There were quite a number of reasons for seeing 'The Cricket on the Hearth'. Charles Dickens' source material is great, if not one of my favourite works of his, that doesn't get enough attention today. While not one of my favourite directors, DW Griffith deserves his reputation as a pioneer of silent film. Have had high appreciation for silent film for a while now, there are some not so great ones out there but the best ones are masterpieces and film milestones.
Griffith did do so much better than 'The Cricket on the Hearth', which is a lesser effort of his and a contender for his weakest Biograph film. Not only does 'The Cricket on the Hearth' not feel like Dickens, with a lot left out and re-ordered and with a short length, it also doesn't feel like Griffith other than the filming techniques. He did many fine films and short films, but when he was not on form like here and the Abraham Lincoln biopic he was really off.
It's not a complete disaster by all means. It looks absolutely great visually, with some inspired filming techniques that still hold up tremendously well. The contrast of the squalor filled early scenes and the more idyllic imagery such as the wedding is striking. The opening sequence sets the film up very neatly and with great promise.
Did think that the performances were quite decent considering what was given to them.
However, Griffith directing-wise is rather uninspired dramatically and at times lazy, two words not usually used by me in regard to him. Also felt that he was not at ease with the material or knew what to do with it, and dramatically there's a finding his feet feel. The title words are rather rambling and over-explain somewhat.
What undoes 'The Cricket on the Hearth' are the story and pace. This was a story that needed a much longer length of at least 25 minutes, 11 minutes is far too short for this story and it shows in how the story is executed. Structurally, it jumps about a lot and has an incomplete and rushed feel to the extent that even those familiar with the source material will be confused by what goes on. Goodness knows what it will be like for those not, they'll be like how was the source material a hit if thinking the film is faithful to it (it's not). There is too much focus on the love story, which has moments of charm but is generally bland, and the titular character is given too short shrift.
Overall, disappointing. 3/10.
Griffith did do so much better than 'The Cricket on the Hearth', which is a lesser effort of his and a contender for his weakest Biograph film. Not only does 'The Cricket on the Hearth' not feel like Dickens, with a lot left out and re-ordered and with a short length, it also doesn't feel like Griffith other than the filming techniques. He did many fine films and short films, but when he was not on form like here and the Abraham Lincoln biopic he was really off.
It's not a complete disaster by all means. It looks absolutely great visually, with some inspired filming techniques that still hold up tremendously well. The contrast of the squalor filled early scenes and the more idyllic imagery such as the wedding is striking. The opening sequence sets the film up very neatly and with great promise.
Did think that the performances were quite decent considering what was given to them.
However, Griffith directing-wise is rather uninspired dramatically and at times lazy, two words not usually used by me in regard to him. Also felt that he was not at ease with the material or knew what to do with it, and dramatically there's a finding his feet feel. The title words are rather rambling and over-explain somewhat.
What undoes 'The Cricket on the Hearth' are the story and pace. This was a story that needed a much longer length of at least 25 minutes, 11 minutes is far too short for this story and it shows in how the story is executed. Structurally, it jumps about a lot and has an incomplete and rushed feel to the extent that even those familiar with the source material will be confused by what goes on. Goodness knows what it will be like for those not, they'll be like how was the source material a hit if thinking the film is faithful to it (it's not). There is too much focus on the love story, which has moments of charm but is generally bland, and the titular character is given too short shrift.
Overall, disappointing. 3/10.