People who think that all silents are sticky with Victorian melodrama will be surprised by the sustained pace, the bracing realism, and the soft-pedaling of the sentimental elements of this startlingly fresh film. The 28-year old Raoul Walsh had already written and produced a dozen films when he directed this. Although the narrative rambles a bit, Walsh's dynamic use of film grammar - closeups, dollies in and out, cross-cutting between scenes, sharp editing - makes REGENERATION look more modern than many silent films made ten years later. Walsh shows his creativity when he uses the circling movements of dancers to foreshadow public panic in an impressively staged sequence of a fire [although it has little plot function]. Titles are used sparingly throughout, and even they are terse and direct. The performances are also surprisingly natural, from square-jawed Rockcliffe Fellowes [who looks something like Robert Stack] to Anna Q. Nilsson, who gives a delicate, sympathetic performance as the good girl/settlement worker. Within the outline of a traditional melodrama, Walsh forthrightly portrays the underside of contemporary society, keeps the sentiment light, and provides an ending that is not without surprises either.
19 Reviews
Despite its age, Raoul Walsh's first film is very watchable today.
FISHCAKE18 March 2000
By the standards of its time, this is a better than average film, and it is still watchable, even though the social and cinematic conventions of 1915 may make it rather quaint to some viewers. Still, the theme about a good woman regenerating a rascal is not unusual today, and here it is told with coherence and simplicity.
One may find the acting style quaint, too, but some of the worst excesses of the silent days are avoided for the most part. Perhaps we can thank young Raoul for that. The editing is choppy, but that may be due to losses over the years, and it may vary depending on the print or tape translation one sees.
One may find the acting style quaint, too, but some of the worst excesses of the silent days are avoided for the most part. Perhaps we can thank young Raoul for that. The editing is choppy, but that may be due to losses over the years, and it may vary depending on the print or tape translation one sees.
The Regeneration: Impressive
Platypuschow23 March 2019
I'm not a lover of silent cinema for a host of reasons, The Regeneration manages to avoid a couple but walks headlong into others.
It tells the tale of a young boy who loses his mother at a tender age, he's raised into violence and poverty and finds himself as an adult engaging in criminal activity. But when a kind hearted lady enters his life he finds himself questing for change, but can he escape his past?
The first thing that struck me about The Regeneration was how stunning it looks, there are movies made decades after this that don't look this good. The camera work is oddly crisp, the cinematography excellent and the performances are considerably less hammy than you'd expect from this era.
I feel like the movie would have been best served as a short, maybe at a 30-40 minute length. As a feature it dragged and the soundtrack though superior to most of it's ilk really does begin to grind on you.
The Regeneration is a wonderful attempt and one of the best of its type that I've seen, alas certain tropes of the genre that I despise meant it could only go so far.
The Good:
Looks incredible for its time
Great finale
The Bad:
Music gets old
Drags around the middle
It tells the tale of a young boy who loses his mother at a tender age, he's raised into violence and poverty and finds himself as an adult engaging in criminal activity. But when a kind hearted lady enters his life he finds himself questing for change, but can he escape his past?
The first thing that struck me about The Regeneration was how stunning it looks, there are movies made decades after this that don't look this good. The camera work is oddly crisp, the cinematography excellent and the performances are considerably less hammy than you'd expect from this era.
I feel like the movie would have been best served as a short, maybe at a 30-40 minute length. As a feature it dragged and the soundtrack though superior to most of it's ilk really does begin to grind on you.
The Regeneration is a wonderful attempt and one of the best of its type that I've seen, alas certain tropes of the genre that I despise meant it could only go so far.
The Good:
Looks incredible for its time
Great finale
The Bad:
Music gets old
Drags around the middle
Raoul Walsh's first feature, one of his best; and one of the earliest features to utilize New York City locations effectively.
jbragin18 February 1999
Raoul Walsh had just come off _The Birth of a Nation_ both as one of Griffith's assistant directors and as an actor (most prominently as John Wilkes Booth), when he made this film. In his autobiography, Walsh credits Griffith with "teaching" him not only about much of the art of fiction filmmaking, but also about production management technics that aided him in taking full advantage of many of New York City's most pictorial exterior locations.
The locations play an important role in adding to the naturalism of an otherwise highly melodramatic plot with the high society young woman turned heroine social worker (much overplayed by a major star of the 1910s, Anna Q Nilsson) and the regeneration of the one-time Lower Manhatan gang leader.
The wonder of this film is the performance of the male "star", Rockliffe Fellowes, who played in over a dozen nearly unremembered films until he died in 1950. His performance is so subtly varied and electrically alive that one is reminded of Brando in his early 1950s films. An interesting sidenote about his performance: The movieola film editing machine -- that magnified the small 35mm frame to about 4 inches by 6 inches as it ran the film stock through the viewer at the proper projection speed -- was not invented until much later. In 1915, editors had to hold the footage up to the light to see each frame and/or use a magnifying glass; but they could not also run the film at speed at the same time. Hence, many of the subtlest nuances that cross the hero's face could not be clearly seen and judged in editing: _Regeneration's_ editor often cuts away before the movement has settled, or cuts into a close or medium shot of the hero after the nuance has already begun.
Watching the film on a large screen today, one is aware how powerful present-day editing technics are at capturing all such movements in the hands of a skilled editor. In _Regeneration_ there is a distinct feeling of rough editing at the moments we leave or cut to the hero at the "wrong" instant. By the way, the original title was NOT _The Regeneration_, but _Regeneration_ alone. From which we can surmise that Walsh was looking to create a work with universal meaning.
The locations play an important role in adding to the naturalism of an otherwise highly melodramatic plot with the high society young woman turned heroine social worker (much overplayed by a major star of the 1910s, Anna Q Nilsson) and the regeneration of the one-time Lower Manhatan gang leader.
The wonder of this film is the performance of the male "star", Rockliffe Fellowes, who played in over a dozen nearly unremembered films until he died in 1950. His performance is so subtly varied and electrically alive that one is reminded of Brando in his early 1950s films. An interesting sidenote about his performance: The movieola film editing machine -- that magnified the small 35mm frame to about 4 inches by 6 inches as it ran the film stock through the viewer at the proper projection speed -- was not invented until much later. In 1915, editors had to hold the footage up to the light to see each frame and/or use a magnifying glass; but they could not also run the film at speed at the same time. Hence, many of the subtlest nuances that cross the hero's face could not be clearly seen and judged in editing: _Regeneration's_ editor often cuts away before the movement has settled, or cuts into a close or medium shot of the hero after the nuance has already begun.
Watching the film on a large screen today, one is aware how powerful present-day editing technics are at capturing all such movements in the hands of a skilled editor. In _Regeneration_ there is a distinct feeling of rough editing at the moments we leave or cut to the hero at the "wrong" instant. By the way, the original title was NOT _The Regeneration_, but _Regeneration_ alone. From which we can surmise that Walsh was looking to create a work with universal meaning.
Why have I never heard of this great old silent before?
AlsExGal24 June 2017
Directed by Raoul Walsh, this is an exciting and poetic film, using all the elements at play in his greatest movies. Those signatures really stand out, even all the way back at the beginning of his career.
It's the story of a tenement street kid who loses his kindly mother at age 10. (The scene that starts the film is quite moving. This is not to be a comic adventure film, but a very serious drama). The boy is taken in by a neighbor woman, a harridan, but a kind hearted one whose husband is a drunkard who beats her and the boy every chance he gets. The boy starts to lose whatever humanity he had, due to the influence of this battling couple.
