User Reviews

A vehicle for Rudolph Valentino, who is magnetic enough almost to make up for the banal plot and the confused characterization. As the son of a cobbler turned famous bullfighter, Valentino swaggers, poses, moves gracefully, tosses his head, dresses in foreign costumes, and lowers his head so he can look smoulderingly out of those big, dark eyes. But he also recoils from the dancing girl who tries to kiss him after they've been dancing a fiery dance with castanets and everything, with a quivering look of disgust, lip curled, flared nostrils, the works. He is swoony over his wife, and then over the bad woman, whose house is strangely oriental—Moorish, I suppose. He is confident in public at one moment and a shy rube at another, and a lot of the time with the bad woman he seems to have been, well, unmanned, dominated by her will (symbolized by a serpent ring she gives him). Of course things do not go well, and his friend and alter-ego the bandit is shot at the arena and Juan is gored. Probably Valentino fans were not looking for a coherent story line—just a lot of great images of his face and form. It might as well be a fumetto. The film-makers preface the story with a fake disclaimer about the cruelty of bull-fighting, which they touch on every once in a while with the fulminations of an old priest or philosopher who rails with unspanish heat about the curse of the cruel sport. It's fake because the film itself loves the ritual and costume and excitement, and Valentino looks great in the Toreador suit.

When it comes to Blood and Sand (1922), I like Valentino's sensual, sensitive performance as the ill-fated matador and Nita Naldi is fun, if a little over-the-top, as his evil mistress, but this film is too preachy, undercutting the tragedy of the story. I also feel there's a misogynistic undercurrent, where women are sorted in the ingénue/vamp dichotomy (Nita Naldi is the wicked woman who enjoys sex and lures Valentino away from Lila Lee, his innocent and sexually modest wife) and men are expected to have "a good love and a bad love."

Still, the production values are nice and this is one of Valentino's better performances, a step up from his kitschy Wile E. Coyote histrionics in The Sheik (1921). And yet still, I'd rather watch The Sheik over this, as it's a lot more fun. Blood and Sand is a drag.

With the exception of Julio in "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse," Juan Gallardo is perhaps the most three dimensional role Rudolph Valentino ever played. The story is familiar, even predictable enough: a young Spaniard is born poor, achieves fame and fortune as a matador, marries a nice convent girl, is beguiled by a truly nasty society woman (who basically collects and discards him), loses his will to fight in the arena and dies soon after a reconciliation with his long suffering wife. But Valentino brings this rather clichéd character to life: he is convincing as the happy go lucky, apparently shiftless teenaged Juan, as the young man celebrated as the greatest bullfighter in Spain, confident and thoroughly enjoying his new wealth and fame, as the besotted wooer of his childhood friend Carmen, and as the suddenly uncertain, ill at ease lover of the wealthy Dona Sol whom he nonetheless cannot free himself from. (At times his degradation suggests that of the professor in "The Blue Angel.") His range is perhaps most apparent in the love scenes: he is tender and considerate when he is caressing his nervous bride on their wedding night but sadistic and brutish when taunted by his kinky mistress who wants him to beat her (the dialogue here is undeniably purple —at one point Juan calls Dona Sol "a serpent from hell"—but it somehow fits Juan's basic personality which is impassioned and unsophisticated). Valentino even gets to show his flair for comedy when he romps with the little boys who play his nephews. In short, his wide ranging performance in "Blood and Sand" puts to the rest the myth that as a actor he can do little more than wear clothes well and glare.

However, although Valentino's performance is compelling, there are problems with "Blood and Sand" that keep it from being a truly great film. First, considering that this is a movie about bull fighting, the fighting scenes were, unfortunately, weak and consisted of awkwardly spliced in footage of actual fights (in fairness to the producers, animal cruelty laws had recently been introduced that prevented the filming of scenes with actual bulls). An even more serious problem is that the script (using a portentous old busybody as a mouthpiece) would have us believe that Juan's downfall is somehow inherently tied in to the cruelty of bullfighting itself--that by living by such savagery Juan would inevitably die by it. The objections to the inhumanity of bullfighting may have been well intended, but as set forth Juan's decline and fall have little to do with this—he flounders because, perhaps not unlike some modern superstar athletes from humble backgrounds, his newfound wealth and fame lead him to make rash, ill advised decisions such as betraying his devoted wife to become involved with an upper class woman who enjoys slumming with him but will never consider him as an equal or take him seriously as a man. (If anything is condemned in "Blood and Sand" it is the cruelty of social caste: Juan found wealth and fame, but he is still very much the social inferior of the likes of Dona Sol, and one of the reasons why he finds it hard to say no to her is not just because he is sexually in thrall to her but because in this near feudal society she is his better—in fact he is told so directly when, resisting Dona Sol's initial attempt to meet him he is bluntly told that it would be unseemly for him to snub a woman of her position. Something of this sort is also happening, I think, when, immediately after the affair is revealed, he mortifies his wife by humbly waiting on Dona Sol).

