The Lost Disney's Alice in Wonderland

Disney is coming out with a 'totally trying too hard to grab the tweens and goth kids who are too old for High School Musical crowd' live action version of Alice in Wonderland. Needless to say its working, as my tween and teenage sisters are excited for it. Going by my billboard theory (the more billboards/ads for a film in Hollywood means all the more it'll fail after opening weekend) it probably won't do well but will become a cult classic as Tim Burton is the Gothic tween God. This film will be Disney's first foray into a live action Alice, but had things turned out differently about 80 years ago it wouldn't hold that title.

Alice in Wonderland has been filmed a batrillion times, from flickers (1903) to this modern age. Disney was obsessed with the story, always vowing it would be his masterpiece. His first successful film foray came in 1924 with live action mixed with cartoons called the 'Alice Comedies'. These starred the adorable Virginia Davis as 'Alice'. However Disney decided to go the Keystone route and not give his new star the rightful pay raise she deserved...so Davis left and new girls were brought in...but the audience was not pleased and soon the comedies fell out of favor.

Disney became a hit with Mickey Mouse in the late 20s and joined United Artists in 1932. It was an epic win for UA, who had been having some rough times since talkies came along. D.W. Griffith hadn't been financially successful since the early 20s, Chaplin took too damn long (and his spaced out films would be one of the things keeping the company afloat), and though Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford had initially been successful in talkies (Mary with "Coquette" and the pair with "Taming of the Shrew") both had hit perhaps their worst year ever with 1931 (Kiki and Reach for the Moon.) Had things gone differently UA may have kept Disney through his successful years and Mary could have been something to Alice...depending who you ask either just a model or a live action version. Either way it never came to be.

Disney's Mickey Mouse had been doing well, but he wanted his Silly Symphonies to do better. He also wanted to make a full length film of some sort. Some point after his signing discussions began between him and Pickford about producing a full length Alice. Though I've heard before that it may have been live action, Pickford's biography says she was to be be behind the scenes, as well as a 'live model' for the cartoon design. Disney's 'live models' have been infamous over the years...everything from Margaret Kerry as Tinkerbell (no not Marilyn Monroe as the story goes) to Alyssa Milano for Ariel in The Little Mermaid. How much control Mary would have had beyond that is debatable, seems the project never got that far.

Mary's life was in shambles at the time. Her marriage with Doug was ending, and her family was falling apart (her mother died in the 20s, her sister and brother would both pass away by 1936.) She hadn't had a flop for over a decade, yet the trauma that was Kiki had been her latest film...and she knew it wasn't her finest hour. Mary had been 'Michael Jackson during Thriller' popular for over 20 years...without film it didn't seem she'd know what to do with herself.


She had planned a few follow ups to Kiki, namely "Forever Yours" which was another fiasco (she and Mickey Neilan were both deep into alcoholism at the time and fought so bad production was halted.) These grown up roles weren't going well (anything post 1927), so she planned a return to her little girl character that was at the time as iconic as Charlie's Tramp. Mary was 41 at the time, but she had pulled off a little girl role well in 1926 ("Sparrows"). And arguably she hadn't really let it go as her following roles were as teenagers, usually under 20 years old. It sounds absurd today, but for realz she could have pulled it off.


In the book Alice is 7 and a half years old years old. Mary had played roles about that young in 1917 with "Poor Little Rich Girl" and 1921's "Pollyanna". Its mind blowing to think of her pulling off so young while actually being so old...this may be why a live action version lives in mythology vs her just being a model. After WW2 Disney intended using Ginger Rogers in a live action/cartoon mix...this gives me further belief that Mary wasn't intended as just a model. Some people just have witchcraft with the camera, and Mary was one of them.

I also have trouble believing Mary would have campaigned as hard as she did for just being a model for a cartoon. But whatever the case was, she schmoozed Disney hard, posing for publicity shots in costume. She also had tea with a stuffed Mickey at Pickfair, which also became a still for autographing. Mary actually made technicolor test footage as Alice in heavy makeup and costume. This footage still exists at AMPAS but to my knowledge has never been released. Below is a photo of her from this test.

I can't remember who found this photo, but I remember they were from http://www.garboforever.com so credit to that!

Honestly the color and makeup are both God awful. Mary could photograph well in color as evidenced below from her one and only technicolor appearance, a cameo in "Star Night at the Cocoanut Grove" which was filmed less than a year later in 1934.