He rises to a position of 'prominence' in the tenement community over the years, since he has all the things that the denizens of the street find attractive - a devil may care attitude, a sense of daring, a lot of strength and good looks. He's never lost his inner gentle nature, but it's hidden under a mask of bravado and cynicism that he needs to survive. The actor, Rockcliffe Fellowes, looks like a cross between Marlon Brando, Jimmy Cagney and Jason Segal. He's quite good... in fact he totally reminds me of Brando in THE WILD ONE. The camera loves him. As Owen, he's able to play both sensitive and tough, which is a magic combination for Walsh.
He falls for Marie whom he calls Mamie Rose (Anna Q.Nilsson), a wealthy girl who is being groomed by her parents for marriage to the city's new District Attorney. The DA has just been appointed and tells all the newspapers that he is cracking down on crime. One night, the girl tells the DA that she wants to see what the street toughs are like for herself. The DA tells her and her friends that he knows a dive where they can see all the lowlifes they want to. Of course, after having his picture in the papers all over town, the DA is immediately recognized and the crowd starts to heckle him showing him how tough they really are. The girl cries out for someone to help the foolish DA, and our Owen breaks up the crowd and leads them to safety. Owen is smitten, and Mamie is struck hard with the need to help the poor and destitute.
She immediately starts work in the neighborhood, doing good deeds and handing out medicine and money to the needy. The rest is just about what you would think a Walsh film would be, with Owen trying to make good out of unrequited love for Marie, who doesn't really realize his feelings. He finds inspiration to become better educated and make something of himself through her ministrations. She turns to him as a pillar of strength when things go wrong.
His loyal pal, a street kid who has a deformity who Owen once saved from being made fun of, is a splendid actor. All of the street toughs really look like street toughs, which is refreshing and a bit scary. Walsh builds up the action in a very similar way to The Roaring Twenties, with a really evil gang leader who takes over when Owen tries to goes straight. There was a surprise ending, for me anyway.This film was very well done for the time it was made and I can see how it made Walsh famous. It made me love him all the more for his sensitivity and realism.
It's the story of a tenement street kid who loses his kindly mother at age 10. (The scene that starts the film is quite moving. This is not to be a comic adventure film, but a very serious drama). The boy is taken in by a neighbor woman, a harridan, but a kind hearted one whose husband is a drunkard who beats her and the boy every chance he gets. The boy starts to lose whatever humanity he had, due to the influence of this battling couple.
He rises to a position of 'prominence' in the tenement community over the years, since he has all the things that the denizens of the street find attractive - a devil may care attitude, a sense of daring, a lot of strength and good looks. He's never lost his inner gentle nature, but it's hidden under a mask of bravado and cynicism that he needs to survive. The actor, Rockcliffe Fellowes, looks like a cross between Marlon Brando, Jimmy Cagney and Jason Segal. He's quite good... in fact he totally reminds me of Brando in THE WILD ONE. The camera loves him. As Owen, he's able to play both sensitive and tough, which is a magic combination for Walsh.
He falls for Marie whom he calls Mamie Rose (Anna Q.Nilsson), a wealthy girl who is being groomed by her parents for marriage to the city's new District Attorney. The DA has just been appointed and tells all the newspapers that he is cracking down on crime. One night, the girl tells the DA that she wants to see what the street toughs are like for herself. The DA tells her and her friends that he knows a dive where they can see all the lowlifes they want to. Of course, after having his picture in the papers all over town, the DA is immediately recognized and the crowd starts to heckle him showing him how tough they really are. The girl cries out for someone to help the foolish DA, and our Owen breaks up the crowd and leads them to safety. Owen is smitten, and Mamie is struck hard with the need to help the poor and destitute.
She immediately starts work in the neighborhood, doing good deeds and handing out medicine and money to the needy. The rest is just about what you would think a Walsh film would be, with Owen trying to make good out of unrequited love for Marie, who doesn't really realize his feelings. He finds inspiration to become better educated and make something of himself through her ministrations. She turns to him as a pillar of strength when things go wrong.
His loyal pal, a street kid who has a deformity who Owen once saved from being made fun of, is a splendid actor. All of the street toughs really look like street toughs, which is refreshing and a bit scary. Walsh builds up the action in a very similar way to The Roaring Twenties, with a really evil gang leader who takes over when Owen tries to goes straight. There was a surprise ending, for me anyway.This film was very well done for the time it was made and I can see how it made Walsh famous. It made me love him all the more for his sensitivity and realism.
O.G.
Screen_O_Genic8 January 2021
One of the first full-length gangster films "The Regeneration" packs a solid portrayal of life at its sordid and debased. A boy growing up surrounded by poverty and crime inevitably succumbs to a life outside the law. Climbing to the top of the heap at a young age his glee with his newfound status is suddenly challenged when a turn of events leads to challenge and redemption. The appealingly dated acting of the time and the old-fashioned look and mores add much to the charm and interest of this vintage piece while ably depicting the grime and the filth of the urban poor overriding the slow pace and somewhat difficult to follow storyline. History and art rolled into one sepia-toned tapestry this is one for both film and history lovers.
A gem, almost gone forever
jeffsultanof8 January 2009
Rather than repeat what others have written, I'd like to comment on how this film managed to get into circulation.
The only known print of the film was found in the basement of a building in Montana in 1976. Preserved (and not too soon given the deterioration seen in the middle of the film), it was part of a series of films shown during the New York Film Festival representing titles which had recently (1978) been saved. I remember seeing all of them; they included Lillom (recently issued on DVD in the Murnau/Borzage box and worth seeing), and The Letter (with Jeanne Eagles, which blew everyone away).
It is a miracle that films still turn up in such a manner even this late in the game. Most films from this time period have long ago turned into flammable dust (they started to deteriorate as early as the thirties), and it is particularly fortunate that "Regeneration" is now among the living. Despite its crudities, it feels like a documentary of the seedier elements of New York, and it still works its magic; it has matured very well. Given that we can see how the streets of New York really looked almost 100 years ago, the film may play better than it did back then. Most of the people in this film are not actors, they are real people, and that is what we reacted to when we saw this back in the seventies.
Additionally, the film is a real window into the transitional period when the one-reeler had turned into a longer, more ambitious feature. As a first feature for Walsh, this film is really extraordinary when we consider that the tools of film-making were still crude (the comments on the editing of the film are correct. However, the abruptness plays better on the big screen). Even more, the film also reminds us that the numerous features made between 1914 and 1920 included some real gems that are gone forever, and cannot be re-evaluated. How many really good actors and directors are known in name only because their work has disappeared?
I consider this one of the finest examples of an early silent feature, and one of the landmark films of the silent era. It is an illustration of how the director of that time found his or her way, made mistakes and had chances to improve. It shows how filmmakers were taking the vocabulary used by Griffith and some European filmmakers to expand the techniques of storytelling to hold an audience's interest for an hour's worth of entertainment.
A must-see if you are interested in silent films.
The only known print of the film was found in the basement of a building in Montana in 1976. Preserved (and not too soon given the deterioration seen in the middle of the film), it was part of a series of films shown during the New York Film Festival representing titles which had recently (1978) been saved. I remember seeing all of them; they included Lillom (recently issued on DVD in the Murnau/Borzage box and worth seeing), and The Letter (with Jeanne Eagles, which blew everyone away).
It is a miracle that films still turn up in such a manner even this late in the game. Most films from this time period have long ago turned into flammable dust (they started to deteriorate as early as the thirties), and it is particularly fortunate that "Regeneration" is now among the living. Despite its crudities, it feels like a documentary of the seedier elements of New York, and it still works its magic; it has matured very well. Given that we can see how the streets of New York really looked almost 100 years ago, the film may play better than it did back then. Most of the people in this film are not actors, they are real people, and that is what we reacted to when we saw this back in the seventies.
