During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.
- Awards
- 2 wins total
Károly Huszár
- Ivan - the Gatekeeper
- (as Charles Puffy)
Johnny Mack Brown
- Russian Officer
- (uncredited)
Albert Conti
- Military Commandant at Novokursk
- (uncredited)
Jules Cowles
- Peasant Who Robs Tatiana
- (uncredited)
Tiny Jones
- Revolutionist at Protest
- (uncredited)
Frank Leigh
- Outlaw Peasant in Cabin
- (uncredited)
Russ Powell
- Man Taking Sergei to Ivan
- (uncredited)
Bud Rae
- Russian Soldier
- (uncredited)
Sam Savitsky
- Military Guard
- (uncredited)
Michael Visaroff
- Cossack Whipping Sergei
- (uncredited)
Featured reviews
I'm a fan but have never seen this Lon Chaney film before. The intensity he brings to his slow-minded character is magnificent.
The title cards keep you on pace with the imagery very well. I didn't especially dislike the ones 'upstairs' but did feel empathy for the peasants 'downstairs.'
Nicely paced and always interesting throughout the story. It was a pleasure to see.
It's easy to spot Károly Huszár (Ivan the Gatekeeper), a familiar face in some great films like. The Blue Angel and The Man Who Laughs. Information about when and where he died at the age of 58 is sketchy, would be nice to know his complete story. IMDB: "His death place and date is still unconfirmed. He and his wife left Hungary in 1941 because of the Holocaust and tried to get into the United States. Some sources say that he died in Tokyo, Japan in 1942. Others that his train was stopped by the Soviet army and he was imprisoned in a Gulag labor camp in Karaganda, Kazahstan where he performed in the camp theatre company. He died there from diphtheria in June, 1943."
Spend a little time with this film, I find it rewarding.
The title cards keep you on pace with the imagery very well. I didn't especially dislike the ones 'upstairs' but did feel empathy for the peasants 'downstairs.'
Nicely paced and always interesting throughout the story. It was a pleasure to see.
It's easy to spot Károly Huszár (Ivan the Gatekeeper), a familiar face in some great films like. The Blue Angel and The Man Who Laughs. Information about when and where he died at the age of 58 is sketchy, would be nice to know his complete story. IMDB: "His death place and date is still unconfirmed. He and his wife left Hungary in 1941 because of the Holocaust and tried to get into the United States. Some sources say that he died in Tokyo, Japan in 1942. Others that his train was stopped by the Soviet army and he was imprisoned in a Gulag labor camp in Karaganda, Kazahstan where he performed in the camp theatre company. He died there from diphtheria in June, 1943."
Spend a little time with this film, I find it rewarding.
Not to go into Tim Robbins mode from The Player, but think of this film as Downstairs (1932) meets He Who Gets Slapped (1924) meets The Last Command (1928). It blends class differences, the pain of humiliation, and the Russian Revolution into a bit of a mess, but it's a mess with Lon Chaney, who I always find mesmerizing. Here he plays a Russian peasant, and opposite him is beautiful Barbara Bedford, who more than keeps up with him as an aristocrat. During the civil war he protects her out in the country (how she ever managed to get in this position isn't explained), taking a whipping to conceal her identify which even he doesn't fully know. She's rescued and they're brought to her manor, where he expects her to live up to her promise to be his friend forever, but she simply offers him a servant's job and makes it clear that he's of a different class. In addition to being disillusioned, he endures the pain of being yelled at and called an idiot by the older lady of the house.
I wish I could say this film is some grand metaphor for the Revolution, with the peasant becoming woke to the hypocrisy of the ruling class and turning on them. It briefly has those overtones, when another servant tells him "You fool! You take a beating because an aristocrat promises you something? Do you think those upstairs pigs ever keep their promises to us downstairs?" The servants in the house look forward to the fall of the aristocracy, and have a little revolution of their own in the kitchen, ignoring the bell ringing for service and getting drunk. It's a situation where everyone seems repelling - the aristocracy for living off the vast wealth inequality (with the couple in this house also being war profiteers), as well as the marauding revolutionaries and peasants, who on three different occasions in the film look to rape Bedford's character. In one of the better scenes, one with real menace, it's Chaney's character who does this, and she repels him with the heel of her hand pushed up under his chin with all of her strength (which looked rather painful to Chaney).
