Madam Satan (1930)

Those who are only familiar with Cecil B. DeMille’s later films might be rather surprised by his 1930 musical sex comedy Madam Satan. If however you’re familiar with his silent films then Madam Satan is just the sort of thing you’d expect him to come up with. It’s like his sophisticated silent comedies but with musical numbers, and even more outlandish. It’s one of my favourite DeMille movies.

This movie was made during DeMille’s brief time at MGM, a very grim time for the director. He was being harassed by the IRS and made a series of box office flops. Those flops included, sadly, Madam Satan. He would return to Paramount and bounce back in a big way with the box-office smash Sign of the Cross in 1932.

The marriage of Bob Brooks (Reginald Denny) and his wife Angela (Kay Johnson) is in big trouble. Bob has been playing around. We get the feeling he’s been playing around quite a bit. His latest playmate is Trixie (Lillian Roth). He’s also been spending too much time with his charming but dissolute friend Jimmy Wade (Roland Young). When Bob and Jimmy get together there will be alcohol and girls involved.

Trixie is the last straw for Angela. Bob gets his marching orders.

But Angela doesn’t really want the marriage to end. And she realises that some of the accusations that Bob has hurled at her are true. She isn’t exactly a fun-loving girl. She’s a staid boring resectable housewife. She isn’t glamorous. And maybe she is a bit sexually cold. Maybe it isn’t surprising that Bob is bored with her.

She realises she has to do something. She doesn’t want to turn herself into a tramp like Trixie. She does however decide that she needs to be much more sexy, much more glamorous and much more exciting. She needs to be more like a mistress than a wife.

The perfect opportunity will be a masquerade ball that Jimmy Wade is throwing on board a zeppelin. Angela will put in an appearance, in the guise of Madam Satan. She makes quite an entrance.

The first half of the movie is a typical pre-code sophisticated sex comedy, and it’s very funny. The second half takes place entirely on board the zeppelin, and it’s totally mad and bizarre.

Jimmy’s party is definitely wild. The highlight is the auction. The six prettiest women take part in it. The men have to bid for them. The winning girl gets to be Belle of the Ball. The men get to dance with the women for whom they put in successful bids. Being the sort of party this is we can assume that as the evening progresses there will be more than dancing involved. Trixie has made it clear to Bob that she expects to be Belle of the Ball, no matter how much it costs him. Bob is OK with this, being totally under Trixie’s spell. At least he’s under her spell until the mysterious super-sexy Madam Satan turns up. Of course she is masked, so Bob has no idea he is being seduced by his own wife.

Then the storm hits and Madam Satan becomes a crazy disaster movie.

The visuals are what make this movie movie so memorable. The costumes worn by the women at the ball are insane. They’re wonderful, but insane.

The ball is like a Roman orgy on a zeppelin.

DeMille was fascinated by decadence, both ancient and modern. And it’s obvious he didn’t entirely disapprove of it. DeMille was no puritan. The theme of societal decadence pop up in lots of DeMille silent films and would be spectacularly showcased in Sign of the Cross and in his 1934 Cleopatra. The Jazz Age rich decadents partying while the storm approaches the zeppelin are the equivalents of the Romans indulging in orgies while Rome burns in Sign of the Cross. DeMille however was not especially interested in ensuring that those who gave themselves up to decadence were punished. DeMille’s specialty was appearing to be on the side of respectability while making it perfectly clear that he really sympathised with wicked fun-lovers.

Kay Johnson looks great as Madam Satan. Reginald Denny manages to be a charming likeable unfaithful husband. The movie is however dominated by the gloriously over-the-top performances of Roland Young and Lillian Roth.

DeMille made some seriously deranged and outrageous movies and this is visually at least the most outrageous of them all. Watching it is like an acid trip, but a good acid trip rather than a bad acid trip. This movie is a wild and delirious ride. Like the passengers on the zeppelin you might want to hold on tight to your parachute.

Madam Satan is very highly recommended.

Madam Satan is available on DVD in the Warner Archive series, with a very good transfer.

North West Mounted Police (1940)

North West Mounted Police is a 1940 Cecil B. DeMille western, although whether it’s really a western can be debated.

The setting is Canada, in 1885. For a couple of centuries the Métis have lived in the Canadian Northwest and they’ve been more or less left alone to live their lives as they choose. The Métis are a mixture of European and Indian. They’re trappers and they’re not interested in the benefits of civilisation. Until the late 19th century they were scarcely aware of being part of Canada. Suddenly they’ve become very much aware of it, and they want no part of being Canadian. They rebelled in 1869 and they’re ready to rebel again.

Keeping order in this territory is the job of a detachment of Canada’s North West Mounted Police, about fifty men.

Inspector Cabot would like to avoid trouble. He doesn’t have enough men to put down a full-scale rebellion. The real worry is that the local tribes, the Cree and the Blackfoot, may join the rebellion.

There are romantic dramas going on in the isolated fort as well. Sergeant Brett (Preston Foster) wants to marry Anglican Mission nurse April Logan (Madeleine Carroll). She’s not sure if she wants to marry him. April’s brother Constable Ronnie Logan (Robert Preston) is in love with a beautiful Métis girl, Louvette Corbeau (Paulette Goddard).

These romantic dramas will become significant when Dusty Rivers (Gary Copper) suddenly arrives on the scene. Dusty is a Texas Ranger. He’s a long way from Texas but he’s on the trail of man wanted for murder in Texas, a man named Jacques Corbeau (George Bancroft). That man is Louvette’s brother. And Dusty takes quite a shine to April Logan. She finds the lanky Texas Ranger pretty attractive. Sergeant Brett is not happy. Not happy at all.

To make things really explosive, the rebels have managed to get hold of a Gatling Gun. Fifty North West Mounted Police troopers won’t have much chance against that.