Additionally, the film is a real window into the transitional period when the one-reeler had turned into a longer, more ambitious feature. As a first feature for Walsh, this film is really extraordinary when we consider that the tools of film-making were still crude (the comments on the editing of the film are correct. However, the abruptness plays better on the big screen). Even more, the film also reminds us that the numerous features made between 1914 and 1920 included some real gems that are gone forever, and cannot be re-evaluated. How many really good actors and directors are known in name only because their work has disappeared?
I consider this one of the finest examples of an early silent feature, and one of the landmark films of the silent era. It is an illustration of how the director of that time found his or her way, made mistakes and had chances to improve. It shows how filmmakers were taking the vocabulary used by Griffith and some European filmmakers to expand the techniques of storytelling to hold an audience's interest for an hour's worth of entertainment.
A must-see if you are interested in silent films.
Raoul Walsh's First Feature Film
springfieldrental17 June 2021
Raoul Walsh had been an actor and an understudy assistant director under D. W. Griffith when Fox Films hired him to direct his first feature film, September 1915's "Regeneration." Many cite Walsh's full-length directorial debut as cinema's first gangster feature film.
Walsh had run away from home at 15 and worked a series of laborious, dangerous jobs, including a cow hand and a seafarer. His hands at that time were so calloused he refused to shake hands. Because of his horse-riding skills, D. W. Griffith hired him as an actor, with one of his first roles as a young version of Mexican revolutionist Pancho Villa.
Walsh showed enough of a curiosity of filmmaking that Griffith took him on as an assistant director, most notably helping him out in "The Birth of a Nation." In the 1915 film, Walsh also plays John Wilkes Booth, who kills Abraham Lincoln. Newly formed Fox Films Corporation heard and saw so many good things from Walsh that William Fox hired him to do one of his studio's first feature films.
"Regeneration," adapted from a 1908 play based on Owen Kildare's autobiography, was a redemption tale of a boy who grew up to become a criminal, but eventually realizing the wrongs he had committed through the guiding influence of a female social worker. Walsh decided to film in New York City's poor Lower East Side using actual criminals and prostitutes to heighten his movie's authenticity.
Elements of Griffith, who Walsh labeled as his teacher, is clearly visible in "Regeneration:" the masking of the lens, the parallel editing and camera positioning, numerous close ups and implementing newly devised cinematic techniques such as a handful of dolly movements. Certain scenes Walsh filmed contained chiaroscuro lighting, anticipating Germanic Expressionism film aesthetics by a few years.
Walsh would become one of Hollywood's auteurs noted for his hard-hitting, macho crime movies such as 1939's "The Roaring Twenties," 1941 "High Sierra," and 1949's "White Heat." He would direct until his final film in 1964, and have a script of his produced as a movie in 1970.
Walsh had run away from home at 15 and worked a series of laborious, dangerous jobs, including a cow hand and a seafarer. His hands at that time were so calloused he refused to shake hands. Because of his horse-riding skills, D. W. Griffith hired him as an actor, with one of his first roles as a young version of Mexican revolutionist Pancho Villa.
Walsh showed enough of a curiosity of filmmaking that Griffith took him on as an assistant director, most notably helping him out in "The Birth of a Nation." In the 1915 film, Walsh also plays John Wilkes Booth, who kills Abraham Lincoln. Newly formed Fox Films Corporation heard and saw so many good things from Walsh that William Fox hired him to do one of his studio's first feature films.
"Regeneration," adapted from a 1908 play based on Owen Kildare's autobiography, was a redemption tale of a boy who grew up to become a criminal, but eventually realizing the wrongs he had committed through the guiding influence of a female social worker. Walsh decided to film in New York City's poor Lower East Side using actual criminals and prostitutes to heighten his movie's authenticity.
Elements of Griffith, who Walsh labeled as his teacher, is clearly visible in "Regeneration:" the masking of the lens, the parallel editing and camera positioning, numerous close ups and implementing newly devised cinematic techniques such as a handful of dolly movements. Certain scenes Walsh filmed contained chiaroscuro lighting, anticipating Germanic Expressionism film aesthetics by a few years.
Walsh would become one of Hollywood's auteurs noted for his hard-hitting, macho crime movies such as 1939's "The Roaring Twenties," 1941 "High Sierra," and 1949's "White Heat." He would direct until his final film in 1964, and have a script of his produced as a movie in 1970.
"Her soul, the noblest and purest thing I ever knew"
Steffi_P29 October 2008
In cinema, 1915 is best known as the year of DW Griffith's epic Birth of a Nation. While I won't play down the talents and achievements of Griffith, his debut feature was merely a culmination of his prior achievements, a milestone in cinema culture but adding nothing to cinematic language. Regeneration however, a largely overlooked film (although it has its champions), was perhaps truly the most important picture of that year.
Raoul Walsh, previously an assistant to Griffith, and already having a handful of short features to his name, made his full-length debut with this romantic gangster fable. The picture opens fairly conventionally for the time, Walsh displaying an incredibly firm grasp of film form for such a young director. The opening shot establishes the mood - the recently bereaved protagonist sitting alone in a bare room, a curtain billowing forlornly behind him, after which we cut away to the hearse bearing his mother in the street outside. However, we then see the lad go to the window and look down. In the very next shot, the camera is looking down at the hearse, exactly as he would see it. Bam! The point-of-view shot is born.
The point-of-view shot is not merely a convenient alternative angle for storytelling. It places the audience into the position of the character. It's something unique to cinema you can't recreate that in the theatre. The only real equivalent is in novels, when the narrative is told from a character's perspective. Walsh here gives cinema that ability, and moves the audience from the position of spectator to that of participant. It's particularly apt too for Regeneration, as it was adapted from an autobiography. Walsh remains consistent to the story's roots by primarily showing the points of view of the protagonist, Owen.
Another great thing about Regeneration is its use of dolly shots that is, moving the camera in or out, towards or away from the action. This wasn't an innovation as such, the dolly having been invented by Giovanni Pastrone for his 1914 epic Cabiria, but the dolly shots in that picture are largely uninspired, at best creating smooth transitions between different length shots. Walsh however really explores the possibilities of the technique. First he uses it to home in on the young Owen in the scene where his adoptive parents argue over the dinner table. Again this is a move which draws us into the character's world, as if we are being pulled forward and forced to look. Much later, in the scene where Anna Q. Nilsson bursts into the gangster's den, the camera itself rushes forward, reaching the centre of the shot at the same pace she does. In effect, the camera movement mimics hers and gives the audience a little taste of her sense of urgency.
Needless to say, there is a lot more to Regeneration than these pioneering camera techniques. Walsh's handling of the dynamic moments is particularly adept, with a climactic ride-to-the-rescue worthy of Griffith, and some particularly realistic fight scenes. But he was just as capable of great tenderness as he was of great action, and the picture is shot through with the sense of melancholy romanticism that is typical of Walsh. And let's not forget the fine naturalistic acting on display, although stars Rockliffe Fellowes and Anna Q. Nilsson would soon fade into obscurity.
By way of a disclaimer, I should point out that Regeneration may not literally be the first motion picture to use point-of-view shots. There was, after all, a wealth of experimentation in the early days of cinema, and many films are obscure or lost. It is shortly after this though that the technique seems to enter mainstream usage. For example, Cecil B. DeMille's The Cheat, made several months after Regeneration, features point-of-view shots, whereas DeMille's Carmen, made about the same time as Regeneration, does not. Tag Gallagher, in his superb essay on Walsh for Senses of Cinema, makes similar claims. Whatever the case, Walsh certainly excelled in a new kind of cinema, one which placed the audience inside the story, and this principle would shape much of Walsh's work throughout his fifty-year career.
