Oliver Twist (1922) Reviews

• Acting honours are shared between Chaney and Siegmann

  kidboots2008-08-18

  Even though Jackie Coogan was one of the top stars of the twenties only a handful of his films were top class productions. All of his films were carefully supervised by John Coogan Snr., who kept budgets to a minimum and Jackie's salary up. It was very unusual to see a top director or a noteworthy star's name on the credits. Joan Crawford was in "Old Clothes" but that was one of her first films. "Oliver Twist" was a rare exception. Directed by Frank Lloyd, who went on to win a Best Director Academy Award for "The Divine Lady" and "Cavalcade", he also directed "Mutiny on the Bounty" which won Best Picture for 1935. The cast also included Gladys Brockwell as Nancy, Esther Ralston as Rose Maylie, George Siegmann as Bill Sykes and the magnificent Lon Chaney as Fagin. "Despised by all - pitied by none" is the title that introduces this rather good atmospheric version of the classic book. There is a real effort to bring about the dinginess and poverty of 19th century London. Oliver Twist is a drudge in an English work house. After having the temerity to ask for more food he is taken on as an apprentice under taker. When Noah Claypole says some horrible things about his mother, Oliver runs away to London. (There is a scene taken from "David Copper field" as Oliver trudges the 75 miles to London town.)He then meets the Artful Dodger, who introduces him to the evil Fagin (the masterly Lon Chaney) who has a den of thieves. Meanwhile Mr. Bumble has discovered things about Oliver's mother - that she was from a wealthy family because of a gold locket she had when she died. Oliver is taught to be a "pickpocket" but is caught on his first job. He is taken to Mr. Brownlow's house where he is looked after because Mr. Brownlow thinks Oliver is decent and good. While sent on an errand of trust he is kidnapped by Nancy, claiming to be his sister. He is then sent out on a job with Bill Sykes but while trying to warn the sleeping victims he is shot by Sykes. He is taken in by the Maylies but Fagin is plotting Oliver's return. Nancy goes to the Maylies to tell of Oliver's danger and together they bring about Fagin's downfall. This is an excellent adaptation that holds up well due to the grand supporting cast. George Siegmann can add Bill Sykes to his gallery of villains (he even looks like the original illustrations from Dickens). He was one of the best "heavies" of the silent screen. From Silas Lynch in "Birth of a Nation" to the terrible Von Strohm in "Hearts of the World", he was from the Griffith stable of actors. Gladys Brockwell is also very good as Nancy. She was a very popular and extremely busy actress who died in 1929 as a result of injuries caused by a car accident. Lon Chaney is superb as Fagin, inhabiting the character of the evil, dirty procurer of young boys to be taught the art of thieving. Jackie Coogan is very cute in the title role and occasionally some of his tricks are bought out (cartwheeling for a bored aristocrat, mimicking the pickpocket game and pretending to be an old gentleman.) As another reviewer said he was the best and obvious choice to play Oliver. Highly recommended.

• "Get the boy freed"

