Mabel normand
|
|  Yüklə 3.35 Mb.
|
The Extra Girl As has been stated, the murder of director William Desmond Taylor and its aftermath as a matter of course had a devastating impact on Mabel, both in her life and profession. Although she does not photograph well in Suzanna, her dolor and ill health appear perhaps even more pronounced in The Extra Girl. Although she could get by to some extent as Molly and Suzanna by being sort of a caricature, by the time of The Extra Girl this approach does not nearly work so well. A casual (though not very sensitive or feeling) viewer of the film can rightly complain that she is not only unsuitable for small-town-girl role here, but that worn out as she appears to be at times, she is discomforting in it. While her eyes do retain much of the liveliness and expression, some shots are done medium rather than close-up in order to avoid too much detail of her face that (as we have seen before) had become somewhat puffy and pallid. The Extra Girl was initially meant as a vehicle for Phyllis Haver, not Mabel, which Mabel, albeit in a friendly way, resented. Though her reaction was to be expected, given the change that had befallen her it is not hard to see why Sennett, at this juncture, should have had a difficult time finding suitable parts for her. Presumably what he really sought from her is reflected in David’s proposal to Sue Graham: “Give up this idea of a career and let’s get married.” This message occurs on a number of occasions of the film, most especially in the conclusion. Yet while Mabel leaves something to be desired in the central role, the story is better, and The Extra Girl is, overall, a more likable and satisfying film than Suzanna. It moves better, is more amusing, and the coarseness of the previous Sennett features is largely absent. Mabel does generally less well here than in Suzanna, yet Jones, this time, compensates and exceeds himself in his robust, optimistic outlook. It’s a story about a dreamy, yet spirited small-town-girl, who goes to Hollywood to seek her fame and fortune -- only to be sourly disappointed. As is usual with the Sennett features, Mabel is not wanting in a superb cast. George Nichols (of course) is back as the father figure, as is Anna Hernandez from Molly O’ in the mother role. Vernon Dent, who would come to be better known in later years by his appearances in many of the Three Stooges’ shorts, is humorous as a bumptious lout, not dissimilar to Eddie Gribbon‘s in Molly O’. Ralph Graves, as the boy friend, David, is a propitious embodiment, as well as representative, of the undaunted supporters Mabel had in Richard Jones, and the rest of the production company, cast and crew. Appropriately, one of the very opening shots of the film has a kitten coming to attack a ball of yarn. Next we see her all tangled up in the string in a ridiculous and hopeless way -- an obvious jibe at Mabel’s own trying challenges. On a personal note of my own, The Extra Girl was the first Mabel Normand film I ever saw. This was at around nine years of age. I mention this, because it gave me a unique opportunity to view Mabel without any pre-conceptions. What I recall was that she made an immediate, and successful, appeal to my sympathy. I instinctively felt a certain pity for her. I could see, even as young as I was, that she was obviously “not quite right” for the part -- there is too much knowing, and the wisdom of experience in her eyes. She is too wan to be taken as a fresh young girl the story suggests; yet despite all this, there was something still entrancing, charming and lovely about her, so that the blend of the strange sadness, the age of the film, and my own natural sympathy for her left an indelible impression. This said, I only especially felt this in the early part of the film. As it moved on, my interest went less to Mabel as such and was led more to the main story and action. Looking back now, those juvenile impressions were essentially correct. Mabel’s best, artistically speaking, occurs in The Extra Girl‘s earliest scenes. As Sue Graham, “practicing” her acting for the benefit of her boyfriend and her mother, she performs a dazzling array of impersonations, expressions and faces: seductress, saint, clown (she does a wonderful little gag with her eyes), and damsel in distress. Snippets of these little sequences have been used as comic spots on television programs in our own time, attesting to their agelessness. Unfortunately, Mabel gleams less resplendently for most of the rest of the film. Among the interesting things attempted, she rides a speeding buck-board pulled by racing horses and whipped on by her boyfriend (in order to escape her father and Applejohn.) Here she has only to sit in the wagon while the boyfriend drives the team. Following this is a shot where she runs, and, with help of her beau, climbs up