Raoul Walsh, previously an assistant to Griffith, and already having a handful of short features to his name, made his full-length debut with this romantic gangster fable. The picture opens fairly conventionally for the time, Walsh displaying an incredibly firm grasp of film form for such a young director. The opening shot establishes the mood - the recently bereaved protagonist sitting alone in a bare room, a curtain billowing forlornly behind him, after which we cut away to the hearse bearing his mother in the street outside. However, we then see the lad go to the window and look down. In the very next shot, the camera is looking down at the hearse, exactly as he would see it. Bam! The point-of-view shot is born.
The point-of-view shot is not merely a convenient alternative angle for storytelling. It places the audience into the position of the character. It's something unique to cinema you can't recreate that in the theatre. The only real equivalent is in novels, when the narrative is told from a character's perspective. Walsh here gives cinema that ability, and moves the audience from the position of spectator to that of participant. It's particularly apt too for Regeneration, as it was adapted from an autobiography. Walsh remains consistent to the story's roots by primarily showing the points of view of the protagonist, Owen.
Another great thing about Regeneration is its use of dolly shots that is, moving the camera in or out, towards or away from the action. This wasn't an innovation as such, the dolly having been invented by Giovanni Pastrone for his 1914 epic Cabiria, but the dolly shots in that picture are largely uninspired, at best creating smooth transitions between different length shots. Walsh however really explores the possibilities of the technique. First he uses it to home in on the young Owen in the scene where his adoptive parents argue over the dinner table. Again this is a move which draws us into the character's world, as if we are being pulled forward and forced to look. Much later, in the scene where Anna Q. Nilsson bursts into the gangster's den, the camera itself rushes forward, reaching the centre of the shot at the same pace she does. In effect, the camera movement mimics hers and gives the audience a little taste of her sense of urgency.
Needless to say, there is a lot more to Regeneration than these pioneering camera techniques. Walsh's handling of the dynamic moments is particularly adept, with a climactic ride-to-the-rescue worthy of Griffith, and some particularly realistic fight scenes. But he was just as capable of great tenderness as he was of great action, and the picture is shot through with the sense of melancholy romanticism that is typical of Walsh. And let's not forget the fine naturalistic acting on display, although stars Rockliffe Fellowes and Anna Q. Nilsson would soon fade into obscurity.
By way of a disclaimer, I should point out that Regeneration may not literally be the first motion picture to use point-of-view shots. There was, after all, a wealth of experimentation in the early days of cinema, and many films are obscure or lost. It is shortly after this though that the technique seems to enter mainstream usage. For example, Cecil B. DeMille's The Cheat, made several months after Regeneration, features point-of-view shots, whereas DeMille's Carmen, made about the same time as Regeneration, does not. Tag Gallagher, in his superb essay on Walsh for Senses of Cinema, makes similar claims. Whatever the case, Walsh certainly excelled in a new kind of cinema, one which placed the audience inside the story, and this principle would shape much of Walsh's work throughout his fifty-year career.
Reel Imitations
Cineanalyst18 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I'd been meaning to return to this film, "Regeneration", for some time and finally did after seeing it on the double feature DVD with "Young Romance" (1915). This review is replacing the one I wrote over 5 years ago. I was overly hasty in my previous comment I think now, and I want to elaborate on some things and make some new comments. Moreover, only 2 out of 13 people found my prior comment useful, so that's a good indication that I should try to at least write and express my opinions better. I considered this film less than average the last time I saw it (whether for a film from 1915 or for a film from anytime), and I still consider it such. Others, however, clearly consider it a good to excellent picture, and some of them have made good arguments to that effect in their IMDb comments, and so that has also encouraged me to revisit "Regeneration".
The best part of this film is probably, as others have said, its realism in using locals as extras and for minor parts, its location shooting and that, especially through the scenes of violent parents I think, convincingly demonstrates the cycle of violence in such a slum. Most of the photoplay, however, concerns itself with the plot of the regeneration of supposed gangsters. There are quite a few title cards that setup the picture to be a gangster-crime film, of which there had already been some in the US ("The Musketeers of Pig Alley" (1912) and "Alias Jimmy Valentine" (1915) are the most accessible ones today); but, here, they're only gangsters in so far as they gather together and do little and rough up someone they don't like occasionally. There's no on screen impetus for a politician to want to crackdown on these "gangsters", at least not before he seeks to do so but doesn't (that plot line is dropped abruptly and never much develops). Near the end, there are some rather unprovoked outbursts that are especially violent by the Skinny character, but there's still no sense of any organized crime.
The storyline becomes more akin to a William S. Hart Western and similar hackneyed formulas: Owen either lazily drinks and smokes and gathers idly with his friends or gets into some fights (what Hart did at saloons in the first parts of his films, for comparison) until he falls in love with the white, virginal Christian woman (often a reformer and from a higher class, as here) and so begins his regeneration, becoming Christian and civilized.
The acting here isn't special either, although the leads do OK enough for back then. Anna Q. Nilsson, in particular, would have a decent career in the silent era, including playing the pure woman for Hart's Western "The Toll Gate" (1920), and continued acting long after that. The only consistent problem with the acting was the tendency of Nilsson and Rockliffe Fellowes to turn away from other characters and stare at nothing to project that they're thinking or are conflicted. The uncredited actor (despite appearing to have the third most screen time) who plays the little fellow at least stares at Fellowes and Nilsson in some queer adulation.
The attempted rape climax, the rescue attempt, in addition to further influence for the Marie Deering character are taken straight from the formulas of D.W. Griffith, which makes sense since this film's director Raoul Walsh was fresh from working on Griffith's "The Birth of a Nation", released earlier in 1915. Griffith had mastered this formula from his multiple last-minute-rescue shorts at Biograph and brought the pure woman, the attempted rape of her and her rescue together in "The Birth of a Nation". The editing in the climax of "Regeneration" and its constant crosscutting throughout, use of match cuts, irises and so on demonstrate further the influence of Griffith, but, in "Regeneration" most of it's choppier, clumsily derivative and often rushed and lacking, as in the rescue and denouement.
The good woman and regeneration plots and other themes probably have more ancient roots dating to the stage, as well. There are a couple other seeming influences on smaller parts of "Regeneration" I'd like to comment on, though. The fire scene on the boat recalls similar sensational sequences rather irrelevant to the rest of the plot from earlier Danish silent films. "The Great Circus Catastrophe" (Dødsspring til hest fra cirkuskuplen) (1912), which involved a fire in a hotel, and "Atlantis" (1913), which involved a ship sinking if little fire, come to mind. "Regeneration" was based on an autobiography and its theatrical adaptation, but it also seems plain to me that it's based on preexisting movie conventions. On film technique, another aspect that stands out are some brief dolly shots, which were likely inspired by "Cabiria", which used comparatively boring, slow dolly shots. Dolly shots had been exploited in cinema since at least 1903, but "Cabiria" seems to have briefly popularized it and influenced their use in some subsequent films.
Nevertheless, in "Regeneration", there's the realism of the surroundings in contrast to the shallow development and formulaic nature of the narrative: a gangster's world without gangsters, real people surrounding movie clichés. The film techniques and style are not original, but are lesser imitations.
(Note: There's considerable bleeding and deterioration to the surviving print.)
The best part of this film is probably, as others have said, its realism in using locals as extras and for minor parts, its location shooting and that, especially through the scenes of violent parents I think, convincingly demonstrates the cycle of violence in such a slum. Most of the photoplay, however, concerns itself with the plot of the regeneration of supposed gangsters. There are quite a few title cards that setup the picture to be a gangster-crime film, of which there had already been some in the US ("The Musketeers of Pig Alley" (1912) and "Alias Jimmy Valentine" (1915) are the most accessible ones today); but, here, they're only gangsters in so far as they gather together and do little and rough up someone they don't like occasionally. There's no on screen impetus for a politician to want to crackdown on these "gangsters", at least not before he seeks to do so but doesn't (that plot line is dropped abruptly and never much develops). Near the end, there are some rather unprovoked outbursts that are especially violent by the Skinny character, but there's still no sense of any organized crime.