Despite the above problems, this is still one of the more memorable films of the silent period and worth owning on DVD. (I recommend the Kino version which includes a commentary by Orson Welles and a parody with Will Rogers).

My print runs under just under an hour which is obviously inferior to the regular 80-minute version or the longer Kino print, so I'll focus on the presenting of the tale instead of commenting on aspects of characterisation, cinematography, etc.

There is nothing extraordinarily unique about the plot or the intrigue itself - it even resembles the classic Greek Tragedies to some extent: poor kid makes good, becomes national hero, earns himself a true family but then the true test of his character comes when temptations are served to him on a platter.

I do approve though of the WAY the story is told. There are instances of foreshadowing (I'll give no details to avoid spoilers) and a parallel subplot serving to muddle the clear distinctions between villain and hero we are so used to seeing in regular blockbuster fare. At the same time, enough tension is maintained to keep the viewer interested unto the end.

It is no mere plot-driven movie either - director Fred Niblo leaves the viewer with enough food for thought to reflect on the nature of society, and man's penchant for self-destruction through cruelty and lust. I am no connoisseur of silent movies such as this one but I thought the actors and actresses were very capable and the three main actors (Valentino, Naldi and Lee) certainly do not lack the required screen presence to make human dramas like this work.

It is perhaps debatable whether Blood And Sand represents the finest of Niblo's and Valentino's careers but it can be taken for granted that they must have been very proud of their efforts here.

It's difficult to evaluate a silent film from the standpoint of present day because you never know what elements besides restoration have been added to enhance the original. In my case, the version of "Blood and Sand" I watched was the 109 minute Kino print with an updated score provided by Rodney Sauer and Susan Hall, and performed by the Mont Alto Picture Orchestra. Most of the picture was in black and white, but when I decided to take specific note, it was the outdoor scenes in B&W while indoor scenes were rendered in a brown sepia tone. There was a segment also done in a more reddish sepia flavor midway through the picture that wasn't repeated.

This was my first look at the famed Valentino. I'd always heard his name mentioned while growing up but never got to see any of his work until today. First impression was that he was the George Clooney of his era, very handsome and a good choice as a matinee idol. His character in the film however came across as cocky, arrogant and brash, and to top it off, he was a womanizer who fell in love with two ladies, his wife Carmen (Lila Lee), and a seductive temptress named Doña Sol (Nita Naldi). The story traces the progress of Juan Gallardo (Valentino) from an apprentice bull fighter of sorts, up to a skilled and eventually famous matador after some two years of triumph in the bull ring. There's a coterie of support personnel around Juan who track his progress along with him, who show a degree of disfavor when he becomes involved with Doña Sol.

One of the things that struck me while watching was the fact that for a film made in 1922, there appeared to be fairly liberal use of even earlier stock footage for such things as crowd scenes and some of the bullfight sequences. Who would have thought? I also wasn't quite prepared for something the present day Me Too Movement would find particularly outrageous. In the latter part of the story, as Doña Sol seduces Juan and the Cleopatra ring changes hands, she passionately intones "Some day you will beat me with those strong hands. I should like to know what it feels like". Yikes, no wonder Juan wound up calling her a 'Serpent From Hell'!

As far as silent films go, I didn't find this one to be particularly exceptional aside from the unusual backdrop of Spanish bullfighting. When I enter this title in a list of silent movies I've seen and rank it in IMDb ranking order, it comes out at #23 out of 32 movies (as I write this). For me, the bonus was seeing Rudolph Valentino for the first time, while the Kino compilation I saw offered a Will Rogers parody of "Blood and Sand" in which Rogers takes on the Valentino role and successfully 'wins' his fight against the bull. As the camera pulls away, a handful of attendants are shown, visibly restraining the bull with a set of ropes. Done as a silent also, Rogers gets to mention via title card that "Yes, these bull fight scenes are always more or less dangerous".

