Easy Virtue (1928) - Alfred Hitchcock

In the year this film was released, 1928, the sound had just arrived to cinema to realize one of the greatest revolutions that have been in the history of seventh art, forever changing its scenario, modifying careers of all directors and actors who had hitherto shone. Therefore, this was one of the late great master of suspense's silent films, his silent exercises were almost always oddities, still looking for a definitive stamp on his language, the master embarks on adapting a literary work to the big screen again. For this work, again Hitch adapts a novel by the actor and playwright, Noel Coward, and portrays the story of a female in British society, who will face an unthinkable nightmare when her past mistakes, having been in the middle of a mess between two men, costing the life of one of them, will generate her a bad reputation, which pursues until the end; even when she tries to rebuild her live, that burden will not disappear when her new partner's family harass, after finding out about her past activities. Unusual film of the British, like most of his nearly ten pictures of the silent period, which certainly can not be classified among the best of the production of the giant producer, but being a silent film by Alfred Hitchcock, the correct palate will surely be enthusiast for this appreciable tape.

            

When the movie gets started, a trial is underway, Larita Filton (Isabel Jeans) is being accused, the prosecuting attorney who accuses (Ian Hunter), urges her to respond, she recalls how a brilliant young painter was portraying her, when her jealous and drunken husband, who abused the lady, interrupted. The husband has a bad response, assaults the artist, who unexpectedly shoots, killing his aggressor; lawyer accuses heatedly women, to complicate the issue when a large inheritance is left for her product of the murder, she is accused and the jury convicts her. She is not condemned, but is exposed to humiliation and shame by media, for which she goes away from it all. Already away, Larita meets John Whittaker (Robin Irvine), a millionaire who courts her, and, after thinking, she accepts his marriage proposal. Once married, they move to the house of John, where Larita meets his new mother in law (Violet Farebrothers), steely woman who from the beginning has suspicions about the origin of his daughter in law. In that house the mother makes her life miserable, especially when comes to light his past, she is only supported by John's father (Frank Elliott) and Sarah (Enid Stamp-Taylor), for even the prosecutor who accused her appears at parties of aristocrats. The tormented Larita can't continue anymore, states Sarah that she must have married John, and puts an end to her martyrdom in that house.

The beginning of the film is typical of hits silent exercises, when the first image we see is a text box in which is differenced what is virtue, defining it as something that is its own reward, from what is the easy virtue, reward of society to a slandered reputation; it is a good summary of what will be appreciated in detail in the film, and is characteristic of several of his silent films to start such as in this picture. The beginning of the story itself, is treated with a language inviting the optimism, with some positive looseness of the camera, offering close-ups, detailed drawings of objects, reflecting the judgment with which the film is opening, there is some mobility of lens, freedom of approaches, zooms, all sorted correctly to portray those tense moments early. Even promptly, in those first minutes immediately we see flashbacks, past action and present merge properly, without elaborate mechanisms or obvious breaks, it is quiet but satisfying how this transition is printed, ending the setting of a start of film that, as stated, invited optimism. Expressive images, monocles swaying imitating the next picture, the pendulum of a clock, side shots of the faces of those involved, prosecutor and defendant facing each other, enriching a narration without words, something quite common in Hitch. It is unfortunate that such a promising beginning of the picture was left on that, an optimistic promise. But continuing with the images, director manages pleasant moments such as horses near each other, as Larita and John, who are feeding their love; and of course the most important sequence in that sense, narrating wordless when Larita finally agrees to his marriage proposal, is through the phone that she accepts, and Hitch gets the luxury of not letting us doubt of her answer without even showing a single shot, nor hers nor his. It is extraordinary that moment, the telephone receptionist is the conduit, narrative and informative vehicle, as her reactions indicate the development of this conversation, some uncertainty at first, but her wide smile and gesture tell us that no doubt she accepted; very remarkable, we, without being showed any of those involved, no doubt know the result of the proposal.

It is true that the film begins showing a murder, but despite that as usual element in the Hitchcockian cinema, the feature is far away from most major artistic vertices of the British, there is no doubt that the master was still self discovering, discovering expressive field in which he would become legend. We speak of course of suspense, which he had warmly tasted in his first major film, The Lodger (1927), but still was finishing the filmmaker to take the final brush strokes before ending his mute stage, and without this being a mediocre picture -for this, as we have seen, contains remarkable and apreciables elements-, is still far from the highest levels subsequently reached by the director. The great filmmaker took very little time, however, finding his topic, some argue that the limited success of previous films made producers interfere more than before on the subject of this feature; but whatever the case might be, we feel that the strength of the director is diluted, in the absence of tension, intrigue and uncertainty of Hitch's suspense, loses his effectiveness the master, in such an innocuous field like this, we nottice the loss of all power that springs forth when performing suspense. Interesting, yes, regardless of whether the chosen theme fully reflects the will of the filmmaker or not, is the treatment of the female protagonist, this because well known is the misogyny of which is accused Hitch, and in this opportunity, the woman, Larita, is no longer the light female who without the slightest thought triggers misfortunes on the male protagonists. Now there is some variation of it, now she is the persecuted, to whom neither her reputation nor hypocritical society will leave alone (we see how John's sisters lurk even in her drinking). Everything becomes relatively ambiguous when we appreciate Larita's attitudes, her instances, her constant action of smoking copiously, her drinking, makes one feel her to some point worldly, plus the way she approaches Sarah. Hitch certainly leaves some room for the viewer to think a little, makes to struggle hesitating whether indeed she is a victim or not, the director makes "suffer" the viewer, something that Hitchcock always stood in the way of making films.

