Volume I: Narrative History

Chapter 9: 1916 December Films

Divorce and the Daughter, a five reel Gold Rooster Play, was released on December 3rd. Variety reviewed the film:

A problem story exceedingly well conceived and deftly handled in five acts, produced by Thanhouser and marketed under the Pathé Gold Rooster trademark. Florence LaBadie is the star. She plays a sympathetic role of a subject that will interest women particularly. In all particulars as to taste, ethics and mechanical treatment it is an entirely worthy output.

The story: Alicia's father, a poor art aspirant, is left to follow his bent, when an unexpected fortune is willed to him. The family moves from its small city flat to a commodious home in the country. Alicia here finds scope for a veritable genius for the housewifely arts, while father concerns himself with art and the highly seasoned Bohemia of a neighboring artists' colony. He neglects Alicia's mother to carry on an affair with an alluring grass widow, who has taken on a bet that she will wreck the old man's home, a fast young man taking the other end of the wager. The prospect is divorce for the father and wretchedness for the rest of the family. Alicia becomes involved in the triangle when the fast young man preaches free love to her, pointing out in support of his arguments for 'souls free and untrammeled by the bonds of marriage' that the old fashioned marriage of her parents has not stood the test of the grass widow's competition. He lures the girl to his apartment, and there is a dramatic struggle during which the girl fells him with a bronze statue. Disillusioned, she falls into the arms of another suitor who offers her honorable matrimony. The bare recital is a long way from doing justice to the film's manifold excellencies. It is the best managed problem feature that has come from the studios this long time.

Shakespeare's King Lear, possibly the greatest of all plays, with Frederick Warde in the title role, seemed to Edwin Thanhouser to promise sure success. Here at last was a Thanhouser Film Corporation picture to compete with the best Paramount, Fox, or any other leading studio could turn out.

An article in The Moving Picture World, November 4, 1916, was based upon a studio news release:

Edwin Thanhouser announces that his mammoth production of Shakespeare's King Lear, starring Frederick Warde, the eminent Shakespearean actor, will be released through the Pathé Exchanges on December 17. Mr. Warde has played King Lear and other Shakespearean productions throughout the United States and is noted as an authority on the works of the immortal bard. The Thanhouser King Lear is Shakespeare in every detail except that, of course, it is produced upon a vastly larger scale than ever was possible on the speaking stage. Mr. Thanhouser believes that Shakespeare knew how to write, and made no attempt to improve upon the story. He did improve, however, upon the production itself, and never before has King Lear had such a mounting as has been given Mr. Warde's characterization. Castles were built and thousands of persons were employed in the making of the play. King Lear, with its pathetic story of the old father who banishes the daughter who loves him and gives his all to the daughters who despise him, lends itself readily to the screen. The battle between the forces led by Cordelia against the warriors headed by Goneril and Regan, the faithless sisters, is splendidly done with heart-wrenching scenes as swords and spears bite into the bodies of the fighters.

Mr. Warde is majestic as the King and portrays with a fine feeling his transformation, as his mind weakens, into a doddering, persecuted old man. The cast supporting Mr. Warde is especially fine. Ernest Warde, son of Frederick Warde, directed the picture and plays the fool, the same part he played on the speaking stage with his father. J.H. Gilmour, famous for his work with Edwin Booth, is a faithful Earl of Kent. Lorraine Huling is Cordelia, and Ina Hammer and Edith Diestel are the faithless daughters. Wayne Arey is the Duke of Albany, Boyd Marshall is the King of France, Hector Dion is Edmund and Edwin Stanley is Edgar, among the other prominent players in the cast.

Not mentioned was the fact that when the review committee of the Pathé Exchange, Inc. saw the film it had at first turned it down for it was a "costume play." Note Edwin Thanhouser implored them to reconsider, and eventually Pathé agreed to distribute it. Reviews in most leading trade publications were favorable.

An exception was the following commentary in Wid's Film and Film Folk, which examined the film closely:

When we remember that the magnificent production of Macbeth, made by Fine Arts, has never set the world on fire, it seems that there is no chance for enthusiasm over this offering. King Lear, as presented by the Thanhouser Company, has the curse of the movies on it, because it isn't artistic as to the photography and lightings, the characterizations were theatric, the groupings rather mechanical, and there is a general lack of distinction about the entire offering. None of the personalities seemed to live, and I believe that most members of any audience will either sleep through this or walk out on it. Certainly they'll not be greatly impressed with this Shakespearean revival.

For the most part, we find the action described by excerpts from Shakespeare's classic, with scenes following which attempt to portray what we had been told was coming. There is very little characterization, most of the footage being devoted to action detail, with the characters going through the various incidents, which, in itself, certainly doesn't justify any recognition as art. Time after time, we found characters walking or running down to the foreground, to stop and then go ahead in the approved movie manner of many years ago. This should be very funny to those of your fans who know something of Shakespeare and realize what can be done in the films by intelligent handling.

The Fine Arts production of Macbeth is the only offering with which this might be compared, since Macbeth was also a Shakespearean tragedy. Note They are so opposite in general tone as to make it impossible to consider them in the same class. Mr. Warde, as the old king, worked hard to establish his character, but his acting, as well as that of all the principals in the supporting cast, was decidedly inclined towards the theatric. The human note was not present. In some of the exteriors we found buildings which were quite appropriate, but in many others, particularly the battle scenes, the selection of locations was decidedly poor. All of the battle stuff was unimpressive, and some of it will register as rather humorous. The director evidently had little knowledge of the value of different camera angles, and the photography was all straight, hard, old-school camera work. In the supporting cast were Ernest Warde, Ina Hammer, Wayne Arey, Edith Diestel, Charles Brooks, Lorraine Huling, J.H. Gilmour, Boyd Marshall, Hector Dion, Edwin Stanley, and Robert Whittier.

The Box Office Angle: I don't consider this good enough to justify your making any noise about it, because if you were to exploit it heavily you'd bring into your theatre hundreds of people who aren't accustomed to coming, and many of them might be unfavorably impressed. This might be a good bet to play up as a matinee proposition, enlisting the assistance of your school authorities to bring the youngsters out to see a visualization of the Shakespearean classic, but I'd go easy in my advertising about promising any wonderful production. People who know good films when they see them will certainly not consider this big or distinctive. Your average patron would probably figure this very poor entertainment, so keep this in mind when you consider booking it for a regular date. If you can afford to play this up heavily and take a chance on presenting the alibi that you didn't know it was weak when they kick, you can probably pull quite a lot of business, simply because most everyone has heard of King Lear. You know your own community and can figure out just how much of a chance you can take that way.