Sergeant Brett sets off on a solo mission to try to persuade the local Cree chief to remain loyal to the Canadian Government. Dusty Rivers sets off to find Jacques Corbeau. Since he can’t make an arrest on Canadian territory he is accompanied by a North West Mounted Police guide, a Scotsman named McDuff (Lynne Overman).

The already complicated plot gets more complicated. There’s treachery, there’s cowardice, there’s thwarted love, there’s jealousy. The rebels set an elaborate trap for the North West Mounted Police.

And there’s spectacle. This is a DeMille movie so it’s not a case of spectacle at the expense of content. The spectacle is the content.

This was DeMille’s first movie in Technicolor.

DeMille has never received much appreciation in his own country. The French regard him as a major auteur which baffles some American critics. DeMille seemed to have no interest in the currently fashionable approaches to movie-making. He had his own approach and if people thought it was old-fashioned he didn’t care. He figured the public would like the movies he made, and they did. North West Mounted Police did extremely well at the box office. DeMille wasn’t interested in naturalism or realism. He liked melodrama. He didn’t care if his movies seemed artificial, as long as they looked good.

In many ways this movie has more in common with movies about British colonial wars, movies like Gunga Din and King of the Khyber Rifles, than with westerns. It’s not really a western at all. This is a grand adventure movie.

Gary Cooper is good. Most of the players are good, with Paulette Godard chewing the scenery in fine style.

The ending is rather unexpected and it works.

Umbrella Entertainment in Australia have released this movie in their inexpensive but excellent Six Shooter Classics series.

Like most of DeMille’s movies this one is misunderstood. DeMille didn’t make movies the way modern critics and reviewers think movies should be made. Personally I like DeMille’s way of making movies. Recommended.

Male and Female (1919)

Male and Female is a 1919 Cecil B. DeMille comedy/melodrama and it’s the movie that made twenty-year-old Gloria Swanson a major star.

This is a DeMille comedy so don’t expect any slapstick. DeMille’s silent comedies were witty and sophisticated comedies of manners. The movie was based on J.M. Barrie’s 1902 hit play The Admirable Crichton.

The story concerns an aristocratic family shipwrecked on a remote island in the South Seas. They soon discover that their survival depends on the butler, Crichton. He’s the only one who understands what they will need to do in order to survive. It’s obviously a satire on class relations.

The early scenes in the palatial home of Lord Loam (Theodore Roberts) set up some of the key relationships and conflicts.

Crichton (Thomas Meighan) is the butler. He’s a very efficient butler and the household runs smoothly. Of course to the family he’s a mere servant. A valuable servant, but still just a servant.

Tweeny, the scullery maid (played by the amazingly cute eighteen-year-old Lila Lee), is hopelessly in love with Crichton. Crichton isn’t interested. He’s fallen madly in love with Lord Loam’s spoilt but beautiful daughter Lady Mary (Gloria Swanson). It’s hopeless of course. Aristocratic ladies do not marry servants. Actually one of Lady Mary’s friends did marry her chauffeur. Lady Mary was horrified. She would never consider doing anything so outrageous.

Everything changes when the family sets off in a yacht for a cruise in the South Seas. The yacht is shipwrecked. The island does not appear on any charts. This is 1919. There weren’t going to be any aerial searches. They could be stuck on the island for years.

The members of the aristocratic family naturally assume that they will be able to lie about on the beach while Crichton and Tweeny fix breakfast for them and do all those menial tasks that servants are supposed to carry out. Crichton has other ideas. He realises that if they’re going to survive they will all have to pitch in and work. This causes outrage. Lady Mary is aghast. But they don’t have much choice. It’s immediately apparent that Crichton is the only one who has a clue what he’s doing and it’s equally obvious that he is a natural leader. He simply takes charge.

Pretty soon Crichton is more or less king of the tiny island. Lady Mary’s feelings towards him have changed radically. She wants to be his willing slave. He’s so strong and wise and decisive. And so manly.

In Lady Mary and Tweeny both want to be Crichton’s slave. It has to be said that Crichton rather enjoys having two beautiful women competing for his attentions.

The ending is not the typical Hollywood ending you’ll be expecting.

Like a number of other DeMille silent movies this one includes an historical dream/fantasy sequence. DeMille loved these scenes and they gave him an early opportunity to display his skill at creating an atmosphere of decadence which he could use as a counterpoint to the decadence of the modern world. And an opportunity to show his mastery of historical spectacle. In this case the fantasy starts out being Crichton’s fantasy, with himself as a Babylonian king and Lady Mary as his slave. Crichton likes this fantasy. It excites Lady Mary a good deal as well.

The shipwreck scene provides DeMille with another opportunity to offer spectacle. DeMille set high standards for himself and for those who worked for him. If the movie was going to include a shipwreck scene it would be a shipwreck scene that would knock the audience’s socks off. And it does. It’s not just impressive by the standards of 1919. It’s impressive by the standards of today.

Gloria Swanson was an ideal star from DeMille’s point of view. She wasn’t given to the exaggerated performances that we often associate with silent film stars. She looked fabulous in the fashions of 1919. She looked fabulous in the ancient Babylonian costumes. And she looked great dressed as a kind of amazon huntress, a guise in which she also appears in this movie. She was sexy and glamorous.

Some of the DVD releases of this movie have been savagely cut. The copy I have is an Italian DVD which includes the full original cut 115-minute cut in two versions, one with the title cards in English and the other with the title cards in Italian. The transfer is acceptable.

If you think of slapstick when someone mentions silent comedies you’ll be pleasantly surprised by this one. It’s sophisticated comedy, and it’s also a fine romantic melodrama and an effective satire. And it’s a DeMille movie so it’s always visually interesting. When I saw this movie for the first time some years back it changed the way I think about silent cinema. Very highly recommended.

