Showing posts with label One-Reel Short Subject. Show all posts
Showing posts with label One-Reel Short Subject. Show all posts

Saturday, June 24, 2023

Best One-Reel Short Subject for 1938

 

The Great Heart relates the history of Father Damien, a Belgian priest who arrived in Hawaii in the mid-19th Century and started working with lepers. Well, he wasn’t actually a priest yet when he arrived, but since he was the only one who was willing to break the taboo on touching lepers, he became the priest to a leper colony on the island of Molokai. The lepers who were isolated there initially resist his efforts to help as well as his attempts to get them to worship. He does get their attention when he destroys the places where they drink too much alcohol and engage in what a priest might consider bad behavior, stuff like dancing and, as the narrator puts it, “love-making” (even though an astute viewer certainly knows what that euphemism means). Father Damien (played by youthful-looking Tom Neal, sometimes in less-than-realistic old-age makeup) and a few others slowly start making improvements to the island, but when he changes the opening of his sermons from “my brethren” to “we lepers,” revealing that he too has become infected, the news of his illness generates lots of donations and other assistance—plus greater attention to the plight of those afflicted with leprosy. Carey Wilson, the narrator of this short, displays a sense of earnestness that borders on the hyperbolic at times. When he asks, “Your heart is undaunted, isn’t it, Damien?”, you want to remind Wilson that Father Damien has been long dead and buried and probably cannot answer such an excessive question. I did learn from this film that one of the effects of leprosy is that the body feels no pain due to a loss of nerve sensation; that’s actually how Father Damien learns of his infection, being unable to feel the heat from the water in which he is soaking his feet. Thousands died from the horrible disease, but this film does take it pretty easy on its viewers by never showing the faces of any of the lepers, just their backs or their silhouettes. The implication is that it’s perhaps just too hideous a disease to witness closely in person. That is, unless (as Wilson puts it) you have a “great brave young heart” like Father Damien. I suppose by the end of the story of his life and all of the sacrifices that he made, the hyperbole might be earned – just a bit.

That Mothers Might Live details the realization by a 19th-Century Hungarian physician, Dr. Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis, of the need by medical professionals to wash their hands before treating patients. It begins with his concern that so many women were dying in hospitals after giving birth. Dr. Semmelweis (played by Sheppard Strudwick) even writes a book, The Prevention of Childhood Fever (the film’s shorter version of the actual title, Etiology, Concept, and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever), detailing the need for antiseptic measures to limit the spread of germs and prevent puerperal fever, but he is, of course, initially ostracized by the medical community. We all know now that his ideas later caught on and are considered standard medical procedure, but it took decades for his ideas to slowly catch on throughout Europe. This short is a nice, illuminating tribute to a somewhat forgotten medical pioneer, and it reaches quite an emotional climax with Emmelweis’s increasing mental instability and his death in an asylum. However, the filmmakers made a rather strange choice: Strudwick and the other actors do not speak on camera. Voiceover narration by John Nesbitt (most famous nowadays for his narration of the MGM series The Passing Parade) provides the dialogue, all in a rather melodramatic, even hyperbolic, at times, tone. Why weren’t the actors allowed to speak their lines? Was it cheaper just to have a narrator say everything? It’s quite distracting to watch as the actors recited dialogue only to hear Nesbitt’s voice instead. This choice doesn’t detract too much from the overall strength of the storyline, but it is odd nonetheless. (By the way, The Great Heart makes the same choice for voiceover narration rather than the actors speaking their lines. It must have been a thing in the 1930s.)

I’ve had no luck finding information on Timber Toppers, the third nominee for Best One-Reel Short Subject. All that’s available online is that it runs 10 minutes, was directed by Tom Cumminsky, and was released by 20th Century Fox. It’s not available for streaming, not even on “those websites” that specialize in films that are not available elsewhere. Presumably, it’s about the timber industry since “timber topping” is a term associated with the production of lumber, but that’s hardly enough to judge the quality of a short film. Oddly enough, no one even states whether or not it’s a lost film. Since that’s the case, I have not choice but to add it to my list of movies I’m likely never to see in order to complete this project.

Oscar Winner: That Mothers Might Live

My Choice: Since I’ve only seen two of the three and both of those were melodramatic and over-the-top, I’d pick That Mothers Might Live as a toss-up. They both deal with individuals who made a difference in the treatment and care of others, but Dr. Emmelweis might have had a somewhat larger and profound impact. Both That Mothers Might Live and The Great Heart tread some of the same territory, though, and use some of the same storytelling methods.


Saturday, June 9, 2018

Best One-Reel Short Subject of 1940




London Can Take It! is a short documentary about the German blitz on London during the early years of World War II. Quentin Reynolds, an American war correspondent, serves as the narrator for a series of images of the kinds of preparations that the citizens are making in advance of the nightly attacks on their city. As the sirens wail, they close their curtains and relocate to shelters. From 8 p.m. to 6 a.m., much of the city goes into hiding as the German planes bomb different sectors. The next morning, the destruction of various sections of the city is heartbreaking to witness, but the Londoners go about cleaning up their neighborhoods and going back to work and even getting ready for another cycle of attacks. The film, produced by England’s GPO (General Post Office) Film Unit for the Ministry of Information, is meant to be a testament to the resilience of the people of London, and it is an effective, understated piece of propaganda. The film presents what should be disturbing images in a very matter-of-fact way, and the narration by Reynolds is also quite low-key. Despite all of this, though, watching the film is quite an emotional experience because you get to see the strength of the English people as they live their lives in the midst of the horrors of war. It’s an inspiring, powerful film even though it only lasts about 9 minutes.

