Fight Club (1999) Re-Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Fight Club
Year: 1999
Director: David Fincher
Country: US
Language: English

David Fincher's Fight Club was the first film I reviewed for this site back on March 19th, 2012. I gave this film a 1/5 , claiming that it was  "A celebration of fascism, shady philosophy and gratuitous violence." On October 2nd, 2012 I reviewed it again, exclaiming that it was "masturbation material for angry teenagers and testosterone filled old men" I haven't been easy on this movie, infact I've enjoyed ranting about it off and on for the last 4 years. Recently I watched it again and new ideas emerged. I had to re-re-review it.

Fight Club is about a nameless narrator (Edward Norton) who attends support groups in attempt to overcome his emotional state and relieve his insomnia. There he meets Marla (Helena Bonham Carter) who attends for many similar reasons Soon he begins to associate himself with Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) and gets dragged into creating an underground fight club which turns into a cult.

Without context I view Fight Club as "macho porn". It's pseudo-philosophical material could fill the meninist subreddit. "White males have it so hard!" boo-hoo and all that jazz. Personally I feel the film (and book) give a very oppressive view of what it means to be a man. Does aggression equal masculinity? Maybe in an ancient historical context, but even then the most well known Greeks weren't necessarily battlefield leaders. I would rather have been Socrates (minus the poisoning) than Leonidas. 

Viewed in the context of its time period, Fight Club is the perfect film to capture what the 90's was "about". There was an overall anger, angst, and ambivalence towards society. We wanted to move as far away from the materialism of the 80's as we could, but we were so desperate for identity and direction that we latched onto things we liked from other eras. Music was either branded to death (Spice Girls) or hopelessly nihilistic (Nirvana). Gaming, film and sports were all about "attitude". Even though the cold war was over, the economy was doing well and there was very little war (except you know, the Gulf War) the West kinda hated itself.

Other films (Truman Show, The Matrix, JFK) would also pick up on the 90's general distrust of authority and emergence of conspiracy theorists (dear lawd, do I hate the conspiracy theorists) but I think Fight Club captured the general mood of the decade the best. The lack of identity was society's identity. The narrator's hangup's about men being emasculated by their current roles of society captured how men felt back then and still feel this day (though I personally feel they are incorrect).

Even though I do loathe this film from an entertainment and ethical standpoint, I must admit that it is technically well made and - if viewed in historical context- it is a pretty accurate depiction of the 1990's. Throwing all real world logic aside (how exactly does shooting one's self in the face remove schizophrenia?) I'd say it's THE American film of the 1990's in terms of tone and atmosphere. 

Anchors Aweigh (1945) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Anchors Aweigh
Year: 1945
Director: George Sidney
Country: US
Language: English

The first of three collaborations of Frank Sinatra and Gene Kelly, Anchors Aweigh would prove to be memorable in more than one way. It was the first time audiences would see Old Blue Eyes, as this is the first Sinatra vehicle in colour. It was Gene Kelly's first opportunity to take full flight as a creative force. It features rare Technicolor footage from MGM studios and the Hollywood Bowl in 1945, and it has one of the most incredible scenes to ever be shown from any musical during the golden age of the Hollywood musical. 

Two sailors, one naive, the other experienced in the ways of the world, on liberty in Los Angeles, is the setting for this movie musical. 

Even audiences who have never seen an old Hollywood picture know of the iconic Jerry & Gene Kelly dance. The scene blended live action and animation almost perfectly and, at the time, was a landmark in film. For many years it was hailed as a special effects marvel (up yours Disney!). Although the short spectacle did cost the studio an extra $100,00 the film did make the money back pretty easily. 

Up until this point in his movie career, Sinatra was a pop singing sensation often brought onto a film project to do a single scene. Kelly was the bigger movie star, but Sinatra's music fame had the potential to bring in much more money so he was given top billing. The two male leads have great chemistry together; they are charismatic enough to charm their audience through most of the picture. Unfortunately the 2.5hr run-time is a bit long, and the plot tends to drag because of that. If a few numbers and scenes were cut, the picture might have a better chance at capturing the attention of modern audiences.