The Cheat (1915)

The Cheat, made for Famous Players-Lasky in 1915, is a very very early Cecil B. DeMille silent melodrama. It’s the movie that first got DeMille noticed as a major directing talent.

DeMille knew he had a story with potential but it needed work. He made sweeping changes to the original screenplay. His instincts were correct.

Edith Hardy (Fannie Ward) is married to stockbroker Richard Hardy (Jack Dean). Edith is a wildly extravagant social butterfly. She thinks nothing of spending $600 on a single dress. Remember, this was 1915. I have no idea how much that would equate to today but it would certainly be tens of thousands of dollars. Edith is irritated that her husband is so tiresome about her habit of spending money that he doesn’t have.

Edith chairs a charity committee raising money for Belgian refugees. So far $10,000 has been raised. Edith gets a hot stock tip so she decides to “borrow” the $10,000 to play the market. She loses the whole lot.

In desperation she asks her friend, the well-known Japanese ivory dealer Hishuru Tori (Sessue Hayakawa) for help. She needs to get her hands on $10,000 immediately, otherwise she and her husband will be ruined and disgraced.

He agrees to give her the $10,000, but there will be a price. The price will be the use of her body.

There’s an early scene in which Hishuru Tori is marking his ivory statuettes with a branding iron, as a sign that they belong to him. We will soon discover that he adopts the same approach with his women.

At the exact moment that Edith is closing the deal to sell herself to the ivory dealer her husband makes a killing on the stock market. Suddenly they’re rich. She tells him that she needs ten grand right away and he gives her the money without asking any questions. Now she can buy herself back from Hishuru Tori but the ivory dealer isn’t having any of this. She made a deal with him and he doesn’t intend to be cheated. Now things get really melodramatic and it all culminates in a shooting, followed by a trial.

One of the things I notice about DeMille’s silent pictures (and I’ve seen quite a few of them) is that the acting is fairly naturalistic. There’s not a huge amount of the exaggerated acting style that so many people associate with silent movies. Fannie Ward succumbs to the temptation at times but this is after all a melodrama. The acting of Sessue Hayakawa and Jack Dean is very naturalistic.

It’s intriguing to note that in the original 1915 release the character played by Sessue Hayakawa is named Hishuru Tori and he’s Japanese. When it was re-released in 1918 his nationality was changed to Burmese and his name was changed to Haka Arakau. Sessue Hayakawa was of course Japanese. Either way this rôle made him a major Hollywood star.

Of course you have to remember that was 1915. The camera doesn’t move. That’s true of all movies in the early silent era. F.W. Murnau is usually given the credit for being the first director to move the camera during a shot but that was not until the early 1920s. It is however obvious that DeMille was aware of the danger that the picture would be too static so he does his best to introduce as much movement as possible into his shots. The actors move around constantly and enter and leave the shot. He was also aware of the need to introduce a sense of movement through the editing. DeMille does use a pan in one vital scene and because this was a technique that wasn’t used very often in 1915 it has an impact.

He also does his best to make every shot as visually interesting as possible. The shot compositions are always interesting.

It’s interesting that DeMille makes very sparing use of title cards. He uses them only when it’s absolutely necessary. Even at this early stage of his career he was confident of his ability to tell a story through visual means. DeMille had a theatrical background but he understood that theatre and film have little in common and that film is a purely visual medium. He understood that if a director knows what he’s doing there is no need to be told exactly what is being said. He trusts the audience to figure out what’s going on.

This movie really doesn’t feel clunky, whereas a movie like A Fool There Was (made in the same year) does look clunky. In technical terms The Cheat feels much much more modern.

Filming a suspenseful courtroom scene without any dialogue is a challenge but DeMille is equal to the challenge.

The cinematography (by Alvin Wyckoff) is impressive with bold use of shadows and very low lighting. Quite an achievement given the limitations of the film stock in use in 1915.

One of the cool things about this movie is seeing the women wearing Edwardian evening gowns and realising that this was not a costume picture. The clothing was contemporary. This is what women were wearing when the movie was made.

This movie was of course made years before such horrors as the Production Code were even thought of. The movie does not judge Edith quite as harshly as she would have been judged under the Production Code. She has made a foolish mistake and she is spoilt and irresponsible and not particularly honest but that doesn’t necessarily mean she is irredeemably wicked.

When seeing this movie you have to avoid the temptation to get sidetracked into obsessing over the racial and social attitudes of 1915. The movie reflects the attitudes of its time. If you want to appreciate the movie you need to set aside 21st century attitudes.

And even though this is very much melodrama there is some subtlety. Edith has brought her problems upon herself. She did, quite willingly, agree to sell herself. She is, as the movie’s title implies, a cheat.

The Cheat was a major step forward for Hollywood film-making, both technically and thematically. The frank treatment of the sexual subject matter is very much in the manner of pre-code movies but DeMille had already reached that point fifteen years earlier. The Cheat was one of the movies that indicated that maybe movies should be taken seriously as an art form. This was a very important movie. It’s also an incredibly entertaining movie.

The Cheat was released on DVD by Kino Video as a double feature paired with DeMille’s 1922 melodrama Manslaughter.

The Cheat is highly recommended.

Manslaughter (1922)

Manslaughter is a 1922 silent melodrama directed by Cecil B. DeMille. It is uncompromisingly a melodrama. I personally think that in order to understand DeMille as a director you have to watch at least a few of his silent movies. You need to watch a couple of his melodramas and a couple of his silent comedies. When you’ve done that you start to look at his later movies in a different light. You understand that far from being the bad director that many critics he was in fact a great director but he wasn’t the kind of director of whom most critics approve.

DeMille’s silent comedies in particular are a revelation. There’s no slapstick here. These are sophisticated comedies of manners. They also demonstrate DeMille’s fondness for outrageous fantasy sequences.