The storyline becomes more akin to a William S. Hart Western and similar hackneyed formulas: Owen either lazily drinks and smokes and gathers idly with his friends or gets into some fights (what Hart did at saloons in the first parts of his films, for comparison) until he falls in love with the white, virginal Christian woman (often a reformer and from a higher class, as here) and so begins his regeneration, becoming Christian and civilized.
The acting here isn't special either, although the leads do OK enough for back then. Anna Q. Nilsson, in particular, would have a decent career in the silent era, including playing the pure woman for Hart's Western "The Toll Gate" (1920), and continued acting long after that. The only consistent problem with the acting was the tendency of Nilsson and Rockliffe Fellowes to turn away from other characters and stare at nothing to project that they're thinking or are conflicted. The uncredited actor (despite appearing to have the third most screen time) who plays the little fellow at least stares at Fellowes and Nilsson in some queer adulation.
The attempted rape climax, the rescue attempt, in addition to further influence for the Marie Deering character are taken straight from the formulas of D.W. Griffith, which makes sense since this film's director Raoul Walsh was fresh from working on Griffith's "The Birth of a Nation", released earlier in 1915. Griffith had mastered this formula from his multiple last-minute-rescue shorts at Biograph and brought the pure woman, the attempted rape of her and her rescue together in "The Birth of a Nation". The editing in the climax of "Regeneration" and its constant crosscutting throughout, use of match cuts, irises and so on demonstrate further the influence of Griffith, but, in "Regeneration" most of it's choppier, clumsily derivative and often rushed and lacking, as in the rescue and denouement.
The good woman and regeneration plots and other themes probably have more ancient roots dating to the stage, as well. There are a couple other seeming influences on smaller parts of "Regeneration" I'd like to comment on, though. The fire scene on the boat recalls similar sensational sequences rather irrelevant to the rest of the plot from earlier Danish silent films. "The Great Circus Catastrophe" (Dødsspring til hest fra cirkuskuplen) (1912), which involved a fire in a hotel, and "Atlantis" (1913), which involved a ship sinking if little fire, come to mind. "Regeneration" was based on an autobiography and its theatrical adaptation, but it also seems plain to me that it's based on preexisting movie conventions. On film technique, another aspect that stands out are some brief dolly shots, which were likely inspired by "Cabiria", which used comparatively boring, slow dolly shots. Dolly shots had been exploited in cinema since at least 1903, but "Cabiria" seems to have briefly popularized it and influenced their use in some subsequent films.
Nevertheless, in "Regeneration", there's the realism of the surroundings in contrast to the shallow development and formulaic nature of the narrative: a gangster's world without gangsters, real people surrounding movie clichés. The film techniques and style are not original, but are lesser imitations.
(Note: There's considerable bleeding and deterioration to the surviving print.)
Birth of a genre
moimoichan628 March 2007
Raoul Walsh, aged 28, has already done it all : he's been a Cow-boy, an actor, and Griffith's assistant for BIRTH OF A NATION, in witch he also played Lincoln's murderer. That's certainly why his very first movies, as this "Regeneration", are already so mastered and so mature. The story of the movie is quite simple : it tells us the life of a gang leader : Owen, from his unhappy childhood to his "regeneration", thanks to Mary, a young lady, who believed in his kindness, and allows him a second chance. But beyond this classical story, this movie is both a brilliant example of Griffith's omnipotent influence on early American cinema and also a totally original and new form of cinema, for it invents the codes of the Gangster's movie and of the "Film Noir" for the years to come.
As in a Griffith's feature, the ideas of the movie are developed thanks to an original use of the editing. For instance, at the beginning of the movie, Walsh superposes a frame of Owen adult, drinking a beer, with one of the same character as a child, eating an ice cream in the exact same position. This editing has of course a narrative function it reminds us that Owen is the same character of the beginning of the movie, only few years after but it also presents him, whereas he could appears as a dangerous criminal, as the same innocent victim that he was younger. This king of narrative and yet symbolist use of the editing is both a homage to Griffith and an introduction to Walsh'own style and thematic.
Griffith's influence is also very strong in the movie's will to be spectacular. When Walsh wants to show how Owen tries to change in the contact of Mary, he creates for instance a gigantic fire on a boat, where Owen risks his life saving children. Of course, we're not really in the bigger than life world of INTOLERANCE or of BIRTH OF A NATION, but still, it's the same spectacular idea of the cinema that Walsh and Griffith share. In 1915, Raoul Walsh is certainly still in the shadow of Griffith, but "Regeneration" is a lot more than a copy of Griffith's cinema, and can be fully appreciates without its relation to its style.
The movie is particularly realistic and has nothing to see with Griffith traditional romanticism. It's the adaptation of an ex-criminal autobiography, and Walsh is really good in showing sordid and realistic details, especially in the description of Owen's terrible childhood. The movie is surprisingly strong, violent and realistic for its age. But Walsh also adds to this realistically point of view, a sort or mythification of his Gangster's character, who almost become an icon, witch we'll find again in the all American Cinema to come, from Hawks 's SCARFACE, to Scorsese's movies. Fiction is already torn between realism and myth, and a large part of Walsh's Cinema will develops this thematic, as in his absolute masterpiece : THEY DIED WITH THEIR BOOTS ON.
The realism of the movie even goes with the myth, for it's mostly in the realistically description of a gangster's everyday life that the "Film Noir" will takes its future codes. Owen and his gang spend most of their time doing nothing : they walk on the docks, in the streets or drinks in clubs, but we almost never see them in action. Or when we do, we see them doing good things, for action time is in the movie regeneration time. Morality is in Walsh'Cinema a rhythm question. Inaction and immobility stuck to the Gangster's life, whereas action and movements is associated to honesty and to the opportunity to grab a good life.
That's how « Regeneration » always seems to be torn between external (Griffith/Walsh) and internal (realism/myth) conflicts, that are the extension of Owen's inner fights between a honest's life and a gangster's one, between the soft world of Mary, and the harsh and masculine one of the Gang. The end of the movie literally destroys this psychological conflict, when the two characters that symbolized each side both died. After having destroyed the two conflicted sides of his personality, Owen's life can really begins, as well as Walsh's cinema.
As in a Griffith's feature, the ideas of the movie are developed thanks to an original use of the editing. For instance, at the beginning of the movie, Walsh superposes a frame of Owen adult, drinking a beer, with one of the same character as a child, eating an ice cream in the exact same position. This editing has of course a narrative function it reminds us that Owen is the same character of the beginning of the movie, only few years after but it also presents him, whereas he could appears as a dangerous criminal, as the same innocent victim that he was younger. This king of narrative and yet symbolist use of the editing is both a homage to Griffith and an introduction to Walsh'own style and thematic.
Griffith's influence is also very strong in the movie's will to be spectacular. When Walsh wants to show how Owen tries to change in the contact of Mary, he creates for instance a gigantic fire on a boat, where Owen risks his life saving children. Of course, we're not really in the bigger than life world of INTOLERANCE or of BIRTH OF A NATION, but still, it's the same spectacular idea of the cinema that Walsh and Griffith share. In 1915, Raoul Walsh is certainly still in the shadow of Griffith, but "Regeneration" is a lot more than a copy of Griffith's cinema, and can be fully appreciates without its relation to its style.