As usual, Gene Kelly's choreography is top-notch, only rivaled at the time by the films of Fred Estaire. Though no particular song stands out, overall they add to the atmosphere and delightful tone throughout the picture. Anchors Aweigh may be long and somewhat dated, but it sure is an entertaining classic. 

Dangerous When Wet (1953) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Dangerous When Wet
Year: 1953
Director: Charles Walters
Country: US
Language: English

Get your mind out of the gutter, this isn't one of THOSE movies. I mean, this does feature some decent looking women in skin-tight bikinis, but this is the 50's and Tom & Jerry make an appearance so...no, you won't get Russ Meyer level nudity. Oddly enough this is marketed as a family picture and the uplifting tone does fit in line with the rest of their family pictures of that era. While researching 1950's musicals I decided to check out Dangerous When Wet and analyze why I hadn't heard of it sooner.

In this, a young woman (Esther Williams) enters a contest to be the first to swim the English Channel. 

In her autobiography, Esther Williams says her film plots were rather generic and that she felt she was being typecast on many occasions. Indeed she has starred in more than one film where her character was a swimmer (Bathing Beauty in 1944 & Million Dollar Mermaid in 1952) and those films had more theatrical swimming scenes. Despite being filmed in a back lot water tank, Dangerous When Wet has a more authentic feel than those previous films. 

Perhaps the first film I've seen Esther Williams in, her acting did manage to win me over. Due to her being so charismatic, I found her struggle rather riveting and I was hoping she would surpass her English Channel goal. Williams’ famous swim with Tom and Jerry is an impressive blend of live action and animation for the early 50's. The technology would be surpassed, but for the time it was an animation benchmark. 

Dangerous When Wet is pure escapism, a wonderful delight for the soul. It's hard not to be entranced by the beauty of this film, especially considering its many catchy musical moments. I particularly liked “I Got Out of Bed on the Right Side". If you're looking for some 50's entertainment that will lift your mood, this is it. 

 

Rasputin and the Empress (1932) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Rasputin and the Empress
Year: 1932
Director: Richard Boleslavsky
Country: US
Language: English

If you stick long enough through the credits, you'll find that pretty much every modern picture ends with "This is a work of fiction. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events, is purely coincidental.” This is standard legal rhetoric that has become so cliche some films go out of their way to mock it. I've always wondered "when did this practice begin?" Well, its origins involve an infamous Russian named Rasputin. 

In this film, a prince (John Barrymore) plots to kill the mad monk Rasputin (Lionel Barrymore) for the good of the czar, the czarina and Russia. 

In 1916 Prince Felix Yusupov was one of several Russian aristocrats agonizing over the unseemly influence that Rasputin held over the czar and his wife. In December he killed Rasputin, but the czar was so distraught about the event that he exiled the prince (inadvertently saving him from certain slaughter during the revolution). 16 years later Yusupov was penniless in Paris, though he had heard about the film and thought he could make some money off of it. 

Having bragged about Rasputin's murder in a memoir, Yusupov couldn't build a libel case against the studio. Instead he insisted that the film was factually inaccurate, a problem that MGM ignored even when an MGM researcher warned them about the possibility of being sued during production. Yiusupov and his wife sued the Studio, and a jury helped in awarding them over $125,000. A justice in the case told MGM that they ought to have put in a disclaimer stating inaccuracy. MGM took their advice.

Featuring three Barrymores in prominent roles (John, Lionel and Ethel) their performances are better than average, making this a somewhat entertaining picture. Though one should not neglect reading about Russian history in favor of viewing this film, the lack of accuracy is forgiven when presented with visually pleasing set-pieces and a well-structured script. While Rasputin and the Empress did change Hollywood legal practice it is pretty dated and it's clear why the film hasn't aged as well as other pictures from that time period. 