aboard the caboose of a moving train. It is not as fluid and spontaneous as the athletic antics of “Keystone Mabel.” Yet she gives it her best, so that the effort is both moving in its way and admirable. Throughout much the film we catch a number of the later Mabel’s peculiar mannerisms. These are not so easy to describe, and are, understandably, necessary to be seen to be appreciated. We can, though, mention a couple at least to suggest some idea of them. In one instance, she talks character A about character B, with all three present in the same room. With one hand covering the side of her face - thus facetiously “concealing” her from B (and also at the same time perhaps winking) -- she speaks to A about B as if B isn’t present. Another has her with wide smile on her face, her eyes all but closed: similar to the kind of smiley face we normally associate with Stan Laurel. At the studio, Sue Graham, as prop-room lackey, manifests a certain insubordination -- kicking hats and goofing off. This “devil-may-care” attitude the passing years had not significantly diminished, and is one characteristic of hers that she retains with some zest and tenacity. At one point, Sue has a screen test done before an old-fashioned, circa 1910, garden scene. Again, one gets the impression Sennett wanted to want to bring back the “good old days.” It is a nostalgic and unforgettable scene, even if the main gag used isn’t especially brilliant. Cast in the role of the “Actor” (playing opposite Mabel) is William Desmond, a veteran lead who had been prominent in the teens. It is odd that given the similarity of his name to William Desmond Taylor‘s (whose original name was actually William Deane Tanner) he should be in the film. One would think it might be making too light of something very serious. Indeed, is Sennett perhaps mocking Taylor by pointing out his false identity? Though we don’t have answers ready to us, certainly the casting of Desmond is very odd, and is not likely a mere coincidence. The motive behind it then is not entirely apparent. But be it what it was, it would be safe to guess that while Mabel tolerated the jest she probably did not care for it.88 The Extra Girl‘s most famous sequence is that where she walks a real lion around the studio set thinking it is only Teddy in costume. This is followed by Sue and the studio people’s discovery and response to her error. It is Jones’ action minded direction and editing that makes the scene work so successfully. Perhaps it was thought a little “shock” therapy would help Mabel, and who is really only incidental to what transpires. She seems to be giving it her best, but the fact is, she simply does not look at all well. Once more, she comes across as too unhappy to be properly funny. Even when she is smiling, there are times when she looks as though she has a hard time keeping from crying. Why then didn’t Mabel just retire, get married, and have children? This is what the ending scene of The Extra Girl seems to ask and suggest. At first, we might think this might be seen as male patronization, but in Mabel’s case it perhaps made good sense. For most of the picture, and for that matter her last few pictures, her get-up-and-go seemed to have given out. Although Mabel always did have her moments, her health does not seem up to the demanding requirements of ongoing performance. One could speculate at length on her reasons for not settling down and retiring from films. No doubt one reason was a desire to not seem to be chased from her career by people unfairly berating and haunting her with scandal. Another, understandably, is that she didn’t want to so easily relinquish what had otherwise and hitherto brought her so much fame and felicity. Unfortunately, times had changed, Mabel had changed, and things were far from what they once had been. “This lion is the whole show, far more amusing than Miss Normand.”89 The reviewer here is not really being so harsh as he is being truthful. More significantly, though perhaps not consciously, he hits on something more than he seems to say. The lion in this case is not Duke the lion so much as director Dick Jones and cast. They are all pulling for her, giving their all. Considering what she was up against, they are in truth veritable “lions” in their effort. Yet because we are dealing with comedy, they are also “clowns.” One is much reminded of the ballet sequence in Limelight. In a way Mabel is like the dying girl who the poor clowns are trying to cheer up and revive. These, however, are no ordinary clowns, but heroic and clever ones as well; and in the case of The Extra Girl, this is no fairy tale, but real life. Though her case looks to be hopeless, she tries, without much success, to pretend it isn’t. The clowns, even so, are too loyal to her to give up hope; and so they go all out, as best they can, for