Of the various ways in which the silent era can be difficult to abide for some modern viewers, one of the most severe are instances of intertitles that directly address the audience - as happens here right off the bat, inviting us to recall the swashbuckling tales of Alexander Dumas' 'The three musketeers.' And how! Hand in hand with that gaucheness, that silent pictures are often so emphatically broken up into discrete shots and scenes lends to the sense of them being staged, and contrived. Such approaches do no favors to suspension of disbelief - though this is just part and parcel of how early films were made, an extension of how the medium and many of its early stars came directly from stage drama and vaudeville. And for those who are open to the tack, it doesn't make the experience any less enjoyable, just different. It's safe to say 'A modern musketeer' is unlikely to appeal to anyone who isn't already enamored of early cinema, but it's all in good silly fun, and worthwhile on its own merits.
In fact, this title surely has a leg up on its contemporaries for the fact that it recalls in no small part the goofy comedies of Buster Keaton, Harry Langdon, or the like. By and large, effects, stunts, sight gags, and physical comedy are the order of the day, with more plain drama rounding out the feature to secure the conveyance of a narrative. The more boisterous aspects of the feature are genuinely delightful, handily inculcating a sense of highfalutin antics and adventure, while the distinctly story-driven moments tell a worthy tale and serve as a vehicle for the flippancy. All this is to say that 'A modern musketeer' is quite well balanced, and smartly written - my commendations to writer and director Allan Dwan, who clearly possessed the intelligence and cleverness to help this movie outlast the limitations of its time. There's wit and zest spread throughout this that are ultimately far more noteworthy than any stilted difficulties of the fundamental film-making or storytelling.
To that end, this is finely made in most every regard, including even the cinematography and editing that are quaint by modern standards, yet on par if not sprightly for 1917. The production design, art direction, and costume design are equally splendid in bringing the tableau to life, and of course the filming locations in the Grand Canyon are utterly gorgeous. And it sure seems to me like the cast are having a blast, a feeling that's readily passed on to the audience. Naturally Douglas Fairbanks stands out the most, starring as protagonist Ned Thacker and thereby getting the most opportunity to demonstrate his skills in a variety of ways. Others on hand, though, including Marjorie Daw, are just as charming in what they bring to the ensemble, and it's a joy to watch them at work.
Mind you, even discounting the idiosyncrasies of the silent era that define the film's construction, I can't say this is perfect. There are indelicacies in the writing in its handling of a Native American character that reek of stereotypes and racism, an unfortunate flaw that while not uncommon is no better for that fact. I'd also argue that the plot is marginally incomplete, and therefore comes off as Movie Magic: maybe I'm missing something, but why was Vandeteer out on the road in the first place, a journey which facilitated Ned meeting Elsie? There's a certain Just So sensibility in the tale that affirms it's crafted with a mind for Fun over Fastidiousness. That's not abjectly terrible in and of itself, but noteworthy nonetheless.
Still, however one wishes to scrutinize 'A modern musketeer,' praising or picking apart this and that, when all is said and done the worst that can really be said is that it's a product of its time. The specifics of intertitles, the orchestration of shots and scenes, and even those more abject shortcomings noted above were a regular part of early cinema, and the latter are sadly still around today in some regards. Otherwise, this is wonderfully well made, more than I'd have given it credit for sights unseen, and roundly entertaining. Everyone put hard work into making this, and it's easy enough to assume that the feature may well be representative of some of the best (though surely not the superlative) that the industry typically had to offer in the 1910s. At length, 'A modern musketeer' may not be an outright must-see, even for diehard silent fans, yet even more than 100 years later it holds up quite well in all the ways that are most important, and it's consistently a good time for all of its 68 minutes. Don't feel like you have to go out of your way for it, but if you in any measure appreciate such old films, this is well worth checking out!
In fact, this title surely has a leg up on its contemporaries for the fact that it recalls in no small part the goofy comedies of Buster Keaton, Harry Langdon, or the like. By and large, effects, stunts, sight gags, and physical comedy are the order of the day, with more plain drama rounding out the feature to secure the conveyance of a narrative. The more boisterous aspects of the feature are genuinely delightful, handily inculcating a sense of highfalutin antics and adventure, while the distinctly story-driven moments tell a worthy tale and serve as a vehicle for the flippancy. All this is to say that 'A modern musketeer' is quite well balanced, and smartly written - my commendations to writer and director Allan Dwan, who clearly possessed the intelligence and cleverness to help this movie outlast the limitations of its time. There's wit and zest spread throughout this that are ultimately far more noteworthy than any stilted difficulties of the fundamental film-making or storytelling.
To that end, this is finely made in most every regard, including even the cinematography and editing that are quaint by modern standards, yet on par if not sprightly for 1917. The production design, art direction, and costume design are equally splendid in bringing the tableau to life, and of course the filming locations in the Grand Canyon are utterly gorgeous. And it sure seems to me like the cast are having a blast, a feeling that's readily passed on to the audience. Naturally Douglas Fairbanks stands out the most, starring as protagonist Ned Thacker and thereby getting the most opportunity to demonstrate his skills in a variety of ways. Others on hand, though, including Marjorie Daw, are just as charming in what they bring to the ensemble, and it's a joy to watch them at work.
Mind you, even discounting the idiosyncrasies of the silent era that define the film's construction, I can't say this is perfect. There are indelicacies in the writing in its handling of a Native American character that reek of stereotypes and racism, an unfortunate flaw that while not uncommon is no better for that fact. I'd also argue that the plot is marginally incomplete, and therefore comes off as Movie Magic: maybe I'm missing something, but why was Vandeteer out on the road in the first place, a journey which facilitated Ned meeting Elsie? There's a certain Just So sensibility in the tale that affirms it's crafted with a mind for Fun over Fastidiousness. That's not abjectly terrible in and of itself, but noteworthy nonetheless.
Still, however one wishes to scrutinize 'A modern musketeer,' praising or picking apart this and that, when all is said and done the worst that can really be said is that it's a product of its time. The specifics of intertitles, the orchestration of shots and scenes, and even those more abject shortcomings noted above were a regular part of early cinema, and the latter are sadly still around today in some regards. Otherwise, this is wonderfully well made, more than I'd have given it credit for sights unseen, and roundly entertaining. Everyone put hard work into making this, and it's easy enough to assume that the feature may well be representative of some of the best (though surely not the superlative) that the industry typically had to offer in the 1910s. At length, 'A modern musketeer' may not be an outright must-see, even for diehard silent fans, yet even more than 100 years later it holds up quite well in all the ways that are most important, and it's consistently a good time for all of its 68 minutes. Don't feel like you have to go out of your way for it, but if you in any measure appreciate such old films, this is well worth checking out!