Lightning Sketches #1
![]() |
| Quick-Draw J. Stuart Blackton Demonstrates His Art |
Speedy and Shorter and Welcome, AI
Pioneer filmmaker J. Stuart Blackton got a start in vaudeville doing what was called “lightning sketches,” artist and easel on stage to astonish watchers by how fast he could draw. Stuart sped so at the game that he took up cartooning, which made switch to movies a cinch. This was pre-teens when everything in that business amounted to history being made. Lightning sketching is sort of what Greenbriar proposes here, a cousin to quickie cartooning before, and a way to jam more topics into posts under these new umbrellas. First off I confess to willing enslavement by AI, that innovation arrived at artistic place no longer to be ignored or dismissed. We’ve lived so long with black-and-white images to shun whatever proposes to assume its place. AI is not “colorization” to my eyes, being instead a reality we knew was there, at least once there, and now comes recapture. Yes, it feels to me like standing in front of those theatres. I tend to take years embracing new technology, having shunned VHS except for novelty or last-resort, like when Captain Blood showed up complete on cassette in 1986, a first time ever we could enjoy 119 minutes rather than 99. Still there was no giving up 16mm for the rest … until the rest became DVD and death of analog, the Night Film Ended as recalled previous at Greenbriar. I’m giddy each time I color convert an image till now monochrome. Think of AI as ideal way lobby cards looked where artfully tinted from the twenties forward. We’ve now passed that to a highest point knowable, not by way of process slowly got at, but gratification had instant, push-button the door to paradise. Do I somehow settle for less, joining philistines who would wreck our culture? If so, consider me and mine wrecked, and welcome to AI arrived at apex.
![]() |
| I'll Never Regard a Black-and-White Marquee Online Again, Now That I Can "Fix It" |
Latest from Lubitsch --- This was news alright, the second teaming of Maurice Chevalier with director Ernst Lubitsch. The Smiling Lieutenant was made particularly for an urban carriage trade. They wanted what mid-staters did not, so money had to come from bookings in the largest and perceived most sophisticated bergs. How to best and quickest get it was answered by roadshowing, twice daily shows at advanced prices. Here was asking a lot in May 1931, Depression teeth sunk in and admissions far harder come by. The Criterion bespoke home for the best, generally from Paramount, Wings having landed there for 63 weeks, The Love Parade soon after which suggested hard ticket possibilities for Chevalier-Lubitsch output. Two dollars was price for the ducats. To stand outside and regard a lavishly decorated front would alone have been worth that to me. The Smiling Lieutenant stayed fourteen weeks at the Criterion, a throughout-the-summer hit (An American Tragedy would follow with a late August opening). The Criterion seated 900, “a relatively intimate size,” said trade observers, especially by palaces up Broadway like the Loew’s State that could accommodate 3,000+. We could wonder how much negative cost was earned back for this single engagement, not forgetting theatre overhead always aspect of such an event.
Depth But Barely Dreamed Of --- My Blu-Ray of the 3-D Money From Home arrived a few days early, so here's rave all round for this summit of 3-D Archive artistry. Masterminds Bob Furmanek, Greg Kintz, and Jack Theakston have done it again, and that says plenty considering fabulous work they’ve done on previous depth releases. Let me go ahead and declare it: Money From Home is the best 3-D restoration I have so far seen, the expert triumvirate having spent several years to get things right, and with Paramount’s full cooperation, they sure did. Jack says in an extra that elements they used filled a room. Remember this was three-strip Technicolor which meant three strips of everything at 100 minute total, plus 3-D meaning multiple miles more of film to finesse. If not for this team, who on earth could have had enough patience, let alone expertise, to get such massive work done? I ducked Money From Home all these years thinking someday maybe it’ll show up on 3-D, grateful now for the wait as here’s an M&L to rank among favorite of theirs. Color also is astounding, Paramount truly on visual parade. We are privileged by receipt of Money From Home in 3-D considering a distinct minority of patrons saw it that way in 1953-54, that story told in 2014 at Greenbriar. Be sure also to consult the 3-D Archive's extensive production history of Money From Home here.
![]() |
| A Book Filled with Revelation, Typical of William M. Drew. |
Final Straw --- There ought be a book by that title, when and what was moment when stars or others of movie hire got their fill and pushed away from the buffet for good. One that notably did was Billie Dove, at exotic left, who excelled doing Blondie of the Follies, then found herself dealt out by editing and service (at Billie’s expense) to first-billed star that was Marion Davies. Billie said “I’ve had mine” and quit movies cold. She tells that story and plenty more in William M. Drew’s At the Center of the Frame, a dazzling compendium of chats the author had with leading ladies of the twenties and thirties, published in 1999. Festooned with arresting stills, this volume and Drew’s companion book, Speaking of Silents, also made up of star interviews, are must-haves for anyone curious as to great female leads of past times and what became of them. Talks are detailed enough to get the essence of these personalities and depths they plumbed looking back. They’ll not be more books like Drew’s because there are no veterans left to testify so forcefully as here. I’m just thankful Drew went the mile(s) to get it all down when he did and present the lot in print.
