jacowium

Solid acting from the main role players keep this boat afloat, which could otherwise have been dragged under by the slow pace and the cloyingly sentimental soundtrack. Ellen Burstyn lights up any screen (big or small), and I can imagine it must be a joy for any actor to partner her on screen. There is an effortless 'chemistry' (for lack of a better word) between her and Landau here.

The central theme here though is not romance as such, but rather ART, and the creating of art that will stand the test of time. While I'm sure that there are as many reasons for becoming an artist as there are actual artists in the world, the interested viewer here will find much to ponder about the process of creating something called a masterpiece, and what drives or inspires the artist to reach his/her full potential.

It is a bit of a pity that the film-making team here couldn't invest the same amount of love into their endeavours, as the artists who truly care about their work - like Max Loeb, the protagonist of this film. I rate this film 7/10 due to good, respectful treatment of the film's main theme, but not any higher due to a somewhat mediocre "delivering" of the film's message.

MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD

As a person who fell in with the overtly religious crowd and later (but very gradually) fell out of that crowd again, I found the premise of "Rain" very intriguing. I didn't push the DVD into the player with high expectations though, knowing that such contentious themes are often treated with soft gloves by the entertainment industry. Having seen it now, I am happy to say that it is a movie well worth seeing, if you're interested in issues like mankind and morality. The production team certainly didn't hold back on their message.

Other viewers may be left with other impressions, but to me a central message of "Rain" was: if we choose to wear masks instead of presenting our own selves to the world, those masks are bound to crack at some stage.

Other reviewers mentioned quite rightfully that the extremely sudden conversions portrayed, seem a tad suspect - not only in behaviour but also in appearance. For instance, Sadie Thompson's hairstyles change rather dramatically overnight. This is a movie adapted from a play though, and we have to accept the dramatic license that film-makers need in order to secure the viewer's attention for some 90 minutes. If we insist on everything being realistic, movies like these would exceed 6 hours. And due to the already dialogue-heavy narrative, there is no choice but to take a few short cuts.

I certainly do not want to fault Mrs. Crawford's performance as the pivotal character here - she gives a suitably strong performance in my opinion. I can however understand some commentators' criticisms, even if I feel them a bit harsh. A Carole Lombard or a Bette Davis (not to fan the flames of the real-life Joan-vs-Bette animosity here) may have brought a bit more physical swagger to the role, and perhaps saved the film from some of the negative judgements it received back in 1932.

Props to director Milestone and the crafty editors for the memorable "Crawford entrance" near the beginning and ends of the film. It is the kind of cinematic thrill that latter-day directors seem to struggle to match. The soft lighting used on Crawford in one segment of the film, and harsher lighting in other segments, were very effective too.

I found "Rain" satisfying as a cinematic product, and even more satisfying as a film with philosophical substance. The latter is better discussed in the message boards.

This is only the second feature film directed by Howard Higgin that I get to see, and unfortunately confirms my suspicion that his craftsmanship still lagged behind other directors of the time, such as Edmund Goulding, Mervyn LeRoy, Alfred Hitchcock etc.

I would cite the screen writing (in which he had a major hand) as one of the weaknesses. The characters often act cartoonish and not all the narrative bases are always covered. For instance, here we see the only the first part of an escape attempt, then the viewer is left in the dark as to how the escapee managed the rest of it.

On the other hand, Higgin's direction of the actors still manages to make me care about the characters, even if their behaviour is often cartoonish, as mentioned above. The actors use facial expressions quite well in communicating emotions, overcoming some of the production difficulties in the early years of talkies.

Another reviewer stated that the opening scenes are "unnecessary" and the "storyline left hanging". Au contraire! A central theme is introduced, i.e. the unwillingness of citizens to take responsibility for their actions, leaving the innocent to suffer in their wake. We then see the main character cradling a dying person in his lap, foreshadowing a critical scene later on.

I believe therefore that director Higgin had a good understanding of cinematic techniques and dramatic elements, but it is in the execution and communication of those aspects, where he disappoints somewhat.

And wait, I didn't mention the joy of seeing Bette Davis in an early role...

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.