The film could have gone to some pretty dark places or made an actual statement, but unfortunately it cops out on all fronts. There is a romantic angle (with Ricardo Cortez) which might have worked had the guy come back and killed the peasant, or vice versa, but the film instead wants both of them to be heroes, opting for a contrived and unsatisfactory ending. Despite that, I liked Chaney and Bedford enough to enjoy seeing this film, especially since it moved along pretty well over its 70-minute runtime.
I wish I could say this film is some grand metaphor for the Revolution, with the peasant becoming woke to the hypocrisy of the ruling class and turning on them. It briefly has those overtones, when another servant tells him "You fool! You take a beating because an aristocrat promises you something? Do you think those upstairs pigs ever keep their promises to us downstairs?" The servants in the house look forward to the fall of the aristocracy, and have a little revolution of their own in the kitchen, ignoring the bell ringing for service and getting drunk. It's a situation where everyone seems repelling - the aristocracy for living off the vast wealth inequality (with the couple in this house also being war profiteers), as well as the marauding revolutionaries and peasants, who on three different occasions in the film look to rape Bedford's character. In one of the better scenes, one with real menace, it's Chaney's character who does this, and she repels him with the heel of her hand pushed up under his chin with all of her strength (which looked rather painful to Chaney).
The film could have gone to some pretty dark places or made an actual statement, but unfortunately it cops out on all fronts. There is a romantic angle (with Ricardo Cortez) which might have worked had the guy come back and killed the peasant, or vice versa, but the film instead wants both of them to be heroes, opting for a contrived and unsatisfactory ending. Despite that, I liked Chaney and Bedford enough to enjoy seeing this film, especially since it moved along pretty well over its 70-minute runtime.
As a lifelong fan of Chaney Sr., this film was on a very short list of existing Chaney films I had yet to see. I watched it last night for the first time and was pleasantly surprised. Although I admit this is far from Chaney's best work, I suspect many of the negative reviews, both then and now, come from unmet expectations. "Mockery" does not have grotesque make-up like "Hunchback of Notre Dame". It lacks bizarre story elements like "The Unknown". Chaney only plays one character instead of two, as he did in "A Blind Bargain". And if you wanted to see sets and scenery on a grand scale, as in "Phantom of the Opera", forget about it.
So what does this film have? Well, this melodrama, set in Russia around the time of the revolution, revolves around the theme you see in most of Chaney's films: unrequited love. Chaney's character is a peasant named Sergei, who reminded me of "Lenny", the character portrayed by Lon Chaney Jr. in "Of Mice and Men". Sergei is a good hearted simpleton, unable to understand matters of love. Sergei's love for the Countess, like Quasimodo's longing for Esmarelda, is destined for failure, but he's the only one who cannot see this.
As the story unfolds, we get glimpses into the good and bad (or Jekyll and Hyde, if you will) found in all of us. Sergei's pure love turns to lust. Tatiana's indifference evolves into compassion.
If you're expecting a 1927 era melodrama, you'll get a good one. If you're expecting something bizarre, like "Novokursk After Midnight", you'll have trouble keeping awake.
So what does this film have? Well, this melodrama, set in Russia around the time of the revolution, revolves around the theme you see in most of Chaney's films: unrequited love. Chaney's character is a peasant named Sergei, who reminded me of "Lenny", the character portrayed by Lon Chaney Jr. in "Of Mice and Men". Sergei is a good hearted simpleton, unable to understand matters of love. Sergei's love for the Countess, like Quasimodo's longing for Esmarelda, is destined for failure, but he's the only one who cannot see this.
As the story unfolds, we get glimpses into the good and bad (or Jekyll and Hyde, if you will) found in all of us. Sergei's pure love turns to lust. Tatiana's indifference evolves into compassion.
If you're expecting a 1927 era melodrama, you'll get a good one. If you're expecting something bizarre, like "Novokursk After Midnight", you'll have trouble keeping awake.