His melodramas are pure melodrama.

Most mainstream critics and most mainstream audiences tend to consider realism to be all-important. Movies should reflect life as it is. The only exceptions are movies that are overtly fantasy or science fiction and most mainstream critics and audiences get uncomfortable when fantasy or science fictional elements intrude in an otherwise realistic story.

I don’t think DeMille ever made a consciously realist movie in his life. When you watch a DeMille movie you enter a parallel universe. It’s the world of movie magic, which is essentially a fantasy world. You enter the world of melodrama, and melodrama is not a realist genre. Things that would be totally unacceptable in a realist movie, things like amazing coincidences, are perfectly acceptable in the world of melodrama. Melodrama is not trying to show us reality but rather a kind of heightened exaggerated version of reality. Melodrama obeys different conventions. Real life doesn’t have endings in which people get what they deserve (whether good or bad) but it’s a convention of melodrama that melodramas do end that way. If you can’t accept that then you won’t enjoy melodrama.


When you’ve seen DeMille’s earlier movies it’s much easier to appreciate later DeMille movies such as The Sign of the Cross, Samson and Delilah and The Greatest Show On Earth. Especially The Greatest Show On Earth, a much misunderstood movie. It’s vulgar, grandiose and overblown because it’s supposed to be. DeMille wasn’t trying to make a gritty social realist movie about the actual lives of circus performers (which is what a lot of critics would have liked). He was taking us into the totally unreal world of the circus, a world of make-believe and unreality and glamour in which everything is a show. DeMille totally loved that world. He revelled in it.

Which brings us to Manslaughter. Lydia Thorne (Leatrice Joy) is a wild girl. Basically she’s a flapper. She lives for pleasure. She spends her time in speakeasies and at wild parties. And she lives for speed. She has a sports car and she drives it fast and recklessly. When motorcycle cop Jim Drummond (Jack Mower) pulls her over for speeding she bribes him with a diamond bracelet. This will have consequences (this is melodrama after all).


Humourless moralising District Attorney Daniel O’Bannon (Thomas Meighan) is in love with Lydia but he disapproves of her. He disapproves of all these crazy kids today. He thinks that America in 1922 is just like ancient Rome - a world of decadence and debauchery. It must end badly. Pleasure is bad and if you pursue pleasure you will eventually pay a price. His musings on this subject trigger the movie’s first fantasy sequence, as Lydia in the guise of a wicked Roman empress presides over an orgy.

Lydia’s maid Evans (Lois Wilson), desperate for money to send her ailing son to a healthier climate, steals a diamond ring from her mistress. Lydia is initially outraged and wants Evans sent to prison but then changes her mind and decides to ask the judge for clemency. But Lydia is too drunk to turn up at court and Evans goes to prison. This subplot is important because it establishes that Lydia is irresponsible and spoilt but she isn’t cruel or malicious. She really did intend to save Evans from prison. This subplot will also have important later consequences (again remember that this is melodrama).

Lydia’s love of speed gets her into big trouble. She causes a traffic accident in which a traffic cop is killed. And yes, you guessed it, it’s the very same traffic cop she bribed earlier.

O’Bannon intends to send her to prison for a long stretch. He does this because he loves her and he thinks that a savage punishment will save her and turn her into the good girl he always believed her to be deep down.

These events will change the lives of all these characters (including Evans the maid), by means of lots more coincidences.

We’ll also get another ancient Rome fantasy sequence in which the barbarians invade and punish the Romans for their debauchery by killing the lot of them. O’Bannon likes this fantasy. Pleasure must be paid for.

The acting isn’t really in the excessively extravagant style that many people associate with silent films. It’s reasonably naturalistic. Which is a net positive since there’s enough melodrama in the story itself. Leatrice Joy is very good as Lydia. Thomas Meighan is OK as O’Bannon although O’Bannon is not an easy character to like.

DeMille came up with a very successful formula early on. He discovered that he could get away with all sorts of sex and sin in a movie if he added in the message that people who indulge in such things must pay for their pleasures. It was a formula that was later to be used countless times by exploitation film-makers. The kicker is, he always made the sex and sin seem like enormous fun and he always made the people who indulge in such things attractive and sexy. And he always made those who enforce the punishment seem humourless and boring. It’s almost as if the audience was supposed to come down on the side of sex and sin. Whether that was really DeMille’s intention can be debated but he certainly understood that it was the sex and sin that would have people lining up to buy tickets for his movies.

Manslaughter is typical DeMille outrageousness, with both the debauchery and the moralising melodrama being equally outrageous. And I haven’t yet mentioned the boxing match between two women and the all-female pogo stick race. Manslaughter is highly recommended because nobody made movies quite the way Cecil B. DeMille made them.

Manslaughter was released on DVD by Kino Video as a double feature paired with DeMille’s 1915 movie The Cheat.

The Sign of the Cross (1932)

Cecil B. DeMille’s The Sign of the Cross (1932) is one of the most notorious of all Hollywood pre-code movies. It can be interpreted in various ways, which makes it also one of the most fascinating pre-code films. It’s a story of faith and it also offers a smorgasbord of sex and sin.

1932 was the worst year of the Depression and it looked like being a dismal year for Hollywood. Movie theatre attendances had crashed by half. It was also shaping up to be a bad year for Cecil B. DeMille. He was being pursued by the IRS and after a couple of not-too-successful movies no studio would touch him. His career was on the skids. DeMille however had no intention of fading away or retiring. He had come up with an idea. He had bought the rights to Wilson Barrett’s religious play The Sign of the Cross. Everybody told DeMille he was crazy, that audiences wanted breezy fluffy entertainment, that it was the wrong time for such a project. But DeMille made Paramount an offer they couldn’t refuse. He would put up half the money for the project out of his own pocket.