The movie is particularly realistic and has nothing to see with Griffith traditional romanticism. It's the adaptation of an ex-criminal autobiography, and Walsh is really good in showing sordid and realistic details, especially in the description of Owen's terrible childhood. The movie is surprisingly strong, violent and realistic for its age. But Walsh also adds to this realistically point of view, a sort or mythification of his Gangster's character, who almost become an icon, witch we'll find again in the all American Cinema to come, from Hawks 's SCARFACE, to Scorsese's movies. Fiction is already torn between realism and myth, and a large part of Walsh's Cinema will develops this thematic, as in his absolute masterpiece : THEY DIED WITH THEIR BOOTS ON.
The realism of the movie even goes with the myth, for it's mostly in the realistically description of a gangster's everyday life that the "Film Noir" will takes its future codes. Owen and his gang spend most of their time doing nothing : they walk on the docks, in the streets or drinks in clubs, but we almost never see them in action. Or when we do, we see them doing good things, for action time is in the movie regeneration time. Morality is in Walsh'Cinema a rhythm question. Inaction and immobility stuck to the Gangster's life, whereas action and movements is associated to honesty and to the opportunity to grab a good life.
That's how « Regeneration » always seems to be torn between external (Griffith/Walsh) and internal (realism/myth) conflicts, that are the extension of Owen's inner fights between a honest's life and a gangster's one, between the soft world of Mary, and the harsh and masculine one of the Gang. The end of the movie literally destroys this psychological conflict, when the two characters that symbolized each side both died. After having destroyed the two conflicted sides of his personality, Owen's life can really begins, as well as Walsh's cinema.
A Vibrant Depiction of New York's Melting Pot!!!
kidboots28 December 2011
Warning: Spoilers
What a super movie - it had thrills, suspense and a very surprising finish, you have to keep reminding yourself it is over 96 years old!!! Anna Q. Nilsson may well have been one of the first film stars to freelance. She was a beautiful Swedish actress who had been working at Kalem for four years. Unfortunately her salary had not increased (much) and she had just divorced her husband who happened to be Kalem's leading actor.Raoul Walsh esteemed her talents as an actress enough for him to cast her in "Regeneration", his first major directorial assignment and a sensational crime movie based on Owen Kildare's popular play, "My Mamie Rose", which was said to be autobiographical. Walsh, a disciple of D.W. Griffiths, may even have surpassed his master in some of the scenes from this movie. The crowd scenes at Grogans captured the color and vibrancy of the city's melting pot of people. Outside of a few scenes in a Bowery mission it was all filmed on the streets of New York, including scenes on the Hudson River.
The film begins with young Owen, due to the death of his mother, being taken in by his neighbours, the Conways, a rough couple who soon familiarize Owen with tough, unforgiving tenement life. Owen (Rockcliffe Fellows) is eventually hardened to the "might is right" way of the streets and by his mid twenties is the leader of a tough street gang. The new D.A. vows to stamp out the gangsters but bows to pressure from butterfly socialite Marie (Nilsson) who longs to see a gangster close up. He takes her to Grogans, the local gangster haunt but is involved in a scuffle and Marie's real distress catches Owen's attention. He breaks up the fight but the incident awakens Marie's better self and she soon finds herself running a settlement house in the heart of the gangster district.
The day everyone looks forward to is the annual treat, a day of pleasure on a large boat. The fire on board the boat showed Walsh's superb handling of crowds - people madly running everywhere, the plunging into the river, the frantic scramble to get to a boat that eventually collapses through overloading and the end title that declares "All the kiddies were saved"!!! Apparently Walsh hired thugs from Hell's Kitchen to round up some extras from the Bowery and when there weren't enough women he offered some men extra money to dress up as women and it made for a vivid and realistic sequence when they all jumped into the water. William Fox was so impressed that he raised Walsh's salary to $800 a week!!
There is even a graphic (for 1915) scene of drug use. A woman flees to the settlement begging that someone rescue her baby from the dwelling she shares with her drug addicted husband. Owen, who is not involved with the settlement, is deemed the man for the job and when he goes to the room and finds the man in a groggy state, by rescuing the baby his salvation begins. Children are symbols of innocence and purity - Owen, as a child, was seen as a loving little boy who was corrupted by the adult couple who took him in and in the fire sequence, Owen runs back to the boat to save two little girls. Griffith's influence is seen in the pathos, when Marie realises Owen has secretly helped a friend, "Skinny", to avoid a serious charge although in Owen's favour, he wants nothing more to do with "Skinny" - it was as a favour to repay a childhood debt.
Interspersed between a brutal near rape scene are various Griffith inspired titles, very flowery, some with biblical quotations.
The film begins with young Owen, due to the death of his mother, being taken in by his neighbours, the Conways, a rough couple who soon familiarize Owen with tough, unforgiving tenement life. Owen (Rockcliffe Fellows) is eventually hardened to the "might is right" way of the streets and by his mid twenties is the leader of a tough street gang. The new D.A. vows to stamp out the gangsters but bows to pressure from butterfly socialite Marie (Nilsson) who longs to see a gangster close up. He takes her to Grogans, the local gangster haunt but is involved in a scuffle and Marie's real distress catches Owen's attention. He breaks up the fight but the incident awakens Marie's better self and she soon finds herself running a settlement house in the heart of the gangster district.
The day everyone looks forward to is the annual treat, a day of pleasure on a large boat. The fire on board the boat showed Walsh's superb handling of crowds - people madly running everywhere, the plunging into the river, the frantic scramble to get to a boat that eventually collapses through overloading and the end title that declares "All the kiddies were saved"!!! Apparently Walsh hired thugs from Hell's Kitchen to round up some extras from the Bowery and when there weren't enough women he offered some men extra money to dress up as women and it made for a vivid and realistic sequence when they all jumped into the water. William Fox was so impressed that he raised Walsh's salary to $800 a week!!
There is even a graphic (for 1915) scene of drug use. A woman flees to the settlement begging that someone rescue her baby from the dwelling she shares with her drug addicted husband. Owen, who is not involved with the settlement, is deemed the man for the job and when he goes to the room and finds the man in a groggy state, by rescuing the baby his salvation begins. Children are symbols of innocence and purity - Owen, as a child, was seen as a loving little boy who was corrupted by the adult couple who took him in and in the fire sequence, Owen runs back to the boat to save two little girls. Griffith's influence is seen in the pathos, when Marie realises Owen has secretly helped a friend, "Skinny", to avoid a serious charge although in Owen's favour, he wants nothing more to do with "Skinny" - it was as a favour to repay a childhood debt.
Interspersed between a brutal near rape scene are various Griffith inspired titles, very flowery, some with biblical quotations.
Nose Tumor
tedg31 October 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers herein.
This film has some absolutely amazing elements, though to my mind the story, editing and all the acting could be discarded.
What startled me was the realism. This was when the film industry was still based in New York, and that city becomes the star. Real street scenes are used, as well as (presumably) many of the extras. When there's a fight, it seems pretty real. When you have some toughs, they're tough and not just acting tough.
There's a shot early in the story where the star as a teenager has a fight. One of the spectators has a nose tumor. Its just the sort of thing you'd see in a bad area. These details make it real.
The camera is stationary except for very few moments. As I say, the editing is clumsy, but there is some terrific irising and two very effective superpositions. Those two elements, the effective use of the city and the camera, make this worth watching.
The story is trite in most respects, except the ending, which is intelligent. He broke the rules of fate, and so his girl dies. Except for the theatrical moaning, the end is gritty, like the streets.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
This film has some absolutely amazing elements, though to my mind the story, editing and all the acting could be discarded.
What startled me was the realism. This was when the film industry was still based in New York, and that city becomes the star. Real street scenes are used, as well as (presumably) many of the extras. When there's a fight, it seems pretty real. When you have some toughs, they're tough and not just acting tough.