One line review: A slow narrative and dubiously mixed message cannot be saved by fine performances and visuals.

It's true for many silent films that a dominant strength of the movie is in the imagery - and so it is here, from the very beginning. Costume design is sharp and eye-catching, and filming locations and set design are broadly just as fetching. Very importantly, the assembled cast embodies their roles most excellently: for lack of sound and verbal dialogue, actors' facial expressions and body language are essential for carrying the picture. Star Rudolph Valentino especially demonstrates the nuance of performance that the silent era demands, capably realizing Juan Gallardo's character arc. Though not appearing until much later, Nita Naldi is also outstanding as Doña Sol, giving the conniving woman of society a playful deviousness that at its best is a delicious treat for viewers.

For all the skill of cast and crew, however, I find myself having a hard time meaningfully engaging with 'Blood and sand.'

There is a clear message at the heart of the film. Text at the beginning works diligently to build it, and it defines the narrative as it's imparted plainly with an intertitle partway through: "Happiness and prosperity built on cruelty and bloodshed cannot survive." To be sure, it's an admirable theme to convey, and its application to bull-fighting - a sport built on barbaric violence - is paramount, here specifically and in real life generally. If nothing else is true, this movie endeavors to ensure the audience knows the reasoning behind its story.

Yet to build based first and foremost on the communication of a very particular meaning can be ruinous if the finished work cannot otherwise stand on its own merits. Consider "Christian rock," a genre of music that has no aim but to espouse religious beliefs - and does so at the sacrifice of engaging, impactful songwriting. Alternatively, movies with a prime directive at their core sometimes simply have difficulty balancing the intent with the content, and one or both may suffer as a result. Unfortunately, I think this is the great deficiency of 'Blood and sand.'

Even as occasional moralizing intertitles are interspersed throughout the length - a full half hour of the runtime has passed and it feels like everything preceding the marriage of Juan and Carmen (Lila Lee) has been naught but half-hearted exposition. Nearly thirty minutes later, Juan meets Doña Sol face to face, and again it's hard not to feel like the preceding 55 minutes have been only exposition, a series of scenes not given deep consideration beyond preparation for the length to come. And still - still! - while the plot grows more pointed, it continues to develop at a slow pace that dampens its effectiveness. The final outcome is that a feature with a length of 108 minutes seems to have roughly 78 minutes of exposition - fine in visualization, questionable in overall realization - and only 30 minutes of real substance.

This is all to say nothing of infrequent cuts to another character, Don Joselito (Charles Belcher), who serves as both observer and commentator, and whose imperious pedagogy echoes or even supplies the high-brow philosophizing of the intertitles. Yet his part in the film is superfluous, and unnecessary to what it wishes to relate. Likewise, the B-plot of the bandit Plumitas (Walter Long) is supposed to be a dark mirror of Juan's path, yet is frankly extraneous.

And still, uneven narrative progression hardly describes the full extent of the problems at hand. The prominent pedantry of 'Blood and sand' is further undercut by the title's craft. The protagonist is a bullfighter, yet the feature is much more about the personal drama outside the arena. The message so emphatically stated as the ultimate reason for his downfall - his participation in such inhuman activity - gets shuttled about with seeming uncertainty, and its insertion almost appears to be a last-minute choice of "Well, this has to go somewhere, so this will be the place." With that in mind, moreover - despite how concretely the movie wants to speak to the vulgar cruelty of bullfighting, that message is confused by distinctly including others, and weaving them in more organically. There's an undeniable misogynist bent to the story, as other text tells us that the very fact of Juan's involvement with Doña Sol is his destruction: "Woman was created for the happiness of man," it intones with disregard for women's agency and autonomy, "but instead, she destroyed the tranquility of the world." That sexism is further cemented with a line of printed dialogue in which Doña Sol seems to openly invite domestic violence so long as it means Juan will be with her. The tawdry spectacle of their affair, 'Blood and sand' suggests, weighs so heavily on the matador that a moment of reflection is distraction enough to kill him. And we're still not done, because 'Blood and sand' - through unnecessary side character Don Joselito - also expresses that the masses cheering the spectacle of brutality and death, ever hungering for sensationalism at any cost, are the real monsters.