What fell through is still up for debate. Disney put Mary off, then when Disney was hot on the idea she would put him off (booze maybe?). In the end Disney fell through, completely dropping the idea. When word of the God awful live action Paramount Alice came round Mary lost all hope. That version would go on to flop (and it starred Gary Cooper and W.C. Fields!!!)

By 1936 Disney left UA to make his own company, and his own great success with "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs". It was one of the few times Mary ever let her business knowledge get in the way of something more important. Though TV was little more than a few inches tall and a dream for most people, UA fought Disney over the rights to broadcast his films on television in the future. Sure that's some good foresight over a future medium that brought film to its knees...but keeping Disney and Snow White would have gave UA a lot more money then losing the TV rights Disney wanted for himself.

The UA founders had some keen insight towards television. Mary would begin her radio career with it in mind, and D.W. Griffith took part in one of the first television broadcasts ever in 1928 (mostly a test, but it was successful.) Disney would go on to great heights while UA would all but fail by the 1950s (it still existed off and on through the years, lately being owned by a couch loving wackadoo...) Disney began work on Alice again in 1938, though the war would hinder this. By now Mary was long out of the picture.

In 1949 another (very trippy) live action Alice was made (Disney tried to have the film hidden to stop all competition with their version). In 1951 Disney made his own cartoon feature of Alice in Wonderland, his first Princess film since Snow White. It got mild reviews (and outright harsh ones from the UK) until the 60s and 70s when acid brought a whole new generation of hippies to the film. Today Alice is used in many promotions and merchandise, and well...we have the whole new goth tween film to look forward to.

To me, its one of the biggest mistakes of silents that Mary didn't play Alice...be it as a live model, voice, or actual live actress. Everything associated with Disney (that doesn't involve being mean to black people) is revived, re-released, and cherished. Though most people today have never seen a silent film they still know Mickey, and many people were introduced to Virginia Davis when her shorts were released on DVD. Many of Disney's voice actresses never went on to more, likely because Disney was very selfish about them (ask Adriana Caselotti). However they were still remembered and revered, re-recording things into old age and being worshiped out signings and releases. Had Mary had any hand in the final Alice she would still be remembered as more than a blip of 'made a test and disappeared' in the Disney lexicon.

When I first heard Mary's voice she reminded me very much of a 'Disney Princess' particularly Alice or Cinderella. She had the perfect little girl voice to go with the perfect little girl look. Film fans point out to me that celebrities voicing cartoon characters is a new phenomena (mostly following Aladdin in 1992). However Alice was being discussed in 1932 and 1933, just a few YEARS after the first feature length cartoons were made, let alone talkies! Whether the idea for Mary to voice a cartoon Alice was ever put on the table or not we'll probably never know, but I'd like to remind everyone that 1932 was just 4 years after the switch...the rules hadn't been set yet. If Mary had the genius to argue over television, I can't fully believe she didn't have the genius to see what Disney was capable of either.

As for Mary pulling off a live action Alice well...that's more debatable. I believe she could of had she wanted to (and put down the bottle). Mary convincingly pulled off a 20 something in 1933 for "Secrets"...7 was a stretch but even in 2010 that's irrelevant...the new girl has been bumped to 19 (and in my opinion looks 39...I don't see anything youthful about her.) The new girl, Mia Wasikowska, also incidentally has curls...like someone else we know.

I must confess I still think Disney ripped Mary off for the cartoon. The little girl Alice is very much like Mary's character...the only thing she's missing is the curls. The voice, the eyes, the daintiness and wonderment. Cinderella's mannerisms too (she seems straight out of Suds or Pollyanna...I keep waiting for her to break out into a version of the glad game.)

Poor Mary...she was the Disney Alice that never was.

Olive Thomas "Everybody's Sweetheart"

I think I have what's called "Ollie fever" these days. I've wanted to write about her for a long time, but much like Mary Pickford I can't really pick a topic. I know a lot about Olive, but what exactly to write?

I don't have nearly enough info to write a proper biography for her...there's already a half assed one out in this world. Of her 12 or so films I've now only seen 2. I've covered her fashion influence over at Perpetual Flapper quite a bit...not much new to write about dear Olive Thomas.

Last night I finally seen "The Flapper", which I had not had the privilege of viewing before. Despite being stalked by a kooky it was a fun night. The Silent Movie Theatre bribed moviegoers with half off tickets if they dressed in period attire, so there was a pretty huge crowd of well dressed flappers (and a few boys who resembled Jack Pickford). 'Donation Only' Gin and ice cream sandwiches pretty much made it great (you people, donate to The Silent Movie Theatre NOW!)

Many years ago a documentary was made about Olive called "Olive Thomas: Everybody's Sweetheart" named for her last film. Andi Hicks, Sarah Baker, and super Olive fan Allison Anders (who inspired one of the first posts on FTT) were behind the wonderful documentary. It was thanks to their hardwork that 10 more Olive films were found, and some of the first interest in her renewed.

2 of the 3 ladies were in attendance, with Allison giving a short speech beforehand. She offered a copy of the documentary along with a bichloride bottle as a prize for the person who could answer an Olive question. Simple enough. The question was, "Where did Olive die?" I decided it'd be unfair to answer, knowing all I do, but the audience wasn't getting it. Most said, "Paris!" which is close, but Allison wanted more. I was honestly trying to think of Neuilly-sur-Seine...but it was escaping me. As the audience still couldn't guess and Allison still wanted something more specific I tried, "The American Hospital in Paris". I was right, so I won. I admitted it was probably unfair but dammit...I don't have a copy of The Flapper so nah nah nah nah.

In fairness to Allison though, I'd like to do a little promotion. So for those of you who do not yet have a copy I highly suggest buying "The Olive Thomas Collection" which is basically "The Flapper" and the documentary together. Both are very enjoyable, though I do wish an update could be done on the documentary (they were the first to research so needless to say new things kept coming out, like the odd 1918 marriage date over 1916). So...buy one.

"The Flapper" is an interesting film, flapper in every sense of the word except the fashions (think skanky Edwardian baby vamps over actual flappers.) Olive was delightful, though the plot was a touch thin. I think the thing that shocked me most was the hanging scene...played for comedy Olive's 'Ginger' decides to hang herself when her older lover (in her eyes) spurns her. You literally see Olive tie the rope and get ready to go for it...I can't BELIEVE they would rerun this after her death! Just wow!

As for the mercury bichloride bottle, its an odd little thing. I must confer further with Allison as I am surprised its as small as it is. One theory I've heard is mercury bichloride would be in a bathroom as a cleaner (in powder form, to be mixed with something). But a bottle that small? Just 70 million more questions I guess...

FTT Honor Project: Saving the Motion Picture Home

Ah my beloved honor projects. These are actually going quite well. Mr. Griffith's site is up and in the making, Rudy Fest is going strong, and though I've been trying to wait for an official word on it 'Is Money Everything?' (one of two non Griffith Miriam Cooper features to survive) will be released on DVD this spring. But what about my 'honorary' honor project, that one to save the Motion Picture Home?

Nothing. Well...lots of small wins. But from the Hollywood community, rich executives and actors well...nothing. As The Wrap points out the press is much more interested in the latest drunken wife beating match (what Wallace Beery's prowess at this sport isn't enough?) then report on how when these people are over the hill, there will be nothing for them. This current crop of 'fame whores' think they'll last forever, why piss around with those 90 year olds who were around 'like before television and color and junk'?

Actors aren't always super wealthy, but studios and execs are. What...you really think those affiliated with say 'Avatar' couldn't throw a few million to save the Motion Picture Home? What's most despicable to me personally is to CREATE the fund silent Hollywood (led by Mary Pickford) banded together. To create the hospital and long term care facility 'classic Hollywood' (1940s-1950s) banded together and did radio shows, donating their salaries from that appearance to the fund. In the days of 'help the latest cause that I will skim off the top of and promo whore myself on' (the latest was the tragedy in Haiti) not a one of these people can be bothered to actually promote a cause worthy in their own backyards, and ironically one that will someday surely affect them. What's that Megan Fox? You'll be young, hot, and in demand forever? Silly me...I didn't know our culture these days was so indispensable.

So since the Angelina Jolies of the world are too up their own asses to do anything about this, the grassroots organization "Saving the Lives of Our Own" is stepping in. They've managed to stave off the closure for over a year, and they also held their own fundraiser to keep the home open. Most of the auctioned off items came from children of the classic era. The thing that makes me laugh and cry about this is these idiot celebs will reap what the sow, as its their own futures that will someday bite them in the ass (karma's a bitch). I cite the story of Mae Murray, who was very well paid during the 20s, one of the top stars, was friends with Valentino, and married a ''Prince''. She owned land and oil, and a huge house. She also had a son named (ahead of her time) Koran.