There's a shot early in the story where the star as a teenager has a fight. One of the spectators has a nose tumor. Its just the sort of thing you'd see in a bad area. These details make it real.
The camera is stationary except for very few moments. As I say, the editing is clumsy, but there is some terrific irising and two very effective superpositions. Those two elements, the effective use of the city and the camera, make this worth watching.
The story is trite in most respects, except the ending, which is intelligent. He broke the rules of fate, and so his girl dies. Except for the theatrical moaning, the end is gritty, like the streets.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
Raoul Walsh is to Us, What Griffith was to Him
IMDBcinephile20 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Walsh had much more spotlight subsequently. Can we ever forget "White Heat", "High Sierra", "The Roaring Twenties"? He's the reason John Wayne is on the map and he has worked in a vocation where he has given many actors their magnum opus, and moreover, he's one of the directors that inherited story before methodology.
The role that he left an indelible impression on me, was his portrayal of John Wilkes Booths. He was a harrowing figure in it, and aptly it worked as he had just started off acting, and was probably the right age to give the portrait a verisimilitude. The time, place and cause and effect were balanced by a brooding canvas in historicity; a momentum of perfection.
The same year, he graced his own project to the screen. It's 96 years old and has barely withered its original acetate (despite being heavily smudged on blue tints of the negative especially near the beginning when Owen goes and gets a bucket for his dipsomaniac adopted Father. But a lot of it is fairly pristine.
The film is based on a book about a young boy Owen. As we go through the pervasively impressive film there's one thing for certain - it's a commentary on the civilisation of susceptible parents and their malicious effect to this young adopted boy. It reflects later on when Owen saves a boy, who Marie Deering (a girl who works in Grogan's and then is drawn to his joint). The period periodically changes and we're then lead to believe that he has ran down to the lowest status in a derelict area. Potent in the way it's looked at, we watch a society without poise, were fighting is ample in mustering entertainment.
The character of Owen and the regeneration of his clique is hellbent on the omnipresence of Marie Deering; she aids Owen in his studies, influence and loving compassion. She's the thing that also destroys him; he never reconciles in the gang he originally lead and they're causing a havoc with their abuse of Police and their brutal comeuppance. One bit that's sort of disjointed from the narrative, is when Marie Deering during the second act, invites him and his Friends into a party and throughout it Owen leers at another woman, who's docile and unfazed. He then throws his cigarette on the boat, unbeknownst that it burns. I guess the scene was used as a visual provocation, yet it still does leave a grand and lyrical impact inherent. It's also perhaps a way of uniting them all and separating it later.
It's a deep film. The seminal Gangster film has a lot of heart, and you can even sense its seminal films on such films as Howard Hawks' "Scarface", "The Public Enemy" and his own film "Roaring Twenties". The manipulation of lighting to emphasise by masking the gun or dissolving is not dissimilar to how it's done today. Though the way it's used here is a bit more vivid, looking at the way the officious guy is introduced to the scene, where Marie is working, to entice us with important plot points. The most impressive of these sequences is an abrupt scene where a Gang Member is harassed by an Officer and takes out a knife to go in for the coup de grace. Most films would chiefly employ blood to give it the verisimilitude - the realism to set it apart - here though, to keep its gritty and taut realism, Walsh uses off screen cutting to let the Audience comprehend the outcome.
It's probably fundamentally great to understand, like Fleming with his primitive films, that Walsh was just a disciple of Griffith, who he was influenced by (watch "The Muskateers of Pig Alley") and his literary influences (this film was adapted from Owen Kildare Frawley's "My Mamie Rose" autobiography, which hitherto I was startled to find out that the film was reciting a time of an actual boys life and memoirs to accompany it, making it, of even more valuable commodity).
The thing is, the character is visceral and not intellectual. The story grows in a cerebral way, and does not descend to ruthless violence, probably because it would have been harder to sell. But in a way, it's adscititious; it would be faltered in its tone and focus.
Another thing that will definitely jolt audiences today is the fact that the film relies on visuals. If when looking at the narrative through the camera, you actually notice that in fact, your mind gives the character their contours. You have to understand the struggle - with other films to justify it all seems pretty well grounded in the genre of its tradition - and it will not leave you with disappointment.
While not epic, the film is a character study, a utopian and dystopian story - truly taut, hard, stylised, with little bits of emotions and a veracity.
The role that he left an indelible impression on me, was his portrayal of John Wilkes Booths. He was a harrowing figure in it, and aptly it worked as he had just started off acting, and was probably the right age to give the portrait a verisimilitude. The time, place and cause and effect were balanced by a brooding canvas in historicity; a momentum of perfection.
The same year, he graced his own project to the screen. It's 96 years old and has barely withered its original acetate (despite being heavily smudged on blue tints of the negative especially near the beginning when Owen goes and gets a bucket for his dipsomaniac adopted Father. But a lot of it is fairly pristine.
The film is based on a book about a young boy Owen. As we go through the pervasively impressive film there's one thing for certain - it's a commentary on the civilisation of susceptible parents and their malicious effect to this young adopted boy. It reflects later on when Owen saves a boy, who Marie Deering (a girl who works in Grogan's and then is drawn to his joint). The period periodically changes and we're then lead to believe that he has ran down to the lowest status in a derelict area. Potent in the way it's looked at, we watch a society without poise, were fighting is ample in mustering entertainment.
The character of Owen and the regeneration of his clique is hellbent on the omnipresence of Marie Deering; she aids Owen in his studies, influence and loving compassion. She's the thing that also destroys him; he never reconciles in the gang he originally lead and they're causing a havoc with their abuse of Police and their brutal comeuppance. One bit that's sort of disjointed from the narrative, is when Marie Deering during the second act, invites him and his Friends into a party and throughout it Owen leers at another woman, who's docile and unfazed. He then throws his cigarette on the boat, unbeknownst that it burns. I guess the scene was used as a visual provocation, yet it still does leave a grand and lyrical impact inherent. It's also perhaps a way of uniting them all and separating it later.
It's a deep film. The seminal Gangster film has a lot of heart, and you can even sense its seminal films on such films as Howard Hawks' "Scarface", "The Public Enemy" and his own film "Roaring Twenties". The manipulation of lighting to emphasise by masking the gun or dissolving is not dissimilar to how it's done today. Though the way it's used here is a bit more vivid, looking at the way the officious guy is introduced to the scene, where Marie is working, to entice us with important plot points. The most impressive of these sequences is an abrupt scene where a Gang Member is harassed by an Officer and takes out a knife to go in for the coup de grace. Most films would chiefly employ blood to give it the verisimilitude - the realism to set it apart - here though, to keep its gritty and taut realism, Walsh uses off screen cutting to let the Audience comprehend the outcome.
It's probably fundamentally great to understand, like Fleming with his primitive films, that Walsh was just a disciple of Griffith, who he was influenced by (watch "The Muskateers of Pig Alley") and his literary influences (this film was adapted from Owen Kildare Frawley's "My Mamie Rose" autobiography, which hitherto I was startled to find out that the film was reciting a time of an actual boys life and memoirs to accompany it, making it, of even more valuable commodity).
The thing is, the character is visceral and not intellectual. The story grows in a cerebral way, and does not descend to ruthless violence, probably because it would have been harder to sell. But in a way, it's adscititious; it would be faltered in its tone and focus.
Another thing that will definitely jolt audiences today is the fact that the film relies on visuals. If when looking at the narrative through the camera, you actually notice that in fact, your mind gives the character their contours. You have to understand the struggle - with other films to justify it all seems pretty well grounded in the genre of its tradition - and it will not leave you with disappointment.
While not epic, the film is a character study, a utopian and dystopian story - truly taut, hard, stylised, with little bits of emotions and a veracity.