It's the chaos of the Russian revolution. Countess Tatiana Alexandrova (Barbara Bedford) is alone and on foot, desperate to get to Novokursk. She encounters peasant Sergei (Lon Chaney) who is picking over the corpses of dead soldiers. She hires him as her guide and promises to be his friend upon arrival. They pretend to be a married couple when they run into revolutionaries.
This is a fascinating exposition of the Russian revolution. Neither side is right. In a way, I am a little disappointed with some of Alexandrova's actions, but it is very much indicative of the society in general. At last, there is no satisfying ending and there isn't one in the real world. I probably would have ended the movie before the final fight.
This is a fascinating exposition of the Russian revolution. Neither side is right. In a way, I am a little disappointed with some of Alexandrova's actions, but it is very much indicative of the society in general. At last, there is no satisfying ending and there isn't one in the real world. I probably would have ended the movie before the final fight.
This little known title still manages to draw audiences thanks to Lon Chaney, although it is a bit hard to find. However, when found, it is a crowd pleaser thanks to a decent story, great acting, and nice production elements.
Chaney stars as Sergei, an unintelligent peasant who happens upon a woman (Barbara Bedford) while lurking in the forest in search of food. She requests that he accompany her to the city and to comply with whatever she says. His agreement of these terms becomes useful when revolutionists try to attack her. Sergei's actions in the situation make it possible for the two of them to reach the city, where he discovers that the woman is Countess Tatiana. In gratitude, she offers Sergei a job in the kitchen where she is staying under the direction of burly Ivan (Charles Puffy). He agrees and grows more and more fond of Tatiana and jealous of her relationship with soldier Dimitri (Ricardo Cortez) until he is driven to action by revolutionist Ivan.
As always, Chaney gives a stirring performance through a transforming makeup job. His character is rude and dirty, but we somehow sympathize with him even though we are brought to like both sides of the spectrum. Sometimes Lon is supposed to be sweet but sometimes he is supposed to be evil, but his character is realistic enough to be forgiven. Bedford is stunning as his love interest, first appearing dressed down in a Madonna-like fashion and then cleaning up to look Garbo-esquire.
The mechanics of the film are great too. It opens with an extreme close-up on Chaney's hungry hands searching through a dead soldier's effects. It follows him as he roams around. Lighting is used to highlight the scenes, especially toward the end of the film when lights flicker on and off constantly. These provide an added touch to make the film even better than it already would have been.
Chaney stars as Sergei, an unintelligent peasant who happens upon a woman (Barbara Bedford) while lurking in the forest in search of food. She requests that he accompany her to the city and to comply with whatever she says. His agreement of these terms becomes useful when revolutionists try to attack her. Sergei's actions in the situation make it possible for the two of them to reach the city, where he discovers that the woman is Countess Tatiana. In gratitude, she offers Sergei a job in the kitchen where she is staying under the direction of burly Ivan (Charles Puffy). He agrees and grows more and more fond of Tatiana and jealous of her relationship with soldier Dimitri (Ricardo Cortez) until he is driven to action by revolutionist Ivan.
As always, Chaney gives a stirring performance through a transforming makeup job. His character is rude and dirty, but we somehow sympathize with him even though we are brought to like both sides of the spectrum. Sometimes Lon is supposed to be sweet but sometimes he is supposed to be evil, but his character is realistic enough to be forgiven. Bedford is stunning as his love interest, first appearing dressed down in a Madonna-like fashion and then cleaning up to look Garbo-esquire.
The mechanics of the film are great too. It opens with an extreme close-up on Chaney's hungry hands searching through a dead soldier's effects. It follows him as he roams around. Lighting is used to highlight the scenes, especially toward the end of the film when lights flicker on and off constantly. These provide an added touch to make the film even better than it already would have been.
Did you know
- TriviaThis film was preserved by the George Eastman Museum in Rochester, New York after having initially been thought as lost until a copy was discovered in the 1970s. It was subsequently fully restored by The Film Foundation, established by director Martin Scorsese and others in 1990.
- Quotes
Capt. Dimitri: [to the Countess] I apologize for my lips, Countess - and I apologize for my eyes - but I cannot apologize for my heart.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Man of a Thousand Faces (1957)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- La novela de un mujik
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $187,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 15m(75 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content