It was make-or-break for DeMille. If the movie flopped he was finished. It was pretty important for Paramount as well. They desperately needed a hit.

Barrett’s play dates from 1895 and strongly resembles the very popular novel Quo Vadis, published at around the same time. It’s a basic story that has been filmed more than once, and in more than one way.

The movie is set in Rome during the reign of the Emperor Nero. Rome has just been devastated by the Great Fire of AD 64 and Nero decides to make the Christians the collective scapegoats for that disaster. Christians are to be hunted down and executed.

The Prefect of Rome, Marcus Superbus (Fredric March), is the most powerful man in Rome after the Emperor. In many ways he’s a typical Roman (or at least he conforms to the stereotyped view of Romans of that era). He is loyal to Nero but Marcus lives for pleasure and he’s clearly very fond of women. In fact he’s notorious for his obsession with women. On the other hand it’s obvious from the start that Marcus is not an especially cruel man. In fact he has a definite soft-hearted side.

He meets a pretty girl, Mercia (Elissa Landi) and it’s love at first sight. She’s very keen on him as well. But Mercia is a Christian. Falling in love with a Christian girl is a very dangerous thing to do. It’s even more dangerous for Marcus since Nero’s empress, Poppaea (Claudette Colbert) is in lust with him. Poppaea means to have Marcus and she’s not going to let a Christian girl get in her way.

A secret meeting of the Christians is broken up by the Roman soldiery, with considerable bloodshed, and the survivors are destined to be executed in imaginative ways in the arena. Marcus is determined to save Mercia while Poppaea plots to get Mercia out of the way.

It’s not the story itself that is so interesting. It’s the way DeMille handles it. On one level it’s a pious Christian story of faith. On another level it’s a fun-filled romp of sex and debauchery. The debate about this movie centres on the question of DeMille’s actual intentions. Was he sincerely trying to make a morally uplifting religious movie or was he more interested in presenting us with a sex and sin extravaganza? I’ve always tended towards the view that DeMille was trying to have his cake and eat it too. That he was consciously making a movie that could be enjoyed on both levels.

The Catholic Church at the time had no doubt what DeMille’s intentions were. They went ballistic. They were so outraged that they formed the Catholic Legion of Decency to combat this kind of Hollywood wickedness.

For me the main support for the theory that DeMille was trying to have it both ways is that the Christians come across as being rather dull and even rather sanctimonious while the wicked pagans are attractive, sexy and fun. On the other hand DeMille does not in any way gloss over the cruelties of pagan Rome.

There’s also the question of casting. DeMille was pretty careful in his casting choices so it’s reasonable to believe that he mostly got the cast he wanted. And the actors playing the Christians are pretty dull. Those playing the sinful pagans are colourful, entertaining and great fun. This doesn’t just apply to the players in the main rôles. The actors playing minor Christian characters are dull and those playing minor pagan characters are lively and attractive.

Of course it’s possible that DeMille believed that Christian audiences would like the fact that the performances by the cast members playing Christians are terribly terribly earnest.

What’s also interesting (and daring in a way only pre-code movies could be) is that DeMille presents the Christian side of the argument but he gives us the pagan side as well, and the pagan point of view is presented without demonising it.

Enough of this. There are other things that need to be talked about. Such as Claudette Colbert. And her famous bathing-in-asses’-milk nude scene. And yes, you do clearly get to see her nipples. This is a full-on pre-code movie. Colbert is at her sexiest, and Claudette Colbert at her sexiest is something to behold. She’s superb and she sizzles.

Charles Laughton goes totally over-the-top as Nero, which is as it should be. Fredric March is an actor I’ve never been able to warm to. That might just be me. Elissa Landi is painfully earnest as Mercia.

Then there’s the spectacle, and the sin and debauchery. The arena scenes display DeMille’s absolute master of spectacle and his gift for the outrageous and the outlandish. The battle between thirty African pygmy warriors and thirty amazon women warriors is a major highlight. There’s also the nude girl and the crocodiles, and the nude girl and the gorilla. DeMille was never afraid to go for maximum outrageousness. I haven’t yet mentioned the lesbian dance scene.

Cinematographer Karl Struss shot the entire picture through red gauze filters to give it a luminous quality. Surprisingly although this is one of the most visually impressive epics ever made it wasn’t particularly expensive. Given the dismal economic climate DeMille knew he had to keep the budget down and he did. The gamble paid off, the movie was a hit and DeMille was back at the top.

The print used in the Cecil B. DeMille collection DVD set of a few years ago (which is the own I own) is excellent and it’s uncut. That’s important. Paramount butchered this movie in 1938 in order to make it acceptable under the Production Code but the DVD presents us with the completely uncut original release version in all its depraved glory. This movie is also available (uncut) on Blu-Ray from Kino Lorber.

The Sign of the Cross (1932) is pre-code Hollywood at its most decadent and outrageous. It’s a must-see movie.

The Crusades (1935)

Cecil B. DeMille’s The Crusades is one of those wonderful Hollywood historical epics that has almost nothing to do with actual history. As a movie, though, it’s hugely entertaining. 

Released by Paramount in 1935 and costing $1.42 million (DeMille uncharacteristically running over budget and behind schedule) the movie was one of DeMille’s biggest commercial flops. DeMille was mystified by its failure and always believed it was a good movie. 

Ostensibly The Crusades deals with Richard I of England and his involvement in the Third Crusade, although mostly it focuses on the relationship between Richard and his bride, Berengaria of Navarre. It incorporates certain incidents and characters from earlier Crusades and mixes real history with a good deal of extravagantly imaginary material.

In real life the disastrous defeat of the Crusader army at the Horns of Hattin in 1187 and the subsequent capture of Jerusalem by Saladin provided the impetus for the Third Crusade.