God's Not Dead (2014) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: God's Not Dead
Year: 2014
Director: Harold Cronk
Country: US
Language: English

This movie makes my brain hurt. When German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote that "God is Dead" in his classic work Thus Spoke Zarathustra he was not saying that God is dead in a literal sense. Rather, the phrase conveys his view that the Christian God is no longer a credible source of absolute moral principles. Everybody involved in this picture clearly didn't get the memo as we are treated to an extremely dumbed down version of Inherit the Wind. 

 In God's Not Dead college philosophy professor Mr. Radisson's (Kevin Sorbo) curriculum (wherein he demands that everybody write "God is dead" to pass his class)  is challenged by his new student, Josh (Shane Harper), who believes God exists.

I'm not sure if this film or War Room is the bottom of the barrel when it comes to faith-based Christian films. Kevin Sorbo does a fine job at playing the maniacally evil professor who dares ask his students to learn about Nietzche. His character is better off in a Tom & Jerry cartoon, but can't blame the actor for such terrible direction and script. Twists happen and turns out this guy has an agenda, he hates God (because reasons) and...getting a bunch of teens to write "God is Dead" will make it all better? Huh!? 

The film takes Josh's viewpoint and doesn't dare give the professor any legitimate critique of Christianity. God's Not Dead's viewpoint is that atheists are just a couple whiners and that it's fairly easy to convert them. If this is supposed to teach Christians how to use apologetics to evangelize, then it is pretty behind the times. Full of cliches and stereotype's, this is probably the most preachy (well, there is literally a kid preaching during the duration of the film) and immature "faith" film I've ever seen. 

I don't have an agenda here, I like Christianity/Christians and I even find that faith based films (Passion of the Christ, Last Temptation of Christ) can be quite great, but this fails on every level. If the only engaging character is the person you're supposed to like the least, then you're doing a very bad job. In suggesting that persecution is being forced to acknowledge others' beliefs, I give ye 0 stars.

Grace Unplugged (2013) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Grace Unplugged
Director: Brad J. Silvermann
Year: 2013
Country: US
Language: English

To avoid controversy, many Christian Directors play it safe; sticking to more traditional and favoured opinions, rather that asking questions and seeking alternative answers. Director Brad J. Silvermann’s newest picture Grace Unplugged strongly leans toward the safe side.

The film stars AJ Michalka as Grace Trey, a devout church-goer who wishes to be a pop star just like her father. With some help, Grace eventually reaches the stardom she has always wanted. However, with each step into the spotlight there is more pressure to compromise her values and strain her relationship with God. Will Grace reject her faith or grow stronger?

Grace Unplugged strives really hard to be a traditional Christian movie, the kind that would be recommended on your local church bulletin board. Unfortunately because of this it loses its artistic soul. The drama never picks up any steam. Whenever Grace's problems do grow they are quickly resolved in the next scene. There is no real "crisis of faith"  (regardless of how hard AJ Michalka attempts to chew the scenery) just first world problems.

 

The Director has made a film that is overly sentimental, preachy and terribly made. The acting is atrocious; I’ve been more moved by a blind monkey with Tourette’s than AJ Michalka. The characters are poorly written, it's honestly hard to care about anybody in this picture. The supposedly "dark" and "suspenseful" moments of Grace Unplugged are laughably uneventful. 

The film doesn’t even skim the surface of Christian philosophy and it doesn't give a legitimate or engaging view of "crisis of faith" (see Calvary for a great Christian film). Grace Unplugged might work as kiddie fodder, but  but as a serious work it needs to be vastly improved.

ChristCore (2012) Review-By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: ChristCore

Year: 2012

Director: Justin Ludwig

Country: Canada

Language: English

Throughout history, Christianity and music have been at great odds, often bitter enemies. According to legend the great blues musician Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in exchange for talent, wealth and fame. At the height of Elvis Presley's popularity in the 50's religious conservatives claimed that rock and roll was "the devil's music". During a press conference in 1966 John Lennon claimed that The Beatles were more popular than Jesus, which caused a major backlash and resulted in public burnings of their records.  

