Say, David, would you mind posting a schedule round-up of SIFF silents here? Thanks!

Absolutely!

The Scarlet Letter,
Saturday May 27, 4:00pm The Egyptian

Au Bonheur des dames,
Sunday May 28, 4:00pm The Egyptian

The Gold Rush,
Wednesday June 7, 7:00pm The Neptune
& Saturday June 10, 11:00am The Egyptian

The Unknown,
Friday June 16, 9:00pm The Moore

The first two films have come and gone, so you've missed them unfortunately. They were also the two unavailable on video. The Gold Rush is well known and easy to find, but it's one of the best from the very best and it's Chaplin on a big screen for cryin out loud! The Unknown is Lon Chaney and the director of Freaks, Tod Browning. They made eight or nine pictures together and this is one of the best I've seen. It also features a very lovely young Joan Crawford. If you don't know her films before she turned thirty you're in for a surprise (she was quite the tomato)! This film will also screen at The Moore and how often can you see film down there any more? It's a beautiful old place and even though I know I'll hate the modern musical accompaniment I wouldn't miss it. I plan to post previews for both these films when we get a bit closer on the calendar.



**this comment contains spoilers***
David,I did read your capsule and thought it did a good job pointing out the strength and weakness of the film. I am, however, a substance over style audience member, so, though glad I saw it in a theater (which, of course, is the great thing about SIFF screening silent films), I didn't really like it.I liked the way the film looked, the cinematography and editing were superb as was the art design, but I had real problems with the story and the acting. The endless cheesecake shots didn't help either. I thought if Dita Parlo either opened her eyes really wide or look down in softly feminine modesty one more time I was going to scream. It was hard to take such an irritatingly gamine performance after seeing Lillian Gish the day before in The Scarlet Letter! I felt the two films were equal in terms of the physical aspect of filmmaking- cinematography etc. However, Seastrom's cinematography and settings served to highlight the inner and social conflicts of the characters. I found Duvivier's style a bit overbearing and obtrusive- at times it overwhelmed the story and, for me, didn't compensate for the lack of interesting characterization or a compelling narrative. For me, the uncle's snapping and going nuts was the highlight of the film, because I felt for him. I was, of course, rooting for and pleased by the shooting of the personnel manager.I found the ending really facile- after showing the relentless destruction of the uncle's business, family and sanity to have the niece go, gee, I guess we shouldn't have stood in the way of progress seemed incredibly, almost cynically, ludicrous.
I am looking forward to the next two silent film screenings at SIFF The Gold Rush and The Unknown- both of which I've seen before but am looking forward to seeing on the big screen with an audience. I am also looking forward to the Silent Film Festival in San Francisco.

Every frame of Julien Duvivier’s extraordinary film is composed

only a still photographer composes frames.
a cinematographer composes shots.

palatial grandeur

i didnt realize this film had a royal setting.

Thanks for your comment. With traditional still photography being my own background, I tend to see and think in those terms. I do however disagree with the observation that all filmmakers compose within shots, and not frames. Edward Weston produced mot ion pictures, and is considered among the greatest still photographers to ever hold a camera.

Regarding the other reference, it is a 'retail palace'.
Webster defines a ‘Palace’ as:
1) The official residence of royal personage
And also as,
2) A large, often gaudily ornate building used for entertainment or exhibitions.

For the unfamiliar or newly initiated, our inquisitive friend is a well-known sportsman. His primary gaming interests lie in the casting of bait to catch arguments. His flies and worms, the infinitesimally hyper-precise and literal usage of every word in the English language excluding anything figurative or with the tiniest suggestion of non-specificity, unless it happens to be his own choice of words, which are always above reproach.
Shhhh! If we pretend he isn’t there, eventually he may vaporize in a puff of smoke. Pfffff!
Or as my Ma always said, "If you keep scratching, it will never go away!"