped me love this film is the DVD version I watched--Turner Classic Movies' "Archives" Lon Chaney Collection release. This features a new score by Vivek Maddala that is simply fantastic. It's even more incredible when we consider that this was Maddala's first score--he obtained the gig by winning a contest that TCM hosted. The score is beautiful and modern, with inventive harmonies. It always meshes exquisitely with the action, and goes far in helping to tell the story.

But what about that background information? Well, even though I don't think it's necessary to enjoy the film, it's interesting in its own right. The story, by Gouverneur Morris, was a response to the first "Red Scare" in the U.S., from 1917 to 1920. Although the roots were complex and associated with World War I, all one needs to know is that the Red Scare involved anti-communist ideology, connected to communist paranoia among the public.

Thus, the "secret society" in the film is supposed to be a Russian communist group (although they're often said to be intended as anarchists, but that's complicated, as well, as "anarchist" can mean very different political ideologies). Lon Chaney's character was originally named Rattavich, but the script was eventually generalized to avoid the more overt politicizations. Under this interpretation of the film, the "Man Who Has Lived Too Long" is a capitalist whom the communist secret society feels the need to assassinate--sometimes this is seen as something of a parallel to the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the Archduke of Austria, which is said to be one of the causes of the first World War. This interpretation helps explain how a film that is mostly on the "wrong" side of the moral compass, or even nihilistic (until the ending), made it past the censors. Whatever the reasons, though, it's a refreshing, unusual and well-made film that gains bizarre, eerie universality through its ambiguity.