The subject matter was well chosen given that the Third Crusade pitted the greatest and most celebrated Muslim leader, Saladin, against the greatest and most celebrated Christian leader of the era, King Richard I (Richard Lionheart) of England. Both Saladin and Richard are heroes not just of history but of legend and romance and both certain qualify as larger-than-life characters.

In the film Richard’s motivation is joining the Crusade is rather odd - it is the only way he can be released from his betrothal to Alys, sister of Philip II of France. Unfortunately by the time Richard’s army reaches Marseilles he’s run out of money and his army has run of food. King Sancho of Navarre comes to his rescue, supplying Richard with all the supplies he needs. There’s just one condition - Richard must marry Sancho’s daughter Berengaria (Loretta Young). Richard agrees but there will be trouble as a result, given that Alys has decided to accompany him on Crusade.

The first half of the movie focuses almost entirely on Richard’s complicated marital difficulties and the plots hatched against him by jealous rivals among the many kings and princelings taking part in the Crusade.

The action finally kicks in when Richard besieges the city of Acre, held by Saladin. From that point on there’s a great deal of action, interspersed with an extremely fanciful romantic triangle involving Richard, Saladin and Berengaria. Richard has vowed to take Jerusalem and Saladin has vowed to stop him and neither man has any intention of backing down. The ending, about which I propose to say nothing, is likely to come as a considerable surprise.

Henry Wilcoxon is surprisingly good as Richard – he’s terribly heroic of course, but he does bring also bring out his fundamental irresponsibility and hot-headedness, and his somewhat shabby treatment of Berengaria, so there is more to the characterisation than you might expect. The only thing wrong with Wilcoxon is that he doesn’t quite have the charisma that a hero of an epic needs. Ian Keith is very good as Saladin, although again it’s a performance that lacks that vital spark of charisma. 

Both Richard and Saladin begin the story as ambitious and arrogant men of violence (although tempered in both cases by a sense of honour). As the tale progresses they become more human and eventually they develop a mutual respect. It’s perhaps a little surprising to encounter actual character development in a movie like this.

As Berengaria Loretta Young is very pretty and outrageously noble and self-sacrificing. Most of the supporting players are adequate, although C. Aubrey Smith is perhaps just a little hammy (as he always was) as a Christian holy man. DeMille’s adopted daughter Katherine DeMiIle is delightfully spiteful as Alys.

Visually this movie has all of DeMille’s many strengths as a director. His framing of shots is exquisite and imaginative. DeMille was not a great believer in moving the camera unless he really needed to do and mostly he didn’t since he was a master of the art of creating a sense of movement and dynamism within a static frame. As always the more complex his shots and the more extras he has involved in them the more impressive DeMille’s skills become.The siege of Acre in this film is one of his great cinematic achievements. 

The sets are magnificent of course. 

The most interesting thing about the movie is the message it conveys. For a movie about war it’s actually very pro-peace. And for a movie about a clash between religions it’s actually a plea for religious tolerance. DeMille hired Harold Lamb, an historian and a fine writer of historical fiction, as a technical advisor on the film. Lamb’s historical fiction is notable for its even-handedness towards other cultures and his influence can I think be seen in the script. 

The Crusades is a movie about war, love and religious faith. On the whole, despite the liberties it takes with history, it’s remarkably successful and it looks magnificent. A very underrated movie by a great director. Highly recommended.

The Greatest Show on Earth (1952)

Cecil B. DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth seems to be almost universally regarded as the worst movie ever to win the Best Picture Oscar. This is absolute nonsense. I could easily name a dozen worse Best Picture winners. The Greatest Show on Earth might not be Citizen Kane but it’s fine entertainment.

DeMille was able to secure the enthusiastic co-operation of the Ringling Brothers-Barnum and Bailey Circus in the making of the movie and the results are nothing if not spectacular.

The movie covers one season in the life of the circus, focusing on the drama of the circus itself as well as the behind-the-scenes tragedies, joys and heart-breaks.

Brad Braden (Charlton Heston) is a circus boss with a big problem. Times are changing and the circus faces stiff competition for the public’s entertainment dollar. The owners want  to cut down the season for the coming year to a mere ten weeks, concentrating entirely on the big cities. To them such a decision seems like a prudent way to avoid financial risk but Braden knows that circuses just can’t work that way. You can’t attract the best performers and you can’t keep such a complex organisation together if you can only offer ten weeks’ work in a year. In a desperate attempt to convince the owners to risk a full season he has taken a huge risk himelf. He has hired the Great Sebastian (Cornel Wilde) as the circus’s number one attraction. The Great Sebastian is the greatest trapeze artist of them all but he has a reputation for being difficult and for causing chaos wherever he goes. 

He also only ever plays the main ring. That’s a problem since Brad has promised that honour to his girlfriend Holly (Bettty Hutton). Holly is a great trapeze artist herself but as he tries to explain to her the Great Sebastian is an established drawcard. For the sake of the circus he has to give Sebastian the centre ring. This establishes one of the movie’s main themes - Brad always puts the circus first, no matter what. Initially this seems to be a flaw in his character but by the end of the movie his dedication will appear in a much more favourable light.

Holly vows to win back her top spot by proving she can outperform even the Great Sebastian. The competition between the two performers proves to be great publicity for the circus and it really draws in the crowds. This is not the only competition going on - there is also a fierce romantic rivalry between Brad and Sebastian. They’re both in love with Holly and neither is the sort of guy who likes to finish second. To complicate things further Angel (Gloria Grahame) is waiting in the wings. She’s always had a thing for a Brad but she’s not the kind of girl who goes around stealing other women’s men. On the other hand if Holly were to decide to choose Sebastian then she’d be more than happy to make a play for Brad. This four-way romantic rivalry provides the movie’s central plot.