Atheist Canadian Director Justin Ludwig has created a documentary called Christcore. It is about a group of musicians who dare to combine Christianity and rock music. The film starts with Ludwig's own doubt regarding this relatively new phenomena, citing his own views, but then slowly submerges us into this strange new world. 

To me, the combination of punk and Christianity seems to be the worst of both worlds. Anybody who grew up listening to the Sex Pistols or the hymns of a good church choir would agree with me.  However the point of Christian Hardcore is that it doesn't seem to fit, it's the music taste a culture of religious outcasts. Ludwig shows this rather well, as we are immersed in the lives  of people with nothing to live for except God and music. They are fascinating and yet incredibly strange.

Though Ludwig has a distaste for Christianity, he doesn't let his subjective opinion to  affect what we see on screen. He allows each subject to speak their mind and he gives them plenty of space to be themselves without judgement. This is refreshing, especially since most documentary directors nowadays make their own personal beliefs to dominate the picture. Unfortunately the film doesn't dive too deep into Christian philosophy, but despite this, the director is incredibly effective in making Christian Hardcore appealing. 

Sausage Party (2016) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Sausage Party 
Year: 2016
Director: Greg Tiernan
Country: US
Language: English

Ah, imagine taking your child to see this picture only to have to explain the many sexual inneundos littered throughout Sausage Party's run-time. "Daddy, why does the hotdog want to jack rabbit into the bun?". Sexual insinuation and juvenile visual metaphor take hold of this Seth Rogan vehicle, but I promise you the film ends up being smarter -and more entertaining- than toilet/bedroom humour. 

The food in Sausage Party believe in “the gods” (human consumers) who select a chosen few from the shelves and escort them into “the Great Beyond”. A jar of honey mustard (Danny McBride) is returned from "the Great Beyond", traumatized from his experiences and tells our hero Frank (Seth Rogan as a weenie) about the "truth". Frank must investigate these claims for himself. 

Sausage Party dissects religion and belief systems far better than the vast majority of Hollywood Christian pictures that have come out lately (sorry War Room). Frank's crisis of faith is quite easy to relate to, and the screenwriter does a good job at not making this an "angry atheist" picture. It's view on conflict can be overly simplistic at times however; the weenie suggests the Jewish hotdog and the Muslim lavash, metaphors for the Israel/Palestine conflict, should solve their problems by just "getting along".  

Directed by Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan, Sausage Party’s animation by Nitrogen Studios is pretty good. It holds its own against the major animation studios like Dreamworks and Pixar, while being a vast improvement over Fox's animation. One would have a difficult time dismissing this film as purely visual innuendo, serving as juvenile humor. The picture lightly critiques the food industry, asking why we must incorporate race into our food. 

While I didn't find myself laughing too much during this "comedy", I did find myself in reflection and thought about the serious topics Sausage Party was presenting. Having a fairly short run-time (80 minutes) this film was pretty engaging. It was better than anybody thought it would be. Certainly one of the better productions to come out of 2016. 

Fantastic Planet (1973) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Fantastic Planet
Year: 1973
Director: Rene Laloux
Country: France
Language: French

May 1968 was a volatile period of civil unrest in France highlighted by demonstrations and massive general strikes as well as the occupation of universities and other places of work across the country. Political leaders feared revolution as France's economy came to a halt. The protests spurred an artistic movement, with songs, imaginative graffiti, posters, and slogans but also intense violence, which ensured their defeat. The period of time immediately following this event spurred an artistic hippie movement which would allow films like Fantastic Planet to be made. 

This futuristic story takes place on a faraway planet where blue giants rule, and oppressed humanoids rebel against the machine-like leaders.

During the late 60's-early 70's France had spurred an intellectual hippie movement, much like America did, but perhaps a little more left leaning. They sought to produce films of great intellect that would also be a spiritual experience. It also helped that they did loads of drugs. While you're watching Fantastic Planet you'll be thinking "were these people high!?" and the answer is yes, yes they were. 

