|
For a movie made
in 1919, Sessue Hayakawa’s film is a wonderful epic with some rather
incredible splashes of stark color and sweeping landscapes. Even for a
print that’s aged and was nearly lost the picture transfer for “The
Dragon Painter” is awfully fantastic with crystal clarity, and an
incredible score. Even those who dislike the movie will find some value
in the backdrops and set pieces, including Hayakawa’s eagerness to break
all stereotypes of the Asian culture.
While I would
have loved to adore “The Dragon Painter” and the story that unfolds, I
can’t say that I did. While it is a very important piece of filmmaking
with an incredible statement to make defying all anti-Asian sentiment
among the masses that were generally accepted, “The Dragon Painter”
isn’t too good. The primary problem, among many, is that
Sessue Hayakawa just didn’t
convince me that he was this incredibly passionate painter and artist
destined to be re-united with his long lost love stolen by a dragon a
long time ago.
|
He looks far too spaced and wide eyed to be
convinced as passionate, and just resembles a mentally
defective man rambling on about nothing at times. As for the
story, there are just too much happy coincidences and
convenient twists to take it seriously. Even for a movie
made in 1919, I just didn’t buy that this painter would
happen on a woman he believed was his lost wife, whose
father happened to be an admirer of his work.
|
|
 |
On the same level, the
dialogue suffers greatly, even if it is a translation, with
exchanges that are trite and often clunky, with very little emphasis
on character and chemistry. Even the greatest of silent film
enthusiasts will be hard pressed to recommend it, and this raging
movie buff knows how they feel.
Hey, no one ever
said all legendary films had to be good ones, and “The Dragon Painter”
is proof. While I adore its contribution to Asian cinema, it’s just not
a good enough film to put it in the gamut of classic silent cinema.
|