There are a couple of sub-plots, one of which will almost destroy the circus. But circuses turn out to be rather difficult to destroy.

It’s very easy to focus on this movie’s flaws but if you do that you’re missing the point of it all. The plot is a bit thin for a two-and-a-half hour movie. Some of the sub-plots don’t go anywhere. The acting is rather hammy. The structure of the movie is very loose with the plot frequently coming to a complete standstill while the focus switches to a documentary style look at the circus behind the scenes, and the action also stops for lengthy performance scenes. What you have to remember though is that DeMille did not want to make a movie set in a circus, with the circus providing a colourful backdrop. The circus itself is the subject of the movie, and it’s the star of the movie as well.

And of course a circus performance doesn’t rely on plot. It’s a series of unconnected spectacles. The structure of the movie follows a similar pattern. Criticising the movie for being episodic and disjointed is like criticising a circus performance for being episodic and disjointed. 

Like a circus, what this movie lacks in tight structuring it makes up for in spectacle. And it really does deliver on the spectacle. It looks magnificent. Some process shots are used but in 1952 when movie cameras were very very heavy, especially Technicolor cameras, and Steadicams had not been thought of, it’s hard to imagine how some of the scenes could have been shot any other way. What matters is that most of the dazzling trapeze performances look very real indeed. 

As for the acting, this is not a movie about angst-ridden urban intellectuals. It’s about circus people. People expect circus people to be larger-than-life and in general the actors deliver precisely the kinds of performances that the movie requires. Betty Hutton plays Holly like a hyperactive kid suffering from a serious sugar rush. She’s bouncing off the walls but while her performance would have been a bad one in most movies in this movie it works. As for Charlton Heston, he’s playing a circus boss and it’s impossible to imagine how anyone could hold an organisation as complex and chaotic as a circus together unless he was the sort of character that Charlton Heston just happened to be very very good at playing. Cornel Wilde pulls out all the stops as the wildly extravagant and exuberant Sebastian and again it’s just exactly the right sort of performance. Gloria Grahame, being the superb actress she was, manages to make Angel very sympathetic and even to hint as a certain amount of acting subtlety while also going just as over-the-top as the other main stars.

James Stewart plays the clown Buttons, a clown with a dark secret. For certain crucial plot reasons he plays the entire movie in clown makeup, quite a challenge given that he’s the most tortured of all the characters. Stewart rises to the challenge. The criticism has been made that it’s easy to guess what his dark secret is but in my view the audience is supposed to figure it out. Because we know his secret we share his anxiety when he’s threatened with exposure.

Despite the movie’s disjointedness DeMille knows what he’s doing. He knows the movie is corny. It’s supposed to be. Circuses are corny. They’re supposed to be. You don’t approach this kind of subject matter with any attempt at subtlety. It’s not a Bergman movie. It’s a circus movie. DeMille knows what is required and that’s what he delivers. The Greatest Show on Earth is as garish as a circus and it’s just as much fun.

The Region 4 DVD is barebones but it’s a reasonable transfer. This is a movie that really needs a Blu-Ray release.

If you accept this movie on its own terms it’s very enjoyable viewing and despite its length it can never be accused of dullness. Recommended.

The Ten Commandments (1956)

The Ten Commandments, released by Paramount in 1956, was Cecil B. DeMille’s last film. At $13.2 million it was one of the most expensive movies made to that point in time, and it was one of the biggest box-office successes in history, pulling in $64 million on its first release. Adjusting for inflation and taking into account re-releases it remains one of the most successful movies ever made.

DeMille’s share of the profits was huge but he gave half of it away to be distributed amongst the crew, an unprecedented gesture.

DeMille took an enormous risk with this movie. Paramount were very nervous about the whole project. Had DeMille not been involved they certainly would not have proceeded with it. DeMille had to be very careful not to offend either Christians or Jews, and considering the fact that the movie fictionalises a good deal of the life of Moses it was no easy task to come up with a screenplay that would not upset somebody. DeMille insisted that the screenwriters could not just make it up as they went along when it came to filling in the gaps of Moses’ life. Everything had to be at least vaguely plausible and the script drew on the work of various Biblical scholars as well as the works of ancient historians like Josephus.

The location shooting in Egypt undoubtedly shortened DeMille’s life. He suffered a massive heart attack. The doctors told him that if he rested in bed for four weeks with oxygen he would make a full recovery. He told them, “Forget it gentlemen. I’m going to the set in the morning.” And he did. He intended to finish the picture even if it cost him his life.



The story of course is essentially an expansion upon the Biblical story of Moses, of the infant Moses being found by Pharaoh’s daughter in a basket on the Nile, of his early life as an Egyptian prince and of his deliverance of the Hebrew slaves from bondage. Needless to say, this being a DeMille movie, it also includes a love story, plenty of sex and plenty of action. There might not be any actual battle scenes but DeMille has no trouble in turning this story into an exciting adventure yarn filled with spectacle.

There was no way of doing spectacular scenes like the parting of the Red Sea using existing special effects technology. The production team and the crew had to invent their own special effects. They did this so well that Steven Spielberg has described the parting of the Red Sea as the greatest special effect in movie history.



Even by DeMille standards this is a big movie. Officially some scenes utilised the services of no less than eight thousand extras although people who were there believe the true number may have been closer to twelve thousand. And in scenes on that scale DeMille would fuss over the placement of a single extra. Much to the horror of star Charlton Heston. But Heston admitted that DeMille was right in taking such pains. No-one ever had the same feeling for crowd scenes that DeMille had. DeMille did not believe in the concept of extras. As far as he was concerned everybody who appeared on screen was an actor. They should know what the director was trying to achieve, they should know what the scene was about and they should know what part they were to pay in the scene.

DeMille was fiercely loyal to the people he had worked with in the silent era. H. B. Warner, who had played Jesus in DeMille’s 1927 King of Kings, was brought out of a nursing home to play one last role.