The first French animation feature since 1953, it was hand-drawn by Roland Topor and roughly 25 other artists.Their aesthetic blends well with Topor’s style of art, which is a combination of intellectual and random. Compared to computer animation of today and the clean rotoscoped animation of yesterday, the hand drawn animation certainly shows its age. Granted, I suspect the film-makers didn't want animation that was too clean and too polished. They weren't exactly keen on sticking to a formula. 

The jazzy score by Alain Goraguer is a remarkable product of the time. While it doesn't flow well out of context with the film and/or time period it still evokes much of Fantastic Planet's themes (which can be applied to an endless amount of topics)  and improves the picture. This is a fairly unique picture that is obviously a must-see for anybody who is interested in film. 

Kill Them All and Come Back Alone (1968) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Kill Them All and Come Back Alone
Year: 1968
Director: Enzo G. Castellari
Country: Italy
Language: Italian

1967-1968 were the peak years of the Italian West, a short period of time when the Italian film industry produced over a hundred Westerns. At this time The Magnificent Seven was an enormous hit in Italy, and had a large influence on many of its Westerns. Kill Them All and Come Back Alone takes the concept of a team of specialists on a mission, each man with his own defining skill/stereotype, and adds in the typical cynicism of the spaghetti Western. 

In 1864, mercenary Clyde MacKay leads a squad of hard-case cutthroats on a mission for the Confederate high command: infiltrate an enemy fortress and steal a million dollars in gold from the Union Army. 

Even when they don’t have an overt agenda, Italian Westerns usually have an interesting political or sociological subtext. Kill Them All and Come Back Alone is unusual because it has none, rather every moment is built on pure primal action. A dialogue scene can hardly run for a minute before a shoot-out occurs or a fist-fight breaks out. 

Kill Them All and Come Back Alone has an attention problem, as it loathes any moments where the actors can catch their breath and absolutely might be moving at all times. The onscreen violence is, surprisingly, not too graphic and involves a great deal of creativity due to a variety of unusual weapons being used. 

The performances...exist? It's hard to be a great actor when your character development is death itself. Kill Them All is certainly an accurate title. I suppose if I just wanted to watch mindless violence this would be an A+, but I like some sort of substance with my movies. Watch this picture if only for curiosity's sake. 

 

The Glass Key (1942) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: The Glass Key
Year: 1942
Director: Stuart Heisler 
Country: US
Language: English

Many film buffs do not know that Akira Kurosawa borrowed plot elements from The Glass Key for his 1961 action flick Yojimbo. That film inspired Sergio Leone for his 1964 spaghetti western A Fistful of Dollars, which then inspired George Lucas for his 1977 science fiction blockbuster Star Wars and so on. Essentially without this picture you might not have many of your favorite films & Hollywood might be drastically different. 

In this film, a crooked politician (Brian Donlevy) finds himself being accused of murder by a gangster from whom he refused help during a re-election campaign.

The Glass Key is a pre-noir picture that was allowed to stay fairly faithful to its seedy source material despite being under the strict Motion Picture Production Code. The film was the second pairing of Alan Ladd and Veronica Lake, who made quite an impression in This Gun For Fire. Neither were necessarily great actors, but they made a great duo who could improve the right (noir) kind of film. Their chemistry here is undeniable. 

This adaptation is toned down significantly from the original source material, yet still manages to be gritty. The director had some pretty great challenges in getting some material onscreen and I'm surprised some scenes (particularly a scene which involves a pretty nasty fight) got approved. Considered at the time as a B-movie, the incredible black and white photography and a cold, dark and brutal atmosphere prove that if it wasn't given a lavish budget, it was still made with great detail. 

The Glass Key is a great under-appreciated crime drama from Classic Hollywood. While it doesn't have the ideal noir ending, overall it's a satisfying picture that boasts a superior performance by Veronica Lake. 

