If nothing else, this film demonstrates how R. W. Paul - and filmmakers in general - had progressed in the short space of time since Porter's The Great Train Robbery transformed the path of cinema in late 1903. Although the film is melodramatic and simplistic it is nevertheless clearly told in half-a-dozen scenes which show a drunken sot following the path of redemption after chancing across a priest (as you do) and signing the temperance pledge. Our dishevelled hero's transformation is both immediate and inexplicable, although it could be argued this is an early and crude use of ellipsis. The film is also interesting for it's fairly matter-of-fact depiction of poverty and domestic violence as well as its use of a variety of stylised sets that contrast with the exterior street scenes.
7 Reviews
I like cherries, but I did not like this film
Horst_In_Translation9 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
"Buy Your Own Cherries" or "Rum vs. Cherries" is a 4-minute live action short film from 1904, so this one is already over 110 years old. It is a British production and the man in charge was Robert W. Paul, one of the country's most successful filmmakers in the early 20th century. The good thing about this one is that the quality is nice and we see the characters clearly. Also there are several locations, which should not be taken for granted as many films from that time had only one room where the action took place for example. On the downside, I had absolutely no clue what was going in here. This film surely tried to tell a story, bit without reading the plot summary here on IMDb, the action was completely lost on me. Intertitles may have helped. That's why 4 out of 10 is still a really generous rating for this little film. I don't recommend the watch.
Early Melodrama and the Story Film
Cineanalyst5 January 2008
R.W. Paul was better at humour; his one-scene comedies, such as "The Countryman and the Cinmatograph" (1901), "A Chess Dispute" and "An Extraordinary Cab Accident" (both 1903), as well as "The '?' Motorist" (1906) are some of the best of their kind. This foray into melodrama, "Buy Your Own Cherries", on the other hand, displays the typical insipid qualities of the genre within a some four-minute timeframe. Due to its short runtime and historical situation of being made over 100 years ago, it's not a waste of time, but I don't recommend it. On the other hand, if you like melodrama or want to see its early incarnations, this is a good find.
Reportedly, this is based on a magic lantern slideshow of a few years prior. The set designs of the film are about as elaborate as a magic lantern slide, too. It involves a lower-class drunkard who hits his wife and puts fear into his children, but soon apologizes and finds God (only four minutes remember). He then quits drinking and buys his own cherries. It's a condescending and classist advertisement for religion and the temperance movement. That's typical of Victorian and Edwardian Britain, but it's no excuse, either. After our protagonist finds God and temperance, his family transforms from living in a somewhat dirty home of penury to a decorated home and apparent middle-class lifestyle. Our protagonist showers his family with gifts.
This film is, however, notable for its fine continuity as an early story film; the transitions between the six shots are clean cuts. One shot is even an insert of the temperance pledge, which makes the film's message more blunt. R.W. Paul was an important pioneer of film technique.
Reportedly, this is based on a magic lantern slideshow of a few years prior. The set designs of the film are about as elaborate as a magic lantern slide, too. It involves a lower-class drunkard who hits his wife and puts fear into his children, but soon apologizes and finds God (only four minutes remember). He then quits drinking and buys his own cherries. It's a condescending and classist advertisement for religion and the temperance movement. That's typical of Victorian and Edwardian Britain, but it's no excuse, either. After our protagonist finds God and temperance, his family transforms from living in a somewhat dirty home of penury to a decorated home and apparent middle-class lifestyle. Our protagonist showers his family with gifts.
This film is, however, notable for its fine continuity as an early story film; the transitions between the six shots are clean cuts. One shot is even an insert of the temperance pledge, which makes the film's message more blunt. R.W. Paul was an important pioneer of film technique.
