Customer Reviews

Home Sweet Home & Judith of Bethulia [VHS]

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Anyone delving just slightly into the history of film-making will soon come upon the name of D.W. Griffith, either in connection with his most famous epics such as "The Birth of a Nation" and "Intolerance", or how he pioneered film-making in the early years of motion pictures. This tape features two of his feature films from 1913 and 1914, and they would certainly be of interest to anyone following the stages of Griffith's work, or simply in the development of film-making generally. Although from the same period, these two films are totally different: "Judith of Bethulia" was inspired by spectacular Italian epics popular at that time (such as "Cabiria" and "Last Days of Pompeii" for example) and was based on a stage play, and the expenses incurred for such a production cost Griffith his job with the Biograph Company. Despite this, the film was a success, with its artistic expression, dramatic acting, fascinating costumes and interesting sets. The story is set in Bible times and depicts the attempted capture by the Assyrians of the walled city of Bethulia, but before the inhabitants starve to death in their beleaguered city, Judith is inspired with a plan to rescue her people. I also found the music - organ by Gaylord Carter - to be especially good and well-suited to each scene.

The seocnd film, "Home Sweet Home" was written and directed by DW Griffith, and is a forerunner to "Intolerance" a few years later, having four different stories with the same theme woven throughout. Unlike "Intolerance", however, these four stories are complete and are shown one after the other, although there is an interesting epilogue that finishes the first story, and that unites all four stories under the same banner, namely the moral quest to find happiness in the home, the family unit, be it in marriage or between brothers. In contrast to "Judith of Bethulia", this is a fast-paced film with more intertitles and various messages to think about. I enjoyed both films very much and recommend them to anyone interested in good quality early films.

D.W. Griffith fuses Thomas Bailey Aldrich's long poem of Judith's story with its basis in the Apocrypha to derive this somewhat austere and powerful film of the widow's noble sacrifice to save her besieged city and its inhabitants from an invading Assyrian army, led by Holofernes. With JUDITH as Griffith's first feature length effort, he turns away from the commercial needs of the Biograph Company, the management of which desires to maintain its policy of making only one and two reelers, and his expenditure of $36000 is double the amount budgeted, reflecting his expanded use of sets and extras and providing the requisite exercise in preparation for his next major work: BIRTH OF A NATION, made as a free agent. Eighteen year old Blanche Sweet's performance is striking as she utilizes all of her wide range of expressivity, uncommon in one so young, to mirror the emotions of a woman who is physically attracted to a man, Henry Walthall as Holofernes, toward whom her only possible final act will be his death by her hand, as depicted in many a well-known painting. The supporting cast serves the sparsely titled production well, with emotional performances from Mae Marsh and Robert Harron as endangered lovers, and among the many bit players who animate the work may be seen Lionel Barrymore, Harry Carey, Antonio Moreno and Lillian and Dorothy Gish as victims of the invaders. This version is the four reeler rather than the one of six reels released later and is Griffith's answer to the full-length epics which were being imported from Europe; its release was delayed a year by Biograph to ensure that the director had left its employ, but this brought scant gain to the company: Biograph was soon defunct, while Griffith's star was rising.

Judith of Bethulia is a very interesting biblical epic, starring several of Griffith's stable of actors at Biograph, such as Blanche Sweet (in the title role), Henry B. Walthall (as Holofernes) and Lillian Gish (as a woman with a baby). The scenes within the city are shot extremely well, with appropriate period detail.

Home, Sweet Home is a truly lovely film, especially when you see it, as I did, with live music and two singers! Walthall and Gish excel as composer John Howard Payne and his faithful sweetheart. Robert Harron and Mae Marsh, in another section of the film, are touching and amusing as young lovers from very different backgrounds. Jack Pickford (Mary's brother) and Donald Crisp appear in yet another section of the film. The four stories are very different, bound together by the song "Home, Sweet Home". Griffith took huge creative license in his portrayal of Payne, showing him as a dissolute, hard-living lout, whereas the real Payne's only major problem was his inability to handle money. Walthall is exceptional as Payne, and he makes you believe his character completely.

"Judith of Bethulia" is the first (and only, up to this point in time) drama that I have seen on a deuterocanonical book in the Bible. The only other film that I can think of is the animated one called "Maccabees: The Story of Hannukah," which I have not yet seen. (This is really a 1913 production. It is the other included drama, which is titled "Home Sweet Home," that was completed in 1914.) The acting was rather well done and the Biblical messages were in tact although the script was not completely accurate to the Bible. I strongly encourage people to see a Biblical production like this for a change.

I also appreciated the ending of "Home Sweet Home."

I think it's tragic that this incredible form of art is dead (Thanks a lot, Jolsen...). I watched this in my film history class (the silent era) and it really blew me away. Its amazing how boring realistic acting can be. This film made me realise that the reason endings in todays movies are usually their ultimate ruin is the freakin dialogue! If you want good dialogue, read a book. If you want great acting, well aside from one mediocre one performance by the hero soldier, watch a good silent film like this one. It's all physical acting, which I for one love. The only thing that keeps this from a five star rating is the all too tedious battle scenes. Well it's a war film essentially. Yeah I know it was really fascinating to see people move on screen back then but thats the only part thats really dated. sometimes its downright boring. But Lilian Gish really comes through and makes you wonder why actors aren't very good at conveying emotions believably anymore. To get a bit philosophical, I tend to think it's because people are so plagued by the insecurities generated by television that they need overwhelming self-confidence to convince us that they can act at all well. But that's my opinion. As far as this goes...real good stuff!