More about Nostradamus is really rather less about the famed predictor of the future than it is about the predictions he made that seem to match what was going on in Europe just prior to American involvement in World War II. The short begins with a nobleman leading a group of grave robbers to Nostradamus’s tomb on July 2, 1626, sixty years after Nostradamus’s death. He learns the hard way to follow the warning on the tomb, “Encroach not upon the repose of the one lying here,” as it collapses on him, killing him just as was predicted on a scroll included in the tomb. That’s supposed to be a shocker of an opening and perhaps a way to solidify the idea of Nostradamus’s accuracy. A short biography follows, highlighted by his prediction that a young cleric will one day become pope. When it comes true, everyone goes back to read the thousands of predictions in his Prophetic Centuries. The film then gives a series of examples to demonstrate further the accuracy of his prognostications: the defeat of the Spanish Armada, the creation and eventual failure of the League of Nations, and a host of World War I events. It’s the slipperiness of the language that allows people to think that Nostradamus was so spot-on with his predictions. Of course, “fishes of steel” could be submarines and “machines of flying fire” could be airplanes, and Germany could be the “miserable republic usurped by a new leader,” Adolf Hitler. This is when the “real” focus of the film becomes more apparent: the predictions about the situation in Europe at the time of the film’s completion in 1940. Vichy France and the bombing of England are among his predictions (if, of course, you accept the interpretations of his language as applying to them), and the film then uses the prediction that the “daughter of the English Isles” will help to end the war. A shot of the Statue of Liberty that ends the film couldn’t be more obvious about its plea to have the United States fulfill its “destiny” by entering the war. The use of both re-enactments of historical events and contemporary newsreel footage is quite effective, and the narration increases in intensity and emotion as the film progresses, reflecting the heightening concern over the events in Europe at the time.

Quicker ‘n a Wink was the second (and last) Pete Smith Specialties entry to receive an Academy Award. It features the work of Dr. Harold E. Edgerton at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who invented the process of stroboscopic (“super high speed”) photography. Edgerton’s process allows us to see in slow motion the kinds of actions like the whir of fan blades and the breaking of a soap bubble that occur too quickly for us to be able to examine them with the naked eye or even to capture with the conventional photographic process. We get to see some unusual effects such as a bullet shattering a light bulb and a golf ball punching a hole in a telephone book. At times, there are comparisons between Edgerton’s photographic process and “standard” photography, such as the moment when a football player’s foot comes into contact with a football. The film (and Edgerton, I suppose, by extension) spends a great deal of time using milk. We see the coronas formed by milk drops and the tall spire created when a golf ball drops into a vat of milk. It was intriguing to see how a cat’s tongue curls when it drinks milk, but not all of the images are equally interesting. The beating wings of a hummingbird are fascinating to watch, but getting to see a dentist’s drill in slow motion is hardly a highlight for most people. As a scientific document, this short captures the beginning of the use of high-speed photography to study the details of motion too quick to discern with only our eyes. Even though it’s really just a series of shots, Quicker ‘n a Wink remains a fascinating historical film.

Siege provides quite shocking timely footage of the devastating German attack on Warsaw, Poland, at the start of World War II. It’s a simple and powerful series of images of the kind of damage that was inflicted upon the city by the German bombers. Journalist Julien H. Bryan arrived in Warsaw just after the end of the first week of bombing and stayed for two weeks to witness a series of air raids and the destruction that followed. The German goal was to destroy the bridges to and from the city, but that never happened. What resulted instead was the loss of many lives and homes and buildings such as churches and hospitals. We get to see the bread lines for limited supplies of food as well as the gutted structures and the bullet holes that riddle walls.  Incendiary bombs caused fires almost every day, and families became accustomed to moving their possessions around the city to avoid having them destroyed. Bryan’s almost day-by-day account is quite moving. His story of the maternity hospital where the patients and their four-day-old babies had to be moved to the basement is quite heartwarming, and his story about how quickly the women re-entered a field to dig potatoes after an air raid had killed some of their fellow citizens is astonishing. He appears in the footage sometimes himself, talking to the residents and recounting their testimony for the viewer. Interestingly, the footage itself almost didn’t survive the attacks. Bryan and his small crew had to find a place to get it developed quickly before it was destroyed or rendered unable to be developed. This film was released two years before American involvement in World War II, and it seems clearly designed to increase U.S. support for entering the war effort by showing the suffering that the people of Warsaw and Poland and the rest of Europe endured under the German attacks.

Oscar Winner: The Academy selected the only entry that didn’t involve some aspect of World War II, Quicker ‘n a Wink. Perhaps there was some concern in Hollywood over supporting the war so early after its inception.


My Choice: I would pick either London Can Take It! or Siege instead. Both deal with the aftermath of the German attack on a city. However, Siege is more likely to invoke pity based upon the kinds of images that it shares, and London Can Take It! leaves viewers with perhaps a more upbeat feeling about the strength of those undergoing the bombings. Both had to be very effective in building American sentiment for supporting the countries involved in what would come to be known as World War II.