Don Juan (1926) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Don Juan
Year: 1926
Director: Alan Crosland 
Country: US
Language: N/A

Don Juan was a historically significant film for many reasons. In regards to the advancement of technology was the first feature-length movie to be released with a Vitaphone score and sound effects, which makes it a "sound" film but not necessarily a "talkie". It also reunited John Barrymore and Mary Astor, who had worked so well together in previous pictures, most notably Beau Brummel (1924)

Don Juan romances his way across Europe until he ends up in Rome and runs into something completely different: a nice girl (Mary Astor). Unfortunately, she is promised to another man, so sift action must be taken.

The Don Juan character first appeared in print in 1630, the anti-hero of the play The Seducer of Seville. It was a tragedy destined to be produced by Hollywood. Considered a "prestige picture", this film was given a pretty high budget and had the special attention of the studio.It was directed very well under Alan Crosland (The Jazz Singer). Under Crosland's direction Don Juan moves swiftly and is cut, photographed & edited in a precise manner.

Unfortunately where the film lacks is John Barrymore's acting, He chews the scenery a little to much to the point that his over-acting becomes unintentionally comedic. His exaggerations are great when there are actually comedic scenes, but not so much for the serious parts.Mary Astor plays her role well though, even if the script doesn't give much for her to do. She is more restrained than Barrymore and thus contributes a far more consistent tone to the film.

Though the writing is a bit poor and we need less of Barrymore, I must say that the sets, costume design, and cinematography are pretty well done.It's doesn't have the best message when it comes to issues of feminism (Don Juan can be impure, but his lady MUST be 100% clean) but it still is entertaining enough to watch once. 

 

Roxie Hart (1942) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Roxie Hart
Year: 1942
Director: William A. Wellman
Country: US
Language: English

Upon my shock of discovering that Bob Fosse's 1970's broadway hit was NOT the first time the public had seen Chicago, it was made in 1927 by Cecil B. DeMille (uncredited because he was also making the deeply religious King of Kings at the time), I decided to watch the original film version and found myself amazed at how good a "silent musical" could be. So Chicago (1927) must have led to the Bob Fosse version right? Nope! We have one more stop to do, a remake in 1942.

In this film, Roxie Hart signs a murder confession in order to attract publicity for her dancing career as dames don't swing in Cook County. Will everything go as planned?

While Chicago (1927) will be a joy to watch because of how engulfed it is in the roaring twenties, Roxie Hart may be a chore because of how hard it tries to remind you of the setting. The script throws phrases of the day in quick succession throughout the entirety of the run-time, but often the lingo used doesn't work in context to the conversation. It's cute at first, but gets tedious as the picture goes on. 

Roxie Hart feels a little more censored than the original (Well duh, Chicago was pre-code) and struggles to deal with its themes in a mature way. During a scene where two women are fighting, some applesauce attaboys thought it would be a big cheese big six (see how annoying lingo out of context is?) to include some noises of screeching cats. Roxie also isn't a deranged murderer in this film...but a dumb but sweet kid. Just...no.

Some part of me hopes that Roxie Hart was butchered purely because of circumstance and time period, but the several successful film-noir pictures made during this period tell me that this film just isn't that good especially compared to every other film & stage version that came before and after it.

Chicago (1927) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Chicago
Year: 1927
Director: Cecil B. DeMille
Country: US
Language: N/A

Legendary choreographer Bob Fosse's Chicago is one of the most successful and longest running Broadway shows in its history. In the 00's it was made into a Hollywood production and would go on to acclaimed commercial and critical success, winning the prestigious "Best Picture" Oscar. To my surprise, Fosse's show wasn't the first use of Maurine Watkins' screenplay. It was made as a silent in 1927 and remade in 1942. 

Based on a true crime story, the movie is about a wild jazz-loving and boozing wife Roxie Hart who kills her boyfriend in cold blood after he leaves her. 