![]() |
| Blood and Sand By Coincidence? No, Anthony Slide Did the Blu-Ray's Audio Commentary |
The Silent Picture --- Another who blazed history’s trail and still doing same was/is Anthony Slide, who edited/published “The Silent Picture,” a Brit publication from the late sixties/early seventies that lasted nineteen issues and had, among other things, breathtaking sit-downs with stars not approached by others, at least not successfully, but Slide always had a way with folk not so accessible to plain press and curiosity seekers. I had a pile of past issues gotten at shows but lately figured to fill in missing ones via eBay, thus recent grab of one where Slide spoke with Bebe Daniels for what had to be her final interview, husband Ben Lyon also present and commenting. I really like how “The Silent Picture” had ongoing commentary on attitudes toward silent film and the struggle to make audiences appreciate the era again. To think these were published while I was still in high school, Anthony Slide to this day active as ever and frequently showing up to audio-commentate for silent movies released on Blu-Ray. Nobody knows this stuff like him.
![]() |
| Unknown To Me Till You Tube Host Jake Reed Dredged It Up ... Bravo to Him! |
Blanche Is Back and You Tube Has Her --- Never mind treks to museums and archives. I’m for sitting home and letting YT discoveries wash over me, especially where talkless favorites Blanche Sweet and Bebe Daniels venture into sound and such rarities unseen by me turn up on exemplary quality formats free for the viewing. Are we sailing upon digital magic carpets or what? YT provider Jake Reed lately added Blanche in The Woman Racket to his upload inventory, and it’s a 1930 creampuff, done by MGM, in fact Sweet’s first with dialogue, her a better Ruth Chatterton than Ruth Chatterton for my money. What a shame silent stars were being bum-rushed out sound stage doors, for Sweet had the goods as ever, age (34) setting stage for character work to come, but where to shine with so little studio opportunity tendered? She’d go east and do legit (in, among things, The Petrified Forest), then television, finally becoming senior spokeswoman for age of innocence few were left to tell of and yes, she spoke extensively with Anthony Slide and William M. Drew.
![]() |
| Seen This is Your Life, Bebe Daniels on You Tube? It's a Treat |
Bebe Does Song --- I toot my grateful horn not for archives that hoard, but for home archivists that share, like the Vitaphone Sound Project, whose work of late has been astonishing. They uploaded last week a 1930 musical from Radio Pictures called Love Comes Along, starring Bebe Daniels, Lloyd Hughes, and Montague Love. All Talk, All Music says the lobby card, as would others through avalanche of tunes till the format ran dry in 1931. Love Comes Along was of sort that might slither to surface on AMC back in eighties day, a likely source for the video cassette from which the Vitaphone Sound Project derived their online version. I did not expect such quality going in --- how could anything off ancient VHS look good still? --- here my mea culpa, because this transfer is astounding for what Vitaphone was able to coax from on-its-face unpromising material. Let’s just say (once again) that miracles are being wrought at home by preservationists who take it upon themselves to discover and then uproot one rare title after another. Remember in May of this year when I pearl-dived at You Tube? Well, there’s been oceans of oysters since, Love Comes Along just one more in a seeming endless parade of pearls. Dispatch yourself quick to Vitaphone’s content page and be amazed at what they’ve come up with so far. Such creators as these make every morning Christmas for classic gatherers.















3 Comments:
(Part One) Subject in today's post William M. Drew has been pondering AI reconstructions of lost films, and here are some of his conclusions so far. Hopefully there will be more to come ...
Dear John,
I'd be very interested in your perspective on the issue of AI reconstructions of lost films or major missing sequences from surviving films. I'd been pondering the idea for some time when I learned recently of an ambitious effort to restore or recreate the deleted 43 minutes from Orson Welles' The Magnificent Ambersons. Here is an online article from May of this year: https://wellesnet.com/magnificent-ambersons-ai-progress/
There have also been several recent efforts available on YouTube to "reanimate" a celebrated silent film that was completely lost, the legendary London After Midnight. Here is a link to perhaps the most successful of these attempts by a devotee in Japan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxP4Oy1Kgc4 This painstaking moving image reconstruction of the Lon Chaney/Tod Browning classic closely follows Rick Schmidlin's stills-based 2002 reconstruction of the film for TCM, including the same running-time of 46 minutes. For comparison, Schmidlin's version can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBnFWZNJqls
The advent of AI in reviving films of the past opens up a whole number of questions far more challenging than the debate over "colorization" that was so hot 40 years ago. My position at the time, which I stated in a 1987 article published in Movie Collectors' World, was that colorizing vintage black and white films was an undesirable travesty. In only one instance did I support this technology--namely, in restoring color to films that had been originally filmed that way but had survived only in black and white copies. As it happens, several individuals have recently done that online to early musicals like On With the Show (1929), the first all-Technicolor, all-talking feature film. While "colorization" is still in wide use online, it has hardly banished black and white films of the past from the public consciousness as I had feared it might in what I concede is my thankfully outdated article from 1987.
