Again, no quote, what with this being a silent film. Like
all silent films, it's from sufficiently long ago as to come from another age
entirely: this is a film in which cars have to share the London streets with horses and carts. It's an
arresting thought that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle may have conceivably see this
film, if he'd managed to teat himself away from all that spiritualism stuff,
being fooled by little girls with their unconvincing photographs of
"fairies", and cultivating
that bushy moustache. I haven't read the original novel; like many people. I've
read absolutely everything Doyle wrote about Sherlock Holmes, and absolutely
nothing else he wrote. He's probably turning in his grave.
I'd be surprised, though, judging by the film, if this was
one of the "literary" works that Doyle was forever going on about.
It's a fairly straight early twentieth century pulp adventure story, and a
rather fine example, but the film, at least, gives no indications of any
loftier ambitions. Essentially, we get an expedition by some explorers, some
set pieces of dinosaurs fighting and doing cool stuff, and a sauropod rampaging
through London.
This is, of course, an extremely cool set of stuff, but that's it. There's not
really any subtext. Even the love triangle, such as it exists, is very British
and stiff-upper-lip. I'm reminded of Frau im Mond, a German silent film from four years later with a similar plot,
but with the expedition (similarly including a token woman) being to the Moon
rather than to a plateau full of dinosaurs. In that film the love triangle
looms much larger in a very un-British way.
The dinosaurs are, if you consider the context, amazing.
Yes, the slow-motion animation isn't exactly Ray Harryhausen. The dinosaurs
look like plasticine, and move sparingly and stiffly. But this whole style of
admittedly primitive animation seems to have survived in popular culture for a
long, long time. The Chewits adverts I remember from my 1980s childhood didn't
look too different. Mind you, I had to raise an eyebrow at the fact the only
dinosaur species encountered by Professor Challenger and his motley crew were
the well-known ones such as triceratops and, er "brontosaurus", most
of which are not exactly native to South America.
Still, best not to think too deeply about such things. After all, we also see
some brief stock footage of a cheetah, a suspiciously African mammal.
Of course, this being the 1920s, there are rather a few
things to raise the eyebrow. I don't think I can exactly be accused of
political correctness gone mad for suggesting that the portrayal of Jacko is,
er, really quite racist. I'm half-convinced that he's portrayed by a white
actor in blackface. It's also interesting to see how much respect is accorded
to a big game hunter, and how no one shows any regard whatsoever for
conservation or the fact that these dinosaurs might be somewhat dependent on
the ecological conditions that nourish them. Health and safety standards appear
rather lax, too. I mean, felling a conveniently placed tree to cross a gorge
and make a bridge is, you know, a bit
dangerous.
But, you know what? This film is fun. I loved it. Who cares
if it's never explained how they managed to get the dinosaur to London, or that the
costumes for the early hominids look rubbish. This is a film in which London landmarks get trashed
by a brontosaurus and, believe me, it gave me great pleasure to type that.
No comments:
Post a Comment