her. The courage and heart of both Mabel and her encouraging consolers is what ultimately makes The Extra Girl a superior, albeit flawed, film. Again, as in the case of Suzanna, its accomplishment lies not in the optimal realization of the original idea and characters of the story. In that department it largely fails. Rather, as with Suzanna, it is in its unintended portrayal of some brave people in real life -- not fiction -- struggling against crushing and insurmountable circumstances that is found The Extra Girl‘s most conspicuous worth. Mabel never lacked for a good crew in Jones and the given Sennett cast, and in what would turn out to be their last and final go together, the latter acquit themselves most capably. The Hal Roach films One of the repeated aspects of Mabel’s later films is that she is almost always playing a little girl character. This was not always the most ingenious use of her, yet was dictated by the wants of her audience and producers. Did this kind of type-casting go against her own wishes? It is not easy to say, but the simple answer would seem to be no. While she had told William Desmond Taylor she regretted not being able to make films like The Little Minister or The Morals of Marcus (Taylor’s version was called Morals), she does not seem outwardly to have been unhappy about her own screen roles. While Gene Fowler, in Father Goose, does present her as telling Sennett she was weary of Cinderella,90 she was probably more traditional in her tastes then we might off hand suspect. That she was as sentimental and old-fashioned minded as Sennett, however, would, on the other hand, be an obvious overstatement. Depending on how one looks at them, Mabel’s Roach films are either too little too late, or else fitting farewells of an unpretentious genius and a great heart, and on reflection the latter seems the more correct of the two. In doing short films for Hal Roach in 1926 and 1927, Mabel was decidedly taking a step down from her former station. Where as before she was always the main star, now she was one among dozens of the Hal Roach “All-Stars.” Possibly she wanted to be sporting by offering some humility on her part, even to the extent of starring in a short with the not so flattering title Raggedy Rose. In The Nickel-Hopper her character, a working – and dancing -- girl, says to the un-introduced beau: “I don’t live on Park St. I live on Lark St.” In other words, she parts with any claim to affected title and when it gets right down to it, she’s not really so different than the rest of us. The two and three reel shorts Mabel made for Hal Roach are actually very good taken as the light, upbeat comedy fare. They are not by any stretch masterpieces; yet they are entertaining enough, and suggest what Mabel might have done outside Sennett. In light of her previous real life ordeals, there is an understandable effort in these shorts to create some sympathy for her. She is still mostly playing Cinderella; yet, except for portions of Raggedy Rose, she seems more confident, and her general look has improved since either Suzanna or The Extra Girl. It is intriguing for us to see, as it no doubt was then, to see where Mabel has come to in the wake of the previous scandals and health problems. Under the circumstances, she seems to have weathered them encouragingly well -- though by no means completely. In Nickel-Hopper she breaks down weeping in such a way that, again, is quite inappropriate to the circumstance; such that we are painfully brought to mind of the prodigious difficulties and sadness still burdening her.91 Moreover, she looks not a little disoriented in some of Raggedy Rose. Anita Garvin, who appeared therein with Mabel, in an interview I had with her related that during shooting Mabel had trouble finding her spot in front of the camera. And, indeed, Mabel on screen occasionally seems not a little befuddled or distracted. Other than these particular exceptions, Mabel comes off rather well in the Roach comedies – again, as always, given the trying circumstances. Raggedy Rose,92 the first of the Roach films, was directed by Richard Wallace in collaboration with Stan Laurel, 93 and is much less of a film than it might have been. Though it reuses some of the gags of What Happened to Rosa, the premise for her character is interesting. Rose is the one “who gets everything second hand -- even the sunshine.” Mabel and Max Davidson (who appeared in The Extra Girl) make for a credible comedy team, and it’s to be regretted their pairing was not further pursued. In spite of this, external stresses, such as the revival of the Taylor case by District Attorney Asa Keyes, brought a tension to the making of the film that were apparently too much for her. This in turn must have affected Wallace and Laurel; so that much of Raggedy Rose, particularly the latter part, is