From the standpoint of the artist, the contrast between "colorization" and a technology to make still images move is obvious. Throughout most of cinema history, there were various color processes available, whether it was Pathecolor, Agfacolor or Technicolor among those on the market. By and large, one can assume the artists accepted black and white in the many decades that this was the prevailing format as is attested by the many 1980s/90s attacks on "colorization" by a number of distinguished cinema veterans including Claire Trevor in my interview with her. When it comes to the issue of motion, the very essence or meaning of the word "cinema" or "kinema" in the original Greek means motion. If the artists who became involved in "film" had wanted to relate narratives in still images, presumably they would either have turned to comic book series like Classics Illustrated or attempted to revive the technique utilized by Alexander Black in his 1894 presentation of Miss Jerry utilizing a series of still photos to tell a story. One can assume, therefore, that cinema artists would most likely have preferred that given the choice, they would have opted for animating still images from a film of theirs that had either been entirely lost or was missing a number of vital sequences as a result of studio interference.
Part Two from William M. Drew:
Any criticism or reservation concerning AFI reconstruction or restoration of an entire lost film or one missing significant footage as a result of studio interference should, I believe, be directed at the degree to which such replacement work involves material somewhat alien to the original production. The people working on the Ambersons reconstruction say that their process of reclamation will involve actors or body doubles of people who in all probability were not even born when the Welles film was made. Also, this being a sound film, AI simulation of long-deceased players' voices will apparently be required to supply lines of dialogue that were cut from the film. It would seem that there were far fewer photographs of missing sequences from Ambersons than there were for Erich von Stroheim's Greed. The example of an illustrated sketch given in the Wellesnet article on Ambersons suggests that there was extensive use of storyboards rather than photos to cover the entire production. That would apparently explain the planned use of living human performers today to complete the project, something that was not needed for the Japanese AI restoration of London After Midnight or the likely reconstruction of Greed based on Rick Schmidlin's 1999 version in which the stills from the missing sequences would now be brought to life via AI animation.
Taking all this into consideration, I would be inclined to agree that there is potentially an artistic legitimacy in AI restoration of what was lost than what had been lacking in most usages of "colorization." However, the question arises as to how many still photos of lost films were retained by the studios. Would it be possible for a London After Midnight restoration or reconstruction to be applied to the first adaptation of The Great Gatsby (1926)? How many still photos of this Paramount production have survived? If only a few exist, then a person would have to attempt recreating the film primarily on the basis of supposition or imagination. I suspect that the visual record of a vast number of lost silent films, perhaps even the majority, amount to no more than a handful of glossy stills along with a few images in magazines and trade journals of the period.
The possibilities of AI with respect to film history range from the sublime to the ridiculous. I make no claims to being an expert in this new technology but I wonder if it might be possible to replace footage in films with severe nitrate decomposition or material with generational loss resulting from excessive duping. Couldn't the AI mimic the basic image in this damaged footage while restoring it to its original clarity? Or am I being an impractical dreamer in advancing such an idea?
Part Three and conclusion from William M. Drew:
I am also cognizant of possible dangers resulting from abuse of this new technology. For example, we could be confronted with the kinds of forgeries that have long plagued the older arts. Someone could come out with a long lost silent that he said he had rescued from complete destruction. He would say that he had copied the last surviving print of an early film by transferring it to a VHS tape. Then just before the VHS itself decayed, he would claim he copied it onto a DVD which he was now releasing to the world in a new Blu-ray version. In reality, he would have simply manipulated a few still images of the lost silent into a feature that had hardly any real basis in a photographic record of the film, making it essentially a forgery. But it might take the dedication of experts to determine that his phenomenal "discovery" was a hoax.
The ridiculous could also include absurd fabrications that no one would take seriously, such as someone concocting features co-starring such unlikely romantic pairings as George Arliss and Jean Harlow, W. C. Fields and Greta Garbo, or Clark Gable and Edna May Oliver in tales of grand passion. Or there could be a teaming of, say, Olive Thomas (died 1920) and Veronica Lake (born 1922) as two shopgirl friends in New York who land a job on Broadway in the "Follies." At the decidedly lower margins of taste, there could be--perish the thought!--filmic versions of the notorious "Tijuana Bibles" with fabricated cinematic depictions of the stars engaged in all kinds of sexual activity that many would be all too inclined to believe were real.
Note that all of the possibilities of AI, whether good or bad, that I've envisioned would be resulting from the deliberate, conscious actions of humans, not the nightmarish dystopia that many are predicting in which the machines run amok and dominate men and women rather than the reverse.
Again, I would appreciate any thoughts you might have on the coming role of AI in shaping or reshaping film history.
Warmest regards,
William M. Drew
Post a Comment
<< Home