"The Wicked Darling" is one of some eleven films directed by Tom Browning that stars Lon Chaney. In this one, Chaney has the supporting role of the villain Stoop Connors. He does well enough, and one can see here the beginnings of one of America's greatest silent film actors. As well, Browning's direction is impressive.
The nighttime photography and low-key lighting add grittiness to the story of crime and reform. Chaney's hard-bitten performance also helps. The pacing is rather quick, too, with smooth editing. Even with the typical bad-girl-turned-good-through-the-love-of-a-man story, there are some uncompromisingly real moments during her reform, as well as the suspenseful ones that keep the film going. In one scene at the restaurant, for example, the "gutter-rose" protagonist returns food to a customer's plate after it falls on the floor.
There is, however, a gaping hole in the story, as I see it. That three criminals, headed by Connors, are seemingly only intent on making the life of the gutter rose miserable is believable enough, I suppose. But, why do Mary and Kent not tell the police that Connors shot Kent? At this time, Kent doesn't know that Mary has the necklace, so it can't be because he's afraid of her arrest, too. I don't understand it, and it's a major fault for a director of films that tend to rely greatly upon their subject matter and characterizations. It seems to be merely an excuse to continue with the plot.
(Note: The newly restored version released by Image Entertainment is excellent, except for some deterioration in the form of mottling, which I found easy to ignore. Additionally, some still photos are used in place of some brief missing footage.)
The nighttime photography and low-key lighting add grittiness to the story of crime and reform. Chaney's hard-bitten performance also helps. The pacing is rather quick, too, with smooth editing. Even with the typical bad-girl-turned-good-through-the-love-of-a-man story, there are some uncompromisingly real moments during her reform, as well as the suspenseful ones that keep the film going. In one scene at the restaurant, for example, the "gutter-rose" protagonist returns food to a customer's plate after it falls on the floor.
There is, however, a gaping hole in the story, as I see it. That three criminals, headed by Connors, are seemingly only intent on making the life of the gutter rose miserable is believable enough, I suppose. But, why do Mary and Kent not tell the police that Connors shot Kent? At this time, Kent doesn't know that Mary has the necklace, so it can't be because he's afraid of her arrest, too. I don't understand it, and it's a major fault for a director of films that tend to rely greatly upon their subject matter and characterizations. It seems to be merely an excuse to continue with the plot.
(Note: The newly restored version released by Image Entertainment is excellent, except for some deterioration in the form of mottling, which I found easy to ignore. Additionally, some still photos are used in place of some brief missing footage.)