done in a rather careless and sloppy manner. It is in this short, incidentally, that the gag of an auto completely falling apart on slightest impact -- the same one used later in the Roach Laurel and Hardy comedies -- saw one of its earliest debuts. In The Nickel-Hopper -- for the first time -- she is placed in a setting that makes reference to the 20’s Jazz Age. While Clara Bow was able to take full advantage of this, Mabel was prevented previously from doing so largely because it clashed too much with the image of her prior films. Moreover, it might have been thought unnecessarily provocative, given the Taylor scandal, for Mabel to be cast in the role of frivolous flapper -- “silly girl” or “sweetheart” being much safer characters public relations-wise. Here she is still a not well-to- do working girl, yet, this time, one at a dance hall kicking up her heals to live Jazz music. More in temper of the era also, the father, rather than being the respectable, if silly figure, of previous films is here an outright, good-for-nothing buffoon -- competently enough acted by Michael Visaroff.94 Aside from this, there are diverting, albeit brief, appearances by Oliver Hardy and the then not-so-famous William Henry Pratt, known later as Boris Karloff. There isn’t much improvement on the old gags; some of those in Rose being decidedly better. Yet it proceeds more smoothly and evenly than Raggedy Rose, and aside from a scene where she breaks down crying (rather inexplicably so), she looks relatively more refreshed and up to form. The film ends with an amusing and surrealistic sequence. After she and the groom accidentally trip off a cliff, her wedding dress opens up into a parachute, and by this means the two newlyweds magically descend. Anything Once! (and also Should Men Walk Home?) is noteworthy because it is such airy fluff and, other than a little paleness and a slight rigidity in Mabel’s movements, there seems hardly a sign of problems, unlike the previous Roach films. There are likeable moments, such as Mabel at the ironing board. But the comedy is not otherwise remarkable. Later in the film, she is dressed in an 18th century tall wig, and ballroom gown similar to the one in Molly O’. Although a two reel short, it is, like Molly O’, a Cinderella story, but a Cinderella story which ends on the note that our diminutive heroine “must be wooed to be won.” One Hour Married while it is rumored to exist, has not yet (to my knowledge) been found. A comedy set amid the trenches of World War One, it appears to have been a clever and unusual film for her; with Mabel at one point sporting a mustache -- a witty touch reminiscent of the old Biograph short Katchem Kate. Her last outing, Should Men Walk Home? is very unusual among all of her films. One has to go as far back as Tillie’s Punctured Romance to find Mabel playing the “bad girl.” Here she is a gun robber holding up vehicles, and later a jewel thief! Needless to say, it is quite out of character from what we saw her doing earlier, and, though only in fun, is still a daring move away from Sue Graham and Raggedy Rose. Directed by Leo McCarey, the plot of this short centers on two crooks (played respectively by Normand and Creighton Hale) attending a party at a fancy mansion, and who seek by stealth to make off with a purloined jewel. Meanwhile a suspicious house detective, portrayed by Eugene Pallette, follows them about attempting to catch them with the goods. Hale is a both appealing and funny lead, and Mabel carries herself well. Certainly, it is very curious to see her doing something so very different. Despite this, and aside from its value in this way, there is no great merit to this comedy, other than to suggest what other kinds of roles she might else have expanded into. Should Men Walk Home? is like a test film; the ideas and possibilities of which regrettably were never to be realized. We can say that her performance shows some new promise, but that’s about it. A firm conclusion is impossible. And thus it could be said, like the film’s title itself, that Mabel’s career itself ends on a question mark. The woes of life over time and ultimately crashed in with ruinous fury upon her, and there is simply no getting around the fact. These troubles interfered tremendously with and strained the quality of her work; such that after the triumph of her Biograph and Keystone Days -- with the notable exception of Mickey -- one can’t help but feel a little disappointed with the later films by comparison. The last are good enough in and of themselves -- after all Mabel just about never bores -- yet for the most part they fall noticeably short of the energy and youthful fervor of the Biograph, Keystone films, and Mickey. But this is true only if we narrowly insist on treating those later films as comedy and fun entertainment. If, however, we