First shocking drama about domestic violence.(spoiler in first paragraph)
the red duchess5 December 2000
Warning: Spoilers
One of the first extended narratives, this lasts a good four minutes. Its combination of melodrama and moral might seem absurd, but there is no denying the power of certain sequences. A drunk goes into a bar, has a few drinks and starts getting stroppy. Thrown out, he goes home and starts belting his wife, his children cowering under the table. He is not a bad man, though, just down on his luck; on one of his travels he is accosted by a priest who makes him sign a temperance pledge and wear a badge. Not since Poe's 'The Purloined Letter' have the contents of a piece of paper been so miraculous. Our hero suddenly finds himself a spruce, decent citizen, showering goodwill on his fellow neighbours, and presents and love on his family, who gather around him, praising good old Dad.
Obviously, this is daftly naive, and the schematic plot trajectory feels like a primitive public warning announcement, or one of those insulting anti-smoking diatribes they hurl at kids. But I dare anyone to forget the striking scene of domestic violence, this lurching hobo bursting into a family scene - suddenly harmony is in disarray, children mill about for a hiding place. The sharp blow to the wife's head is traumatic - we can feel her stagger to the back of the scene.
What is most poignant about this sequence is not its torrid exposure of male brutality, but its more complex showing of human misery, frustration, despair, lashing out typically at those more vulnerable than his own sorry self. It is this that makes the denouement palatable, the strong family love that survives social, economic and personal pressures, and makes the hero, even at this stage of wretchedness, a far happier man than the top-hatted snob who turns his nose up at him, a rare instance of American cinema dealing with class.
This film is apparently based on a magic lantern slide series - it would be fascinating to compare the two media, one reaching its eclipse, one only starting, although achieving a remarkable degree of maturity in its first decade. The cutting here betrays a cinematic intelligence, revealing the difference between private and public, exterior and interior space, the differing mobility of male and female, the tensions in patriarchy etc.
Obviously, this is daftly naive, and the schematic plot trajectory feels like a primitive public warning announcement, or one of those insulting anti-smoking diatribes they hurl at kids. But I dare anyone to forget the striking scene of domestic violence, this lurching hobo bursting into a family scene - suddenly harmony is in disarray, children mill about for a hiding place. The sharp blow to the wife's head is traumatic - we can feel her stagger to the back of the scene.
What is most poignant about this sequence is not its torrid exposure of male brutality, but its more complex showing of human misery, frustration, despair, lashing out typically at those more vulnerable than his own sorry self. It is this that makes the denouement palatable, the strong family love that survives social, economic and personal pressures, and makes the hero, even at this stage of wretchedness, a far happier man than the top-hatted snob who turns his nose up at him, a rare instance of American cinema dealing with class.
This film is apparently based on a magic lantern slide series - it would be fascinating to compare the two media, one reaching its eclipse, one only starting, although achieving a remarkable degree of maturity in its first decade. The cutting here betrays a cinematic intelligence, revealing the difference between private and public, exterior and interior space, the differing mobility of male and female, the tensions in patriarchy etc.
Ambitious For Its Time, & Worthwhile, But Could Have Been Better
Snow Leopard16 May 2002
The story in "Buy Your Own Cherries" is rather ambitious for its time, and it had a worthwhile point to it as well, but it only partially comes off. It's the kind of concept that would probably have worked much better just a handful of years later, when film-makers had developed some standard story-telling techniques.
The story concerns a drunken man and his family, and there are a number of worthwhile ideas in it, as it shows the family working through things. There are several subtle details that are hard to catch unless you watch it over again. Once you see how it all fits together, it's interesting, though still quite moralistic, with one particular plus being a nice symmetry in the way it starts and ends. But there are some fairly significant details that aren't quite clear at first, and without catching them the story loses some of its point.
Overall, it's certainly of historical interest, and once you watch it a couple of times, it's clear that the story offers something worth thinking about as well. With better or more refined technique, it might have been quite good.
The story concerns a drunken man and his family, and there are a number of worthwhile ideas in it, as it shows the family working through things. There are several subtle details that are hard to catch unless you watch it over again. Once you see how it all fits together, it's interesting, though still quite moralistic, with one particular plus being a nice symmetry in the way it starts and ends. But there are some fairly significant details that aren't quite clear at first, and without catching them the story loses some of its point.
