I'm always fascinated by film's ability to convey two or more contrasting viewpoints at once. In sound films, this is usually done by having the image on screen contradict the narration on the soundtrack. An excellent example of this is in the first reel of "Singin' in the Rain", when Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly) narrates his illustrious life story while we see a much less glamorous flashback: we're meant to understand that the image, not the text, is the truth.
'What the Curate Really Did' is an extremely early film which is notable for two reasons: it features one image superimposed within another (as opposed to a split-screen: two images side by side), and -- relying purely on images, without any intertitles -- it presents two contradictory narratives, crediting the audience with enough wit to rumble which one really happened.
The film begins conventionally, in an 'exterior' set which is clearly within an indoor studio, yet which still looks realistic. A curate (in dog collar) meets a little girl (barely more than a toddler, in smock and poke bonnet) in the street, and he briefly speaks to her while a nearby woman observes. All quite innocent ... but now we see that woman relating this news to another woman, who relates it to another, and so forth. This occurs in a series of indoor tableaux, while -- in a rectangular inset in the upper portion of the frame -- we see the gradually escalating tale which each gossip passes to the next. Like a game of Chinese Whispers, the story gets farther from the truth with each retelling. We see the girl maturing from toddler to teen to flirtatious young lady, while the curate's exchange with her becomes increasingly more intimate.
SPOILER: Eventually, of course, the story comes full circle ... with the curate hearing (and the audience seeing) the scandalous tale of how he openly embraced a young flirt in the street. I was reminded of Norman Rockwell's famous painting 'Gossip', in which a story is passed from person to person until it returns to its originator. In fact, I wonder if Norman Rockwell ever saw 'What the Curate Really Did'. I'll rate this ground-breaking -- and amusing -- film a full 10 points out of 10.
'What the Curate Really Did' is an extremely early film which is notable for two reasons: it features one image superimposed within another (as opposed to a split-screen: two images side by side), and -- relying purely on images, without any intertitles -- it presents two contradictory narratives, crediting the audience with enough wit to rumble which one really happened.
The film begins conventionally, in an 'exterior' set which is clearly within an indoor studio, yet which still looks realistic. A curate (in dog collar) meets a little girl (barely more than a toddler, in smock and poke bonnet) in the street, and he briefly speaks to her while a nearby woman observes. All quite innocent ... but now we see that woman relating this news to another woman, who relates it to another, and so forth. This occurs in a series of indoor tableaux, while -- in a rectangular inset in the upper portion of the frame -- we see the gradually escalating tale which each gossip passes to the next. Like a game of Chinese Whispers, the story gets farther from the truth with each retelling. We see the girl maturing from toddler to teen to flirtatious young lady, while the curate's exchange with her becomes increasingly more intimate.
SPOILER: Eventually, of course, the story comes full circle ... with the curate hearing (and the audience seeing) the scandalous tale of how he openly embraced a young flirt in the street. I was reminded of Norman Rockwell's famous painting 'Gossip', in which a story is passed from person to person until it returns to its originator. In fact, I wonder if Norman Rockwell ever saw 'What the Curate Really Did'. I'll rate this ground-breaking -- and amusing -- film a full 10 points out of 10.
