User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Still funny, 100 years later
wmorrow5921 November 2009
Warning: Spoilers
When this one-reel Biograph comedy was made its star, Mary Pickford, had been acting in movies for less than a year, and yet she'd already appeared in dozens of short films. From the first moments of The Trick That Failed her aptitude for screen acting (and for quickly garnering audience sympathy) is apparent. Pickford had one of the most nuanced, "readable" faces of the silent era: we always know exactly what she's thinking and how she feels. Here Mary plays an artist struggling to sell her paintings, but no one is buying. Her dealer is a formidable-looking gent with a bushy mustache, and when she approaches him with a new canvas we get a vivid sense of her nervous apprehension; when the man wheels on her, she flinches. The dealer refuses to take any more of her paintings because her work isn't selling, and she's crushed. She returns home, and we see that her household larder is down to a few crackers and a sip of milk.

Although her circumstances look bleak, Mary has two suitors. One is a handsome, wealthy young gentleman, while the other is a grotesque looking old guy who resembles a low-comedy clown. (Speaking of low comedy, Mack Sennett is on hand here in a supporting role as the gentleman's butler; it would be three more years before he would leave Biograph, turn producer and found Keystone.) The young man proposes to Mary but she turns him down, saying that she would prefer to become a success on her own before marrying. Later he gets an idea: he'll send his servants to the art dealer's gallery with money, buy up her paintings, and thus bring about Mary's success in a hurry. Normally I wouldn't want to give away the ending, but, as the title makes clear, the gentleman's scheme doesn't work out the way he expected.

Despite a rather bizarre and mystifying closing gag The Trick That Failed is a cute little comedy. I particularly liked the way Mary conveys her poverty, early on, when she pulls the milk bottle out of the ice box, notes how little she has left, quaffs it, savors the taste, and then follows it up with crackers, the last ones in the box. The punch line comes later, after her paintings have inexplicably begun to sell like crazy. Now prosperous, Mary returns home with several bottles of milk and a dozen boxes of crackers! Pickford, like Chaplin, could take simple concepts such as this and turn them into comedy gold.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
It leaves the audience in good humor
deickemeyer24 January 2015
Warning: Spoilers
While this film is set down as a drama, it is really a comedy drama, and contains some amusing situations, which do not conclude with entire satisfaction to at least one of the parties involved. Here is a girl who is a deplorably bad painter, but notwithstanding the fact that her art dealer cannot sell any of her work, she persists in carrying him more and more, each one apparently worse than the one preceding. Two artists are desperately in love with her, and when one proposes she tells him that she will not marry him unless she can sell her paintings. He conceives the scheme of supplying money to buy them, and sends his valet and others to make the purchases. She is told of her good fortune, receives her money and hurries away to tell her lover, only to discover a pile of her paintings in his studio. Angered at being fooled in that way, she dashes out of the house, and accepts his rival, who proposes to her that night. If anyone could conceive a more satisfactory complication for a motion picture, he is a good one. This picture is as good as any light comedy the Biograph people have ever produced, and it leaves the audience in good humor, though as much cannot be said of the artist who loses the girl he wanted. Such a drama as this, with a bit of piquancy interlarded, seems to be acceptable to a large proportion of motion picture audiences. - The Moving Picture World, December 11, 1909
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disrespect for Actors
Single-Black-Male10 May 2004
I think the 34 year old D.W. Griffith had a disrespect for actors in the sense that he would not allow them to bring their own interpretation of a character to a story. What you see on screen is Griffith manifesting himself in various players simply because he couldn't act himself. If he didn't make so many short films, then he could be judged by his directing skills alone. As it stands, his treatment of his cast surfaces on the screen and you end up watching puppets guided by Griffith rather than actors. Mary Pickford could have given a lot more in this piece if she was empowered with the right to make changes to the script and take ownership of the role.
0 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed