Lightdeossk
Captivating movie !
Kailansorac
Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.
Marva-nova
Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.
salvidienusorfitus
Very good story. Joan Crawford is lovely and Norman Kerry is pleasant and agreeable. It is a shame that some footage is missing from the early part of the film. No indication is made about what the missing footage contained in the print I saw. A few title cards with a summary stating what happened during the missing section would have been nice. Lon Chaney is very good and quite convincing as a man driven insane by unrequited love.
Antonius Block
While very short at just 50 minutes, this film packs an emotional punch and is macabre in a way that is unique to the genre of horror movies. I won't spoil the big moments, but the tone is set from the beginning as we find ourselves at the circus performance with an armless man (Lon Chaney) hurling knives and firing a rifle at his partner (a young Joan Crawford). As we later see Chaney (and a real-life armless double) manipulate objects and do things like smoke with this feet, we're reminded of the film director Tod Browning would make five years later, 'Freaks'. Chaney's performance throughout the film is brilliant, and he dramatically captures angst, jealousy, and pain. John George turns in a strong performance as the little person in the circus who is Chaney's friend, and the two of them create a striking pair. While the overall tone of the movie is deliciously creepy, the romance Joan Crawford warms up to with a circus strong-man (Norman Kerry) is sweet, and Browning uses a piece of gauze over the camera lens to create an idyllic, dreamy feel to some of their scenes. The uncredited score that was used on the TCM showing was also fantastic. Great film, especially for 1927.
Eric Stevenson
I guess this was one of the last movies released into mainstream theaters that was under an hour long. Then again, there were some movies in other countries that occasionally do this, especially with the "Dragonball Z" movies. Anyway, the weirdest thing about this is probably the title. I have no idea what it means. It's not about anybody discovering anything. Since I don't know the meaning, maybe it is an appropriate title! Anyway, this movie tells the story of a guy who infiltrates a circus disguised as a sort of sideshow freak to get with the woman he loves.The length works very well. There really is surprisingly a lot of things that go on here. As one of the latter silent movies, it's actually cool to see how the technology did in fact advance! The screens that say the words actually look a lot nicer than in previous silent movies! Even the atmosphere is better and a lot more organized. We got strong performances by everyone as well as some really intense scenes. For a film that's really old, this doesn't shy away from violence, even if it isn't graphic. I think the acting at least holds up very well. ***1/2
gavin6942
A criminal on the run (Lon Chaney) hides in a circus and seeks to possess the daughter (Joan Crawford) of the ringmaster at any cost.Love, crime, a hidden identity, and horses on treadmills all come together for this silent classic, now mostly forgotten. And it all blends together beautifully well, with Chaney taking the lead and everyone following in his path.Some of the best parts are the use of feet for smoking and knife-throwing. How much is Chaney and how much is his double is hard to say exactly. While it all looks like him, clever camera tricks may have fooled me. Either way, people who use their feet as hands are pretty cool.Reviews at the time were quite positive, as they should have been. Photoplay appreciated the "macabre atmosphere" and Harrison's Reports noted it was "artistically acted and skillfully directed". Variety was less praising, calling the movie "not as great a picture as it might have been", but what more did they want?This is definitely one of Chaney's strongest performances in his later years. That may be strange to say, but it is true. Although Chaney peaked in 1924-1925, his career was already over by 1930. This one is must-see.