Then the talkies came. Mae's voice was fine per the usual, but her husband was a fraud who drained her of her money and had convinced her to burn bridges in Hollywood. She lost EVERYTHING. Her house, her oil, her health, her son. She began drinking and her son was put in the care of a nurse, and she couldn't get him back. I believe he is still with us though he has long since changed his name. Frederica Sagor Maas mentions in her book (at 110 she could outpace all these mouthy whippersnappers) seeing Mae in a rundown Hollywood apartment in the 40s. Mae ended up in the Motion Picture Home reportedly out of her mind (if Frances Marion is to be believed). Her box of clothing, costumes, and memorabilia were sold off for a little over $200. She died in 1965, at about the age of 75 (her real birth year has yet to be discerned). Mae hadn't been famous since 1927. 38 years of her life were spent poor and in decline, maybe Angelina Jolie should consider such stories.

Saving the Lives of Our Own had another victory yesterday. Dr. David Tillman resigned. He was the idiot who presided over the closure idea, and took a 20% pay raise which earned him about $600,000 a year in 2007, reportedly at a time the Fund was 'loosing $10 million a year'. Mmmhmmm. Tillman gave no reason for his departure.

What can you do to help (in that old silent film spirit we kiddies have)? Join Saving the Lives of Our own, and do what you can. Even easier is signing their petition (come on, it takes 5 seconds of your life!) Click here for more ways you can help.

Donate to The Silent Movie Theatre

Finally The Silent Movie Theatre sent out an official word on their silent screenings. I say treat their words as law and do as they say (after all they have bath tub gin and cupcakes!):

Cinefamily,

There's been a lot of wondering and concern about the state of silent films in the Cinefamily program, so I wanted to send a missive both clarifying our past approach, and informing you about the future -- a future that does include the continued tradition of showing silent films here. The Cinefamily is a non-profit whose goals are to explore *every* corner of cinema, and perhaps even a little beyond those corners, seeking to discover and share all kinds of film. We really do like it all, and want our program to be a big "tent" with great films from every genre, every place, and every decade. So it was not a conflict for us to continue the tradition of silent films here, a landscape rich with masterpieces and curios. The fact that we were welcomed into the Silent Movie Theatre, a wonderful home with such a rich history, was exciting -- but we also knew might lead to confusion.

Though we do many things here, we are keeping the tradition of showing silents at The Silent Movie Theatre alive with its own special time slot. For the past three years (two years since we opened, and one year previous while we were planning everything), we've dedicated one day a week to silents. The theatre had been existing for some time previously as a private rental house for weddings, parties, and private screenings, so this was actually an increase in silent screenings. Since last October, we did take some time off to assess the best course of action, but have no fear: the plan was to return stronger than ever.

We now have a guest programmer the first Wednesday of every month -- The Silent Treatment -- who will be showing rare archival prints, most of which are unavailable on DVD. While we may not show silents each and every Wednesday, we will show at least two or three a month, and we also plan on starting a matinee program in the spring, with more family-friendly classics by the big names in silent comedy -- Chaplin, Keaton, etc. Our investment is real -- we even bought new 18-frames-per-second motors (instead of the usual 24) for our projectors, so that we could show true 35mm restorations like The Flapper this Wednesday.

Keep in mind: we don't show silent films to make money, and in order to show as many as possible, we do need your support. The shows are more, not less, expensive than regular screenings, because we also have a live musician and a short program each time, both of which are above and beyond normal costs. Unlike previous owners, we inherited virtually no in-house library of films; while previous Silent Movie Theatre programmers could keep silents shows affordable by showing only public domain films they owned in-house prints of over and over again, every short and feature we show now costs us both rental and shipping fees. In addition, showing rare archival prints requires higher separate print loan fees (aside from rights clearances), insurance, and other sundry expenses.

If you want to help, in addition to attending the silents shows, you can also make tax-deductible donations to the Cinefamily -- and if you want to leave a little note "earmarking" your support for silent films, that does send a message. You can paypal us at donate@cinefamily.org, or mail a donation (with your name and address, so we can get you your receipt) to: The Cinefamily 611 N. Fairfax Avenue Los Angeles, CA, 90036

Oh, and lest I forget! We're re-opening our silents program with a film I've been dying to show. The Flapper is the best flapper movie this side of It, and undeservedly forgotten actress Olive Thomas was the first Hollywood starlet to earn the appellation. Sexy, fun, and a classic example of the kind of rare screening we hope to show more of (a 35mm print from The Eastman House is a really big deal, guys!), you should all come out to the show. To make it more fun, it's half-off the ticket price if you come in 1920s period costume, and feel free to join us at our "speakeasy" on the back porch (the password is: "swordfish"). So put on the ritz, rope a dope, bring your sugardaddy and come to the Cinefamily petting pantry to catch the latest flick. They're the cat's meow!

Best, and thank you for your time,
Hadrian Belove, Executive Director, The Cinefamily