step back and view the star of these films as an exuberant heart fatally disappointed, passing through the relentless tumult of real life, we get an affecting portrait of endurance holding out against egregious and aggravated suffering. Though blow follows upon tragic blow, she stills looks forward, while doing her best to laugh and make others happy. She does not always succeed; yet this only reminds us of the devastating obstacles and insurmountable ills she was faced with. In retrospect then, hers is a beautiful, yet sad, drama that teaches a deeper wisdom about life that few at the time, even those involved in making these films, could hardly have been aware. The mystery and intrigue accompanying it all only adds to its fascination for us today. In addition to the semi-real life portrait of Mabel in these later films, we also are provided with indirect glimpses of those who steadfastly stood up for her: Richard Jones and many others -- under no little pressure themselves -- who took part in their making and production. Their wit, courage and effort in support of her, remain an inspiration and model to those who aspire to something more noble and worthy in this life. * from Moving Picture World, June 25, 1910 Over The Garden Wall (Vitagraph) -- A pretty story which is perhaps best described by saying that quite in a natural way a widow and widower95 meet and marry through their children, becoming acquainted over the garden wall. The story is not great perhaps but it is pleasant and the ending is sweet as the most ardent admirer of love stories could desire. * from The Nickelodeon,96 March 11, 1911 Betty Becomes a Maid (Vitagraph) – Margaret is the older and Betty the younger of two sisters; naturally Margaret claims precedence. Their brother Jack writes home from college stating that he will bring a young unmarried millionaire friend to spend a few days with them. Margaret immediately gets in line to set her cap for the young visitor and warns Betty not to be too presumptuous, for Margaret is well aware that Betty has the advantage in looks and winsomeness. In order to give her sister every chance. Betty says she will play waitress. Brother Jack and his friend join the family at dinner, Margaret pays considerable attention to Jack’s friend, but he is attracted by Betty, who is now acting as serving maid. He is so smitten by the pretty maid, that he can see nothing else and Margaret becomes greatly incensed. The young millionaire makes up his mind to get acquainted with the waitress and Jack agrees to help him, not letting him know that she is his own sister. Betty of whom the young fellow has heard a great deal. He follows Betty into the kitchen, bribes the cook to let him sit there until he meets the pretty girls. When she comes in he makes love to her, and in the excitement both he and Betty get covered with flour and sit in the dough, which the cook has been mixing. To add to the fun of it all, Betty tries to protect her face with the dough, from the kisses which the young fellow is trying to give her, she is a sight to behold, but nothing daunted, he makes a hole in the dough and succeeds in planting two or three kisses on her pretty mouth. Betty’s father comes into the kitchen with Margaret, the young millionaire tells them he is in love with the waitress; explanations follow, Betty’s identity is made known. The young fellow proposes to her there and then, the father’s consent is gained and Margaret joins in with all the rest in offering congratulations to little sister and intended. Released March 14. * from New York Dramatic Mirror, May 3, 1911 Picciola (Vitagraph) -- The delicate and poetical sentiment of this film is splendid. A little flowering plant forcing its way upward through a crevice of the stone paving in a cheerless prison yard furnished the incident on which is based as pretty a love romance as has been seen in a long time. A political prisoner during the First French Empire finds in the plant solace and relief. He cares for it and it rewards him by saving his life from fever and winning for him the love of a pure young girl, who comes to the prison to see her father, also a victim of politics. To complete its magic charm it wins freedom for both men, softens the heart of the jailor and wrings a response from the cold calculation of the great Emperor [Napoleon] himself. The fever is conquered when the jailer brews the tea from the leaves and gives it to the sick man. The rest is accomplished when the visiting girl petitions the Emperor to permit the removal of a paving stone that the plant may not be choked to death. He comes to investigate and speedy pardon follows. All parts are played with great skill and expression. Released April 20. [In response to R.S.F., New York:] The Vitagraph Betty is Mabel Normand. 97 * from Moving Picture World, May 6, 1911 |