Overall, it's certainly of historical interest, and once you watch it a couple of times, it's clear that the story offers something worth thinking about as well. With better or more refined technique, it might have been quite good.
Technically good but the material ensures it is a so-so film only of interest to see for Paul branching out
bob the moo2 March 2008
I watched this film on a DVD that was rammed with short films from the period. I didn't watch all of them as the main problem with these type of things that their value is more in their historical novelty value rather than entertainment. So to watch them you do need to be put in the correct context so that you can keep this in mind and not watch it with modern eyes. With the Primitives & Pioneers DVD collection though you get nothing to help you out, literally the films are played one after the other (the main menu option is "play all") for several hours. With this it is hard to understand their relevance and as an educational tool it falls down as it leaves the viewer to fend for themselves, which I'm sure is fine for some viewers but certainly not the majority. What it means is that the DVD saves you searching the web for the films individually by putting them all in one place but that's about it.
The other reviewer here (Cineanalyst) wrote an interesting review for this film but he nailed it with the opening sentence "R.W. Paul was better at humour" because here Paul tries his hand at a longer melodrama and the result is so-so. This is the man who gave u special effects and satire with some of his other films (Cab Accident, Countryman) but here seems happy with quite an ordinary and moralising story. That said it is a clean and tidy narrative that fills the time well. Regardless of the period the material is blunt and obvious, with a clear message about religion that toes the line without anything of interest or value being said.
However it is very well shot with a really good flow between the scenes and some clear photography. Technically interesting then but the material is nothing more than par for the course.
The other reviewer here (Cineanalyst) wrote an interesting review for this film but he nailed it with the opening sentence "R.W. Paul was better at humour" because here Paul tries his hand at a longer melodrama and the result is so-so. This is the man who gave u special effects and satire with some of his other films (Cab Accident, Countryman) but here seems happy with quite an ordinary and moralising story. That said it is a clean and tidy narrative that fills the time well. Regardless of the period the material is blunt and obvious, with a clear message about religion that toes the line without anything of interest or value being said.
However it is very well shot with a really good flow between the scenes and some clear photography. Technically interesting then but the material is nothing more than par for the course.
Paul Advances Into Melodrama
Tornado_Sam24 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
As already emphasized by the other reviewers, Robert Paul was known as "the king of comedy" for a good reason. In "A Chess Dispute" he uses off-screen action to create a humorous situation; in "An Extraordinary Cab Accident" he presents a simple gag of dark comedy; in "Come Along, Do!" (half of which is now lost) he creates a light gag between the interactions of two individuals to make a comedic scene. "Rum vs. Cherries" is a melodrama rather than a comedy, and plays upon the often-reused concept of a drunkard's reformation. In its six scenes, it is rather complex for 1904, but the action can be undefinable at times and viewers nowadays could easily be lost--one reviewer on this site has expressed as such. However, because audiences at the time were used to interpreting stories in silent film, this was probably not a big problem.
In the film, a drunkard angrily pays his debts off at a bar and comes home broke. He abuses his wife and scares his kids, until only seconds later he realizes what he's doing is wrong and promises to find work. (For six scenes, the film is only four minutes and is rather rushed considering the amount of action). He meets a preacher and signs the temperance pledge (shown in closeup which is rare for the period) and brings back wealth to his family.
The message of the story is a good one, and the actors make fairly convincing performances. The main issue is probably the pacing; the story could easily have been lengthened to maybe six or eight minutes. Complex in many ways but not a classic Paul film.
In the film, a drunkard angrily pays his debts off at a bar and comes home broke. He abuses his wife and scares his kids, until only seconds later he realizes what he's doing is wrong and promises to find work. (For six scenes, the film is only four minutes and is rather rushed considering the amount of action). He meets a preacher and signs the temperance pledge (shown in closeup which is rare for the period) and brings back wealth to his family.
The message of the story is a good one, and the actors make fairly convincing performances. The main issue is probably the pacing; the story could easily have been lengthened to maybe six or eight minutes. Complex in many ways but not a classic Paul film.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