After considering half a dozen other actors DeMille finally decided on Yul Brynner in the role of the Pharaoh Rameses. The danger of putting Brynner in such a role was that he was likely to overshadow the real star, the actor playing Moses. Fortunately with Charlton Heston as Moses there was absolutely no danger of that happening. Both Rameses and Moses are played as truly epic larger-than-life characters, which is as it should be.

Yvonne de Carlo brings a surprising (and entirely appropriate) dignity to the role of Moses’ wife Sephora. Anne Baxter gives one of her better performances as Nefretiri, the woman for whose affections Rameses and Moses are bitter rivals. Vincent Price has great fun with the role of the master builder Baka while John Carradine chews up the scenery as Aaron. For Edward G. Robinson the role of the Hebrew slave master Dathan was a career-saving role. Despite their political differences Robinson had immense respect for DeMille. I’ve always thought Cedric Hardwicke was rather overrated but he does well as the old Pharaoh Sethi.



The movie had to be ready for a November 1956 release and unfortunately the consequent haste is evident in a few scenes. Some of the blue screen shots certainly could have used more work. What is extraordinary though is just how well the important scenes hold up. Every scene that really matters works superbly.

This movie is an odd mix of outrageous entertainment and piety. DeMille saw no conflict between the two. This is a rare example of a deeply religious movie that is also enormously enjoyable as entertainment.

The Region 4 DVD release spreads the movie over two discs, which presents no problems since the movie has an intermission. The transfer is an excellent one.

It is unlikely that anyone but Cecil B. DeMille could have made a movie such as The Ten Commandments work. This film is an extraordinary achievement. It’s one of those movies you just have to see.

Samson and Delilah (1949)

Cecil B. DeMille’s career had its ups and downs during the 1940s but Samson and Delilah, released by Paramount in 1949, marked a triumphant return to form. It is pure DeMille and it was a smash hit at the box office.

DeMille never bothered to adjust his fim-making style to the sound era. He continued to believe that the visual impact was what mattered, and Samson and Delilah certainly delivers the goods in that area.

Samson (Victor Mature), of the tribe of Dan, is one of judges of the Israelites. His people have been enslaved by the Philistines. God has a mission for Samson, to begin the process of freeing the Israelites from bondage. In order to achieve this aim God has given Samson supernatural strength.

Samson initially seems an unlikely hero. He spends his time drinking with the Philistines, brawling and chasing women. Miriam (Olive Deering) is in love with him, but Samson wants to marry a Philistine woman, the beautiful Semadar (Angela Lansbury). Samson has another admirer, Semadar’s younger sister Delilah (Hedy Lamarr). During a ceremonial lion hunt Samson demonstrates his great strength by killing a lion with his bare hands. This feat impresses the Philistine leader, the Saran of Gaza (George Sanders). The Saran gives him permission to marry a woman of the Philistines. His choice of Semadar in preference to Delilah enrages the latter. Delilah is determined that no woman will take Samson from her.

The wedding feat ends in a brawl, with tragic results. Samson finds himself outlawed. Samson is deeply loved by his people and they refuse to give him up to the Philistines. Samson pursues a career of banditry, wreaking havoc among the oppressors of the Israelites. An attempt to capture him ends in disaster with Samson destroying an entire army with only the jawbone of an ass as a weapon. This is a scene that could easily have seemed ridiculous but DeMille handles it superbly. The introduction of the ass’s jawbone is done very skillfully and wittily.

There seems to be no way of taking Samson, until Delilah assures the Saran that she can do the job. The Saran is not as enthusiastic as you might suppose, since he is Delilah’s lover, but there seems to be no alternative. Delilah also assures the Saran that she can discover the secret of Samson’s strength. Delilah’s seduction of Samson sets up the spectacular ending in the Temple of the Philistine god Dagon.

DeMille had second thoughts about his casting of Victor Mature in the lead role. He’d cast him after being very impressed (and rightly so) by the actor’s performance in Kiss of Death. Mature insisted on using a double for the lion-fighting scene, much to DeMille’s disgust. The underrated Mature in fact does a fine job, as he always did when he had a decent role and a good director.

Hedy Lamarr gives one of her best performances as Delilah. She has no trouble being perversely seductive and she is also convincing as a woman with very conflicted feelings, torn by jealousy and by her mixture of love and hate for Samson. Lamarr got on extremely well with DeMille and she repays his confidence in her.

George Sanders adds a touch of fun as the Saran. This is Sanders at his most delightfully cynical. He doesn’t try to make the character too much of a clichéd villain - the Saran is not evil, he is merely a king who is determined to assert his authority. Angela Lansbury looks very glamorous and she also gives a fine performance.

DeMille’s genius comes to the fore in his treatment of the sexually perverse elements in the story. Some of this is implicit in the original Bible story but the film really ramps up the perversity. The attraction between Samson and Delilah has more than a hint of the sado-masochistic about it.

This is a typically DeMille mix of sex and spectacle, of lust and religion. Only DeMille has ever been able to carry off such a combination successfully, and without showing any disrespect for religion. DeMille took religion seriously, in fact more seriously than is often assumed.

The climactic scenes in the temple are a tour-de-force. Those scenes cost Paramount a fortune but they were worth every penny. The gigantic statue of Dagon (actually a seventeen-feet high model) is breath-taking.

Paramount has made us wait a long time for an official DVD release of this movie, but the wait was worth it. The movie look magnificent. The colours are stunningly bright and lush. DeMille’s epics really need to be seen on the big screen but if you’re lucky enough to have a big high definition television you won’t be disappointed by this DVD.

Samson and Delilah is an epic as only Cecil B. DeMille has ever been able to make them. Superb entertainment, truly spectacular and very sexy. Very highly recommended.