One could reasonably argue that all these factors play into the course of events and the protagonist's demise. If that's what 'Blood and sand' wanted to do, then it was far from articulate in its dispensation of wisdom. Instead it feels much more like a game of moving the goalposts to satisfy every equivocation: "This is the true meaning! No, that is! No, this is!"

I'm not familiar with Vicente Blasco Ibáñez's novel, from which screenwriter June Mathis adapted her screenplay. I've seen a few other features Mathis wrote, and found they ranged from flawed but entertaining, to classic and timeless. I've not had opportunity to watch other renditions of Ibáñez's novel. I have no point of comparison to make, and can only judge this film on its own merits. I think the technical craft is swell. I think the writing is a jumbled mess.

Maybe a second watch would solidify the feature for me in ways that a single pass could not. Yet with so many other movies available of which to partake, I struggle to justify returning to this one. Great performances and strong attention to visual details are to be commended, but they can't outweigh unconvincing story development and disordered thematic construction. In my opinion this is the weakest of those Valentino flicks I've watched, and the weakest I've seen to date of silent films at large. 'Blood and sand' was received well in 1922, and is still held in high regard today. But for my part, I'm not impressed - only disappointed.

Problems! Where to start? Well, I suppose the first thing is the condition of the print. I am reviewing the Alpha print. It is in just watchable condition. The music score? I don't remember, even though it is just on 24 hours ago that I ran the Alpha DVD. After about 20 minutes, I turned the DVD off because the pace was funereal. I decided to turn the movie back on and try watching it at twice the recommended speed. To my surprise, this experiment was extremely successful. I emphasize the words "surprise" and "successful". There was still plenty of time to read all the captions with no straining or effort on my part at all -- and as you might expect, as the movie was based on the famous novel, there were far more captions than scenes! There was plenty of time to read the captions and some of the scenes -- and by no means all the scenes themselves -- did now run just a little too fast. But that was far more comfortable than the Alpha DVD's funereal pacing.

I thought that Valentino gave a rather glum performance. The ladies, particularly Nita Naldi, were more pleasingly animated. Fred Niblo's direction was competent but nothing special. And Fred did nothing to disguise obvious inserts of old stock footage, particularly in the bull-ring scenes.

It's also true that a better print (and music score!) would definitely give the movie a higher overall rating!

Why is this movie one of my favorite silent movies? For a start, it was one of Rudolph Valentino's best performances! I consider his other best performances to be in "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" and "The Eagle", although, of the movies in which I have seen him, he never gave a bad performance-some were just better than others! As the doomed bullfighter, he is perfect! Then there were the two leading ladies, both very good in their roles-Lila Lee, as the suffering wife, and Nita Naldi, as the seductress. Finally, there was Walter Long, memorable as a bandit friend of the bullfighter. I don't know if sound affected his career, but, in the silent movies in which I have seen him, he was very good! The only flaw in this movie was a ridiculous seduction scene, but, if one can overlook it, this movie will prove to be a very worthwhile movie!

Rudolph Valentino (1895-1926) plays a bullfighter Juan Gallardo 'Zapaterin', who is really good at what he does.He falls in love with Carmen, played by Lila Lee (1901-1973), a girl he's known since childhood.But then an other woman shows interest on him, a true vamp who goes by the name of Doña Sol, played by Nita Naldi (1897-1961).And of course Juan becomes interested of her, too.Soon his loving feelings turn into hate.This woman just won't let go.Eventually Carmen finds out what has been going on between Juan and this woman.In the end, Juan is dying after a bullfight and Carmen is there by his side, Doña wouldn't care less.Fred Niblo's Blood and Sand from 1922 is a brilliant silent movie with some drama, romance and sport.The actors do a perfect job.Rudolph Valentino is marvelous.He was a teen idol of his time, who was idolized by half the world.He died tragically awfully young in 1926 to blood poisoning.He was only 31 and half the world mourned.Nita Naldi and Lila Lee are both very beautiful and they also could act very well.In the silent days the eyes had a big part, and in this one they all handle the eye work perfectly.And the dramatic music makes it all better.Blood and Sand is a thrill for all the Valentino fans and for those who don't require any dialog in the movie.