One of the most interesting Noirs.
classicchocolate0019 September 2013
Owen's mama passed away, got to live in Conway's home. He was unhappy, especially drunken Jim bullied Owen, Owen ran away from a home in his age, ten. Owen worked and fought with the young gang, Skinny who bullied the small guy in Owen's age, seventeen. He became a leader of his own gangs in age, twenty-five. Did want to be a gang, but the beautiful kindly upper-class woman, Marie changed his life. Skinny, Owen's enemy requested Owen to hide him for he knifed one police officer and hated to die. Owen hid Skinny, became friends for a while. But Owen's mind changed, he abandoned Skinny for his right life. Skinny harassed Owen's small friend and Marie for his revenge. Owen saw the incident, fought with Skinny to save her. Skinny attempted to shoot Owen, but unfortunately shot Marie's neck. She got to go to bed. Owen thirsted for revenge. He strangled with him to kill, but could not do that after his mama occurred to him. Skinny ran away. Unfortunately Marie died.
I loved her classic beauty in the film. Very innocent and brave Marie are adorable. The most exciting scene is that beautiful innocent Marie bit Skinny's arm and pulled his hair. Most people just hate gangsters, but some people such as Marie are unlike most common people. I hopefully become a kindly woman like her. But it is too difficult to change human's mind. I was astonished at Skinny's style, kinda modern. He is good-looking, I still love his wicked gangster as well. The casting satisfied me the most. I remember everybody was well-acted.
I loved her classic beauty in the film. Very innocent and brave Marie are adorable. The most exciting scene is that beautiful innocent Marie bit Skinny's arm and pulled his hair. Most people just hate gangsters, but some people such as Marie are unlike most common people. I hopefully become a kindly woman like her. But it is too difficult to change human's mind. I was astonished at Skinny's style, kinda modern. He is good-looking, I still love his wicked gangster as well. The casting satisfied me the most. I remember everybody was well-acted.
Knock-out Masterpiece!
PrincessAnanka4 March 2002
I became obsessed with this movie two years ago after checking it out of our great NYC library. I rave about it to my friends. To think that this full-length feature was made in l915 is astounding. Maybe it's because of its amazing star, Rockliffe Fellowes, who looks so much like Marlon Brando you'll be double-takes. That he never became a legendary star is a real tragedy but when you think of it, almost none of the film actors from that era survived into the 20s except for Mary Pickford and a few comedians. Rockcliffe is so natural, as is his co-star, the beautiful Anna Q. Nillsen, you have to remind yourself that they were acting. This movie should be studied in film courses to show today's younger movie buffs what dynamic work was being done back int he "dinosaur" age of films. And maybe, like myself, they'll never forget the fantastic Rockliffe Fellowes. This guy "coulda been a contendah!"
Linked to Riverboat General Slocum disaster
kedenbird13 January 2012
Raule the Director was definitely affected by the terrible tragedy of the Excursion Ship The General Slocum that burned with great loss of life in the East River of NYC in 1904 This film's riverboat seen is directly linked to the disaster of the excursion steamship General Slocum 6/15/1904 along the East River NYC.
Over 1000, mostly women and children, lost their lives due to criminal negligence. At the time of the making of this movie the tragedy was still fresh in the minds of most Americans. People may want to examine info available about this tragedy on the internet. It was NYC's largest loss of life in one event until the 9/11 tragedy.
Over 1000, mostly women and children, lost their lives due to criminal negligence. At the time of the making of this movie the tragedy was still fresh in the minds of most Americans. People may want to examine info available about this tragedy on the internet. It was NYC's largest loss of life in one event until the 9/11 tragedy.
David Jeffers for SIFFblog.com
rdjeffers25 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Monday, October 25, 7pm, The Paramount, Seattle
"She made of my life a changed thing and never can it be the same again!"
An orphan (Rockcliffe Fellowes) grows up on streets of New York's Lower East Side and becomes the leader of a violent criminal gang. A social worker (Anna Q. Nillsson) turns his head and saves him from his immoral ways, but the past won't let him go.
A glowing tribute to the Settlement House Movement, Regeneration is based on My Mamie Rose, the autobiography of Bowery Boy Owen Kildare. While D. W. Griffith's The Musketeers of Pig Alley (1912) is generally considered the dawn of the gangster film genre, Regeneration is the first of the feature era. Director Raoul Walsh firmly established the start of his half-century career with this influential film, produced by Fox Film Corporation in their first year. Moonlighting Kalem Studios star Nillsson and newcomer Fellowes interact with touching realism as the kind-hearted socialite and the Fools Highway thug in this balanced tale of love, disaster and redemption.
"She made of my life a changed thing and never can it be the same again!"
An orphan (Rockcliffe Fellowes) grows up on streets of New York's Lower East Side and becomes the leader of a violent criminal gang. A social worker (Anna Q. Nillsson) turns his head and saves him from his immoral ways, but the past won't let him go.
A glowing tribute to the Settlement House Movement, Regeneration is based on My Mamie Rose, the autobiography of Bowery Boy Owen Kildare. While D. W. Griffith's The Musketeers of Pig Alley (1912) is generally considered the dawn of the gangster film genre, Regeneration is the first of the feature era. Director Raoul Walsh firmly established the start of his half-century career with this influential film, produced by Fox Film Corporation in their first year. Moonlighting Kalem Studios star Nillsson and newcomer Fellowes interact with touching realism as the kind-hearted socialite and the Fools Highway thug in this balanced tale of love, disaster and redemption.
Decent
Michael_Elliott12 March 2008
Regeneration (1915)
** (out of 4)
First film directed by the legendary Raoul Walsh after working on The Birth of a Nation is probably best known for being one of the first "gangster" pictures as well as being one of the first films to actually shoot on the streets of Hell's Kitchen. Owen is orphaned at the age of ten and taken in by his abusive neighbors and by the time he's an adult (Rockliffe Fellows) he's a "gangster" living on the streets, not working and drinking too much but a social worker decides to try and changed his ways. The term gangster here isn't like the gangster films we're accustomed to but instead it means poor folks hanging out on the streets. The historical importance of this film can't be argued and it clearly influenced some of Scorsese's films as he talked about in A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese but at the end of the day there's really very little going on in this thing. The use of real locations and real actors is a nice touch but the story drags along and the editing, which Walsh is clearly trying to copy Griffith, is a mess. The 70-minute running time feels a bit long as well. From a historic standpoint this is worth viewing once but I doubt I'd go back for a second viewing. The highlight of the film is one scene where people are partying on a boat, which catches fire and they must try to make an escape. This here is certainly one of the great scenes of the silent era.
** (out of 4)
First film directed by the legendary Raoul Walsh after working on The Birth of a Nation is probably best known for being one of the first "gangster" pictures as well as being one of the first films to actually shoot on the streets of Hell's Kitchen. Owen is orphaned at the age of ten and taken in by his abusive neighbors and by the time he's an adult (Rockliffe Fellows) he's a "gangster" living on the streets, not working and drinking too much but a social worker decides to try and changed his ways. The term gangster here isn't like the gangster films we're accustomed to but instead it means poor folks hanging out on the streets. The historical importance of this film can't be argued and it clearly influenced some of Scorsese's films as he talked about in A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese but at the end of the day there's really very little going on in this thing. The use of real locations and real actors is a nice touch but the story drags along and the editing, which Walsh is clearly trying to copy Griffith, is a mess. The 70-minute running time feels a bit long as well. From a historic standpoint this is worth viewing once but I doubt I'd go back for a second viewing. The highlight of the film is one scene where people are partying on a boat, which catches fire and they must try to make an escape. This here is certainly one of the great scenes of the silent era.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