We are certainly facing a novel treatment of female elements in Hitch, to already commented on Larita and her ambiguous person, we add the maternal element, the imposing mother of John, who actually gets to eclipse him in prominence. Like almost never seen in Hitchcockian films, we see a female duel, Larita against the mother, an unprecedented duel of feminine forces, interesting in a film by the British, as well as the empowerment of the mother; but the maternal theme in Hitch's oeuvre would be the subject of another article (see only the mother of Norman Bates). Among the negative elements of the film, one becomes a certain weakness to represent many of the sequences of the picture, lacks of tension, strength in representations, feeling almost loose and limp the core of portrayed. Starting with the brawl between the jealous husband and the young painter, continuing with sequences as the first contacts between Larita and John, just to cite examples in which feels that lack of strength in other films so strongly appreciated. Also, after the commented initial deployment of the camera, we will not see much of the visual narrative elements of the British, only glimpses of them, like when the Whittaker family is eating, and food and dishes disappear by dissolution of shots; this lack of resources and visuals definitely are detrimental to the film. But all is not bad, it is interesting that Hitchcock slides a study, a look at the society of his time, the hypocrisy of the rancid aristocracy, because as soon as the mother of John learns the truth about Larita, she and most of the family condemns her; but with the imminent humiliation and gossip of society ahead, they prefer to remain silent, conceal the truth. Although despise her, rather than being consistent to it, they prefer to keep up appearances, they prefer to maintain a false image of normalcy to their peers, the double standards of the aristocrats, that society are portrayed. In his period as a silent filmmaker, Hitch is still looking for his style, and almost every one of his films constituted a rarity, brought novelties, in 1927 produced The Ring, non-repeated pugilistic exercise, and Downhill, attractive analysis of physical and moral decay of an individual, and in 1928 comes the unusual comedy The Farmer's Wife. Then comes the film now commented, with that unsettling end of her asking to be "shot", because there is nothing left to kill. Atypical but interesting years for Hitch, those are his silent films, although no masterpieces, are real jewels to appreciate.

The Farmer's Wife (1928) - Alfred Hitchcock

The great Alfred Hitchcock, in his time as a filmmaker in the silent period of this art, made about almost ten features, when was still looking for his signature style as the immortal master of suspense, defining his main artistic cornerstones. It was already the mythical year in which the greatest revolution came to the movies, the sound had arrived to stay, to completely reconfigure the film scene, and the great Hitch was thus materializing his last silent exercises. With this picture begins the British his link with his new producer, British International Pictures studios, and after leading Decline (1927), adapted a literary work again, the play of Eden Phillpotts, to introduce a simple story, hilarious, in which a mature man, becomes widowed, after the death of his wife, decides to find a new mate for him, and starts searching for the female, draws up a list of potential prospects, and, aided by his housekeeper, is launched to woo, obtaining one each rejections every time. But when it seems that his target will not be met, thoughtlessly he finds what he wanted in the least expected person. Unusual exercise in the filmography of prodigious Hitchcock, a pleasant comedy, which of course does not approach the biggest films of this remarkable director, is certainly a rarity, but being a silent film of Hitchcock, already has great appeal to be appreciated.

                

In a country house, we see the farmer Samuel Sweetland (Jameson Thomas), passing through a difficult time, his wife has just passed away. He lives with his housekeeper, Araminta Dench (Lillian Hall-Davis) and his butler, Churdles Ash (Gordon Harker); all attend shortly after the wedding of the daughter of Sweetland, after which, the farmer, assisted by his loyal "Minta", elaborates a list of four possible candidates to become his new wife. Then initiates the courtship of each, starting with the widow Louisa Windeatt (Louie Pounds), to whom lets know his intentions, obtaining negative from the widow. Then continues with Thirza Tapper (Maud Gill), who although at first seems to have a different attitude towards the proposal, finally also rejects him, growing frustration in Sweetland. In a fun and crowded meeting, he makes his third attempt, the choice is Mary Hearn (Olga Slade), a woman whose answer is not only negative, but even laughs at the farmer, who responds with some insults, generating her a hysterical attack. The whole town already has learned about the search of the widower, he woos the fourth one, Mercy Bassett (Ruth Maitland), again getting a rejection. Eventually he will find a woman who genuinely loves him, and when two women come back, get surprised to find the farmer happily paired.

