When Knighthood Was in Flower

I was quite impressed with the restoration of Marion Davies's breakout picture When Knighthood Was In Flower. For its time the film is quite lavish and an awe inspiring spectacle. I wouldn't be surprised if William Randolph Hearst made sure that Paramount had whatever financing it needed to bring his Marion's breakout film to the big screen. The only thing that surprised me was that he didn't get Cecil B. DeMille to direct. But more than likely DeMille did not want to be second guessed by WR Hearst.

With or without DeMille this film is the definition of spectacle. Many of you have probably seen the Disney classic film The Sword And The Rose made during the 50s that starred Richard Todd as Charles Brandon and Glynis Johns as Mary Tudor with James Robertson Justice as Henry VIII. Marion Davies is Mary Tudor, sister of Henry VIII and a pawn in the power play game of medieval Europe.

Lyn Harding is Henry VIII and this is back in the day before he became changing wives like underwear and beheading a pair of them. He's married to Catherine of Aragon aunt of the Hapsburg Emperor Charles V whose many titles also included King of Spain and ruler of the Netherlands as well as all that German and Eastern European territory. Henry VIII thought that if he could get sister Mary hitched to the aged Louis XII of France he'd have things all sewed up alliance wise.

But Mary has a mind of her own. Marion Davies catches one look at Charles Brandon at jousting tournament and she decides this is the guy I want and I don't care if he's not noble.

The long forgotten Forrest Stanley is Charles Brandon. I'm sure WR Hearst didn't want a leading man getting all the attention in Marion's film. Time and the coming of sound have erased our memories of most of the cast. But William Powell plays Francis I of France who succeeded Louis XII when he died. This was Powell's second film and he's properly sinister as Francis. Not that Francis was any more or less bad than any of the other monarchs of the day including Henry VIII in real life. But Powell in his silent years played swarthy sinister villains and Francis I is done in the best Snidely Whiplash tradition.

Historically accurate its not. Anne Boleyn makes a brief appearance here as a girl Henry VIII was beginning to check out. Anne was a mere 13 when all this action is taking place and was not drawing Henry's or anyone else's attention yet.

It's been remarked that Davies's strong suit was a gift for comedy and she has a great old time fleeing from the king with her lover and going to a tavern in male drag. She has a great old time in this part of the film, you could tell Davies was enjoying herself.

I'm glad this film is now restored and we can see both Marion Davies and William Powell in their salad days.

What can be said about at the time the most expensive movie ever made with cost an estimated at $1.8 million. The pet project of the famous media magnate William Hearst, it is the tale of a woman, sister who defies all royal conventions, especially one; she falls in love with a commoner - Knight Charles Brandon - while bethrothed not of her choice, of course, to King louis XII of France. Action ensues as the forces of tradition conspire to keep them apart. The sets are very good and Marion davies is extremely good. When I watch a silent movie and I wish to hear what the actor is saying, then the performance is classic. Everyone else is adequate and passable. The director who isn't very good throws in a lot of gothic subtext and an unusual editing style of what I'll term "flash cutting" is used. Cinematography is especially wonderful. Deeper meanings or detailing beyond the obvious social strata innuities and foresight castigations of a by-gone era, is pitifully missing. Entertaining yes, action-packed - agreed but a bit quaint, unlike Robin Hood released around the same time but which holds up much better. (It alsao looks as if it cost more; it did not). But Garbo, Shearer and Dietrich did this too and theirs are better. Worth watching but watch out for sappiness in many moments. Just as a note, this movie was the biggest hit of the 1922-23 movie season, ahead of Robin Hood and Safety last.

Mary Tudor (Marion Davies) falls in love with Charles Brandon but is forced for political reasons by elder brother Henry VIII to marry the old and decrepit King Louis XII of France.

Nice, big budget sets and costumes, but Marion Davies seems the wrong actor for her role. As swashbucklers go, rather tame.

Although he is not remembered to-day for anything else but this production, Robert G. Vignola directed no less than 99 movies, starting way back in 1911 and continuing through to 1937. A look at "The Scarlet Letter" (1934) confirms the impression that he learnt his craft back in 1911 and stuck with it. Throughout the entire length of "When Knighthood", Mr Vignola does not move his camera so much as a single half-inch. Were it not for his fondness of editing constantly from a group shot to a tight two-shot, the whole movie is otherwise presented as if it were a stage play. Nonetheless, he does maintain the pace of his tale with admirable dexterity. I was amazed to find that I'd been glued to the screen for well over two and half hours. I thought I'd been watching the action for no more than 90 minutes.

Of course the overwhelming richness of the production, tight plotting that most effectively builds up to two separate climaxes, plus spellbinding acting (particularly from Miss Davies herself, Lyn Harding, William Norris and William Powell) all contributed to the movie's appeal. On the other hand, I thought Forrest Stanley made a rather dull hero; and the fact that he and Ernest Glendinning who played his friend, Caskoden, were virtually interchangeable look-a-likes did not help.

All told, however, this is a thrilling, engrossing and visually appealing production, and I can't wait until it's released on DVD with an appropriate music score.

I haven't looked at this in twenty years or so, and my memory was dim, but at the time I thought it was good but not great. Looking at the dvd of the Ben Model-Library of Congress-Jack Theakson-Steven Stanchfield restoration, I am agog at the clarity of the images, the beauty of the tints, and the care taken in the hand-coloring of the torches in the big chase at the end, the stupendous sets by Joseph Urban (who, Lara Gabrielle Fowler notes in the well-written booklet that accompanies the set, actually designed palaces in Europe) and the sumptuous clothing. Ben has added a handsome organ score based on the original offering at the Criterion in Manhattan. Like the original movie, nothing has been omitted to make this less than a landmark restoration.

The story is one of those melodramas of romantic piffle in costume that have long been popular. Marion Davies is Mary Tudor, young sister of Henry VIII, played by a suit seen in a Holbein picture, into which Lyn Harding has been stuffed. He is interested in marrying Marion to whichever ruler will serve his dynastic purposes, but she wants love, and settles on Forrest Stanley. When her engagement to the decrepit Louis XII is announced, she and Stanley try to flee to America; they are caught and Stanley is saved from a cheap and chippy chopper only by Marion's promise to marry Louis and not make a fuss. Unfortunately, the marriage takes its toll on the king, and the new king, played by William Powell, would have his way with her. As Tod Slaughter used to ask, will Heaven protect the working girl?

This sort of suffering-in-ermine story does not appeal to me, as I have made apparent in many another review. Even worse, for my taste, is the fact that the actors and their performances get lost in the immense sets and sumptuous costumes, so that it sometimes seemed that I was viewing a series of Flemish paintings -- not in the least aided by Robert Vignola's well-this-composition-worked-in-the-last-thirty-setups staging. It was almost an hour into the film, when Marion and Forrest are hiding out at an inn, that some of the clothing comes off and we get to see some acting. Otherwise, the only human moments seem to be the rare close-ups of the actors -- usually Marion in some immense pearl-studded miter -- lending more of an air of a tableau vivante, or even a good waxworks than a fillum.

I know that there is a large contingent of fans who will enjoy this movie just for those things which seem to me a distraction from good story-telling. These are the matters of likes and dislikes that we shrug our shoulders at. It doesn't lessen the amount of work and, indeed, the achievement of the restoration. The amount of labor and cooperation make it clear that, yes, we fans of these old movies can achieve something worthwhile. I can only hope that those of us who like this sort of thing will like it very much, and we can do more of these. Anyone for Dorothy Gish?