  Steffi_P2011-03-30

  Oliver Twist, the novel by Charles Dickens, has had a long and unusual relationship with the cinema. Adapted numerous times (this 1922 feature was already at least the fifth), incorporating some major changes along the way which have since become accepted in future versions. Viewers today may be familiar the 1948 David Lean movie and the Lionel Bart musical, but these contain several key differences from the novel. You see, Oliver Twist was an early work by a young author, and its plotting is not perfect. This faithful adaptation reveals those shortcomings, reproducing all the far-fetched coincidence and convergence, and removing any sense of danger from the finale by having Oliver safe and sound rather than recaptured by the criminal gang. Oliver Twist is a lengthy book and anyone wishing to adapt it has a lot of source material to pick and choose from. However for this version screenwriters (Walter Anthony and director Frank Lloyd) have attempted to cram in just about every subplot and minor character, quite a feat for a 74-minute runtime. As such there are a lot of title cards quickly glossing over some point, with characters popping up and disappearing without really being introduced. Because leading lad Jackie Coogan had found fame co-starring with Charlie Chaplin, there has been some attempt to comedy the picture up, and some half-hearted slapstick routines are the only real departures from Dickens. There's also a fair bit of en vogue cross-cutting, for example between the scene of Oliver play-acting with Mrs Bedwin and Brownlow's conversation with his friend over Oliver's character. It doesn't add much. More promise lies in the look of the picture. The production design is fabulous with sets and costumes conjuring up the dilapidation and inequality of the era. It is especially appropriate for Dickens, rich with visual detail just as the author's work is rich with description of place and person. Director Frank Lloyd is one of the unsung heroes of this era, a great aesthetic shot composer with a painterly eye. At a time when it was really becoming commonplace to have the camera pan and tilt to follow the actors, Lloyd liked to explore the psychological effect having a character disappear off screen while the camera remained still. A fine example here is when Sykes pushes Nancy to the floor, shoving her out of the shot, revealing Fagin's concerned face in the spot where she stood. Some have dismissed Frank Lloyd as a conservative for the lack of movement in his pictures, but here we can see he uses a lot of point-of-view shots, before they really became standard. He is also pretty imaginative with his inserts, such as the one of Bullseye the dog scrabbling at the door, which was copied in a few later version of Oliver Twist. Meanwhile a lively editing pattern keeps things moving. These days, many an adaptation of Oliver Twist is judged more than anything else on the strength of its Fagin. In this case, it was an early make-up part for horror king Lon Chaney. Chaney did his own make-up, and he has sensibly resisted making Fagin too grotesque or stereotypically Jewish (compare Alec Guinness in 1948, and cringe). Apart from the occasional shift of the eyes, this is largely a physical performance, with Chaney conveying great presence and character in his body language. As he would with many of his characters he brings out the forlornness over the overtly evil, beginning a tradition of increasingly sympathetic Fagins in successive screen versions. Chaney is unfortunately one of the few delights of the cast however. Jackie Coogan was the first major child star, but he is a disappointment here, with Lloyd failing to conjure up any of that magic that Chaplin found in him. I'm normally impressed by ubiquitous every-villain George Siegmann, but frankly his appearance as Bill Sykes is just lazy typecasting, and his performance is lacklustre. One saving grace is that, by the standards of the day, the acting is quite natural and restrained. Gladys Brockwell (Nancy) is very good in this respect, emoting well, although sadly her part is underused here. This 1922 version of Oliver Twist is a mixed bag. On the one hand it's visually impressive with some truly memorable set-pieces such as Sykes's rooftop fall or Fagin alone in his cell. On the other it is structurally rather chaotic, full of hasty plot lines that don't get the development they require. This problem is something future adaptations would address. It's intriguing though how the looks of characters and the unfolding of key scenes are remarkably similar from one movie version to another. And this is where the talent of Charles Dickens shines through – the bold twists, catchy dialogue, and larger-than-life figures that have made his work such a source of inspiration for the screen.

• Good Version of the Story With Coogan, Chaney, & More

  Snow Leopard2002-06-21

  With a good cast headed by Jackie Coogan and Lon Chaney, plus decent atmosphere that conjures up the sights of Dickens' world, this version of "Oliver Twist" works well. The Dickens story makes wonderful movie material, but it is also quite melodramatic, and for a film version to succeed requires convincing characters and a believable recreation of the world of the novel. Coogan, Chaney, and director Frank Lloyd all get the job done. Coogan was of course the best and obvious choice in his day to play Oliver. But Chaney, although much more limited in his screen time, is even more memorable. Fagin is the kind of role that Chaney most excelled at. His make-up, mannerisms, and gestures are all impressive, and it is amazing the way that without dialogue he can so quickly and efficiently define his character's relationships with the other characters. The rest of the cast are mostly lesser-known names, but they all do a good job of establishing their characters, too. The settings are a bit plain at times, but are always consistent with the story, and they do the job of showing us the varied places where Oliver lived the different stages of his young life. There have many versions of the Oliver story, and the terrific David Lean version from the 40's is still the one by which all others should be measured. But this is a good adaptation, and it has almost everything you could ask for in a silent version of the story.

• A Visually Beautiful Silent Film

  madcardinal2011-04-13

  I eagerly popped this DVD into my player because I've always been captivated by early still and motion photography. I was pleased with the beauty of this silent film: some scenes have a brownish color cast resembling a calotype while others look bluish like a cyanotype. This film follows the novel closely, so dickensians and purists should like it. Lon Chaney is convincing as Fagin, and child star Jackie Coogan - who enjoyed a resurgence later as Uncle Fester on "The Addams Family" - earns the sympathy of the viewer. There are the usual histrionics for this period: this is a silent film, and so they come with the territory. Highly recommended to those who like silent films. A must-see for Dickens devotees and Chaney completists.

• the best ever adaptation

  greystudies2012-11-28

  Actually, the "best" version is a matter of opinion, whether you prefer the 1922 Frank Lloyd version, the 1948 David Lean version, the 1968 Carol Reed musical version, or the 2005 Roman Polanski version. But there is little doubt that the 1922 version is the "best" in terms of being the most faithful to Dickens' original novel, virtually every major character and subplot is included with little in the way of changes, quite a feat for a 74-minute movie. I rank it alongside of the 1951 version of Scrooge with Alistair Sims and the 1948 version of Great Expectations as one of the finest adaptations of Dickens on screen.