The initial image of the picture presents a visual summary of the environment where everything will happen, we see country wildlife, ducks, dogs, cattle, everything surrounding the home, the farm of Samuel; we will see nice images of animals, and then dozens of hunter dogs, field, outdoors, a film that even with these elements goes declaring itself as atypical work of its author. Apparently there are in circulation more than one version, more than one cut of this film, and the film viewing in which this criticism is based on, is a cut of 97 minutes, lower in almost twenty minutes to another version I understand there is. And perhaps is because of that missing material, that we feel a certain frenzy in the early sequences, in which quickly, within a few minutes, the farm is shown, the death of the farmer's wife as well, and also the marriage of the daughter, is possible that in the extended version we might not feel that certain rush of the first few minutes. It is a certainly atypical work of Hitch, it's a comedy, something far more benign to what the master usually did, far from the suspense that would turn him into a legend; however, it is also true that comedy, the comic charge is something that was almost never absent in the films of the British, we always find batched hilarity during the filmmaker's features, and in this case is disseminated in part on the occurrences and certain clumsiness of the housekeeper of one of the courted ladies. Nevertheless, as this is completely a comedy, it is noted that this is a foreign field to the greatest feats of the notorious filmmaker, without being a loose filmic exercise; we are simply witnessing a stage when the creator was still finding himself, and while an important step in this direction was took with The Lodger (1927), discovering the suspense as the main asset of his films, it is evident that the then novel Hitchcock continued in the process of defining his style, as it was largely in his time of silent films.

But unlike almost all his silent features, this time draws the attention the number of dialogues included in this exercise, much more abundant than in his most successful soundless films, as the two already mentioned The Lodger, and Decline, released the same year, films in which that very absence of dialogues made the dramatic charge on actors and on non-verbal audiovisual language were much higher. The picture is simply the process of farmer finding wife, as the title indicates, and for this mission is positive and significant the interpretation of the protagonist, Thomas Jameson, his gestures, eyes wide open, fluorishes and records, representing the more humorous moments, enduring rejections, with which becomes almost a malicious work to appreciate how the man woos women, obtaining respective negatives. Finally, as seen in many stories, the person who is first assistant, the one who starts helping the interested to get coupled, ends up being all that he wanted, he always had in front of his noses, at home, all he thought would find outside. As for his film language, the initial linear narrative of the camera is broken at last when the filmmaker interestingly wields his well known visual narrative resources, and when the good farmer decides to start looking for his new partner, we will appreciate these tools. That's when for the first time in the film appear the overlayed shots, also close-ups, everything tidy in the assembly to set the moment when he draws up the list of candidates, imagining each of them at his home. Also, when we see him preening to start wooing ladies, appears again this montage work, concatenating detailed shots, again close-ups, images of loyal Minta helping him to get ready, again shows his narrative eloquence in pictures. Nice and typical lineament of him, visual storytelling is something in which Hitch always excelled, his silent films were always very visual, and while on the picture this is seen only half-heartedly, it is confirmed that it is an aspect that accompanied the cinema of the British since his beginnings.

One of the funniest parts of the picture comes, no doubt, with the third prospect-to-wife, Mary Hearn, who laughs at Sweetland and his request, he gets angry, he insults her, and she reaches a paroxysm of hysteria seen for the first time that moment. Then at the end of the movie we get back to see it when she changes her mind and wants to marry Samuel, will be surprised that it's late, and again we'll see the arms waving and shouting hysterically, certainly one of the funniest moments, in what feels as a good comedy, but not remarkable. It is not a brilliant film, but gets its mission, amuse and entertain, the little more than an hour and a half of footage from the version I had access to passes quickly, but as stated, although being an entertaining film, feels it is not the field in which the filmmaker would shine so brightly up to reach the highest peaks of cinema. Without his main guidelines, no suspense, no deaths, mysteries and intrigues, without false guilty, the picture certainly is a rarity within the extensive filmography of the British giant. Also, the version I could watch has had a curious musical accompaniment, renowned and illustrious composers, the likes of Mendelssohn and Dvorak, among others, a first-class musical accompaniment, but certainly feels a little -or rather very- strange to acclimate a comedy of this kind, most likely a hearing selection that was not chosen by Hitch. As it could not be otherwise, a happy ending will await the farmer, the faithful Minta finally is the answer to his search, virtuous, discreet and beautiful, after arduous and almost humiliating journey, the beautiful Lillian Hall-Davis, one very relevant silent actress, quietly takes part of the protagonism of the picture. Having already worked with Hitch in The Ring, also from 1927, the beautiful actress, who incidentally Hitchcock himself declared as his favorite actress, could not make the leap to talkies, and find a notorious and tragic end up committing suicide in 1933. It was already the year in which with The Jazz singer, the sound would come to the cinema to change everything forever, all filmmakers and actors undertook new directions in their careers, and here we have Hitch, beginning to find his definitive style, we have in this film a very particular filmic exercise of his, that without being a masterpiece, will seduce British fans for sure.