A Cecil B. DeMille production, although Frank Urson was credited as the director, it was widely known that DeMille directed most of the picture. He took his name off the credits because The King of Kings was also in theaters and he didn't want audiences to be torn between the two wildly contrasting films. DeMille's venture into producing pictures proved to have very mixed outcomes, both financially and critically. 

Chicago moves along at a rapid pace, although it does slow down in the middle, it quickly picks up near the end. Phyllis Haver plays the lead character rather well, capturing Roxie's homicidal urges to perfection. In contrast, Victor Varconi doesn't play his role well, that or he has a poorly written character that is extremely hard to connect with. 

Chicago will be a fun picture to watch for modern audiences because of how well it captures the roaring twenties. Everything oozes red hot jazz, from Roxies tacky feathered dresses to the set design. The score, compiled by Herr Rodney Sauer and "The Mont Alto Motion Picture Orchestra", is utterly fascinating. This is one of the best "silent musicals" of Cinema.

Nero (1909) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Nero
Year: 1909
Director: Luigi Maggi
Country: Italy
Language: N/A

The reign of Emporer Nero was as infamous as it was bloody. Obviously a silent film couldn't cover every moment of Nero's life (I doubt even a 10 season television show could either), but Nero gives great effort in being a grand spectacle. This film was released in 1909, the start of what is now known as the Golden age of Italian cinema. Though eventually it would be known for post-war realism, in the silent period Italian Cinema was known for sweeping epics. 

The film  two of Nero’s more infamous acts: his dumping Octavia in favor of Poppaea and the burning of Rome.

The narrative structure used in Nero is quite common of the pre-feature era; the vignette.  It's a construction of the "good parts" of their material compacted into a highlight reel. This would mean a traditional narrative was missing, but the visuals were relatively easy to follow along to. Title cards would tell you where you are in throughout the story so you aren't left in the dark about what's happening if you don't know history. 

The sets and performances are quite stagy, but the emperor's story fits well with the stage and with the exaggerated acting that goes along with it. The performers move with grace, despite some of their gestures being clearly intended to be seen live. The sets are not exactly convincing, but do their best to create an "epic" feel. 

Clearly made with precision and dedication, Nero isn't a bad picture if you view it as a product of the pre-feature era. It's a fun mini-epic that has a certain appeal in its charm. At only 10-12 minutes (Youtube has different lengths), it's a breeze to get through. 

Snow White (1916) Review- By Michael J. Carlisle

Title: Snow White
Year: 1916
Director: J. Searle Dawley
Country: US
Language: N/A

This 1916 film of "Snow White" is a screen adaptation of the 1912 Broadway play, written by Jessie Braham White. It was thought to have been lost, until the George Eastman House located a print in a Danish film vault. Legend says that this is the inspiration for Walt Disney's 1937 animated film, which in time also inspired numerous other pictures, some of which included the Three Stooges. 

Snow White is a motherless princess, who arouses the jealousy and hatred of Mary Jane, the ugliest woman in the kingdom. 

As you'd expect the plot takes the same route that every Snow White picture that came after it did. Evil step-mother, lots of little people, prince who makes out with a corpse...you know, the usual. While it does have its dark moments, it doesn't go Grimm far. Marguerite Clark gives a standout performance as she recreates her Broadway role. Clark is not a well known name nowadays, even to fans of silent cinema, but she was a success in the 1910's, particularly because she could grasp what audiences needed/wanted in an actor. 

The costumes are very well made, evoking a sense of whim that most fairy-tale pictures ought to do. Aimed at children, Snow White is quite charming but lacks emotional or intellectual depth. By the end everything is neatly wrapped up and all loose ties are...tied. My main gripe with this picture is the title cards. There is too much dialogue in this SILENT picture. Where's Norma Desmond when you need her? "We had faces!" 

Despite some flaws, overall the picture is entertaining and easy to get into because the story is so familiar. This version of Snow White will never gain more fans than Disney's picture, but it does have a timeless quality and should be seen by newer generations.