Newcomer to the Biograph studios, Mary Pickford plays quite a flirtatious young girl in The Violin Maker of Cremona. This film is one of her first and already Pickford's natural way of acting is very evident in her performance. She plays Giannina who has two admirers who work at her father's shop making violins. One is a cripple Filippo ( David Miles ) and Giannina playfully tosses a flower through his window as he is getting dressed, however he mistakes her flower as a gesture of love. At the violin shop, he watches Giannina flirting with Sandro ( Owen Moore ) the fellow she really loves, now Filippo sadly realizes he may have no chance with the pretty maiden. A contest is being held for the best violin maker, with one of the prizes being Giannina's hand in marriage. I do not want to give a full synopsis, for the rest of the film the viewer can watch the techniques used by D.W Griiffith with his actors to bring this story to it's melodramatic ending. I will comment that Mary Pickford and David Miles are the standout performers to study and this early Biograph silent is interesting to watch.
10 Reviews
Mary Pickford's Major Role Debut
springfieldrental29 January 2021
The "Queen of the Movies," Mary Pickford, made her film debut in a major role in June 1909's "The Violin Maker of Cremona" for Biograph Studio. Pickford, who was screen-tested by D. W. Griffith in April 1909 for another role, intrigued the director so much that the studio hired her for $10 a day when acting. She played in a couple of background parts before getting her major starring role as the daughter of a successful violin maker in this movie.
Pickford, born Gladys Smith in Toronto, toured with her mother and sisters in the early 1900's acting in the theater circuit. Unable to break into major roles, Pickford (who changed her name from Smith in 1907) finally received a supporting role on B'way at the age of 15. Two years later, she got her screen test at Biograph.
At the Ft. Lee, N.J. studio she was assigned both lead and bit parts for the almost two years employed there, acting in 51 films just in 1909 alone. During the making of "The Violin Maker of Cremona" she met her future husband, Owen Moore, a studio actor who is seen as one (the non handicapped admirer) of the two swooners in this D.W. Griffith directed movie.
The film itself was one of Griffith's less inspiring directed efforts, consisting of several scenes with medium long stationary shots. Today's viewers may be confused by the plot if unfamiliar with the story and can understand, before a lack dialogue and explanatory titles, why the need for such titles would emerge in movies by the following year. It appears the actors are using sign language to convey the complex story forward. The film is rewarding enough though to see why Pickford, directly off the B'way stage, with her acting abilities at 17 years old was able to attract the attention of Griffith.
Pickford, born Gladys Smith in Toronto, toured with her mother and sisters in the early 1900's acting in the theater circuit. Unable to break into major roles, Pickford (who changed her name from Smith in 1907) finally received a supporting role on B'way at the age of 15. Two years later, she got her screen test at Biograph.
At the Ft. Lee, N.J. studio she was assigned both lead and bit parts for the almost two years employed there, acting in 51 films just in 1909 alone. During the making of "The Violin Maker of Cremona" she met her future husband, Owen Moore, a studio actor who is seen as one (the non handicapped admirer) of the two swooners in this D.W. Griffith directed movie.
The film itself was one of Griffith's less inspiring directed efforts, consisting of several scenes with medium long stationary shots. Today's viewers may be confused by the plot if unfamiliar with the story and can understand, before a lack dialogue and explanatory titles, why the need for such titles would emerge in movies by the following year. It appears the actors are using sign language to convey the complex story forward. The film is rewarding enough though to see why Pickford, directly off the B'way stage, with her acting abilities at 17 years old was able to attract the attention of Griffith.
Fascinating Look at Early Griffith/Pickford
FlickerArt22 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this as an 8mm piece distributed by Blackhawk and I enjoyed the short very much. Mary Pickford plays a young woman of a father who will marry her off to whomever makes the best violin. The two men compete for her hand and there is a lot of silliness that occurs between the two of them that would amuse a modern audience. Production wise, it's set at Biograph studios and I can't remember anything memorable about the cinematography so I may need a second viewing and update my review in the future.Many people still think all of her films were of her pretending to be a child. She had a much wider range of roles and this early Biograph is a great example of it.
A Flower from Mary Pickford
wes-connors5 November 2007
Crippled violinist David Miles (as Filippo) is very much taken with lovely young Mary Pickford (as Giannina Ferrari); when she tosses him a flower, he lovingly places it in a special vase. Ms. Pickford is rather free with her flowers, however, and also has one for Mr. Miles' dashing friend Owen Moore (as Sandro); for Mr. Moore, Pickford includes an amorous "come hither" look. The residents of Cremona are apparently violin enthusiasts; Miles and Moore enter a contest to see which man can make the best violin in town. The prizes are a gold chain and
Mary Pickford's hand in marriage, allowed by her father Herbert Prior (as Taddeo Ferrari)! Who will the winner be?
Interesting as an early co-starring role for Pickford; with a few exceptions, she is not as impressive in her early film roles as might be expected after viewing her later, sometimes exceptional, performances. Pickford's best moment is her repulsion when she realizes the "lame" Miles will enter the contest to win her hand in marriage, obviously because he is disabled! Miles is the real star of this D.W. Griffith film; given the best role, he gives the most interesting performance. A hundred years later, you can finally call "The Violin Maker of Cremona" lame.
*** The Violin Maker of Cremona (6/7/09) D.W. Griffith ~ David Miles, Mary Pickford, Owen Moore
Interesting as an early co-starring role for Pickford; with a few exceptions, she is not as impressive in her early film roles as might be expected after viewing her later, sometimes exceptional, performances. Pickford's best moment is her repulsion when she realizes the "lame" Miles will enter the contest to win her hand in marriage, obviously because he is disabled! Miles is the real star of this D.W. Griffith film; given the best role, he gives the most interesting performance. A hundred years later, you can finally call "The Violin Maker of Cremona" lame.
*** The Violin Maker of Cremona (6/7/09) D.W. Griffith ~ David Miles, Mary Pickford, Owen Moore
Interesting Story, But Filmed With Little Imagination or Skill
Snow Leopard14 April 2004
This is a flawed attempt to film an otherwise worthwhile story. The narrative of "The Violin Maker of Cremona" is nothing weighty or complex, but it has enough substance to work as a short story, and it could have made a pretty good one-reeler. In this movie, though, things just don't work very well. It misses a lot of the potential in the story, and it does not really stand out in any cinematic way, either.
The story begins with two apprentice violin makers who are in love with the same young woman, and who both hope to win the same violin-making contest. As things develop from this starting point, the basic story-line is clear, but much of the action is inadequately explained and/or unclear. The physical effects of the film's age don't help in this respect, but that does not explain away all of the flaws. Moreover, there was a lot of potential for drama and emotion that is never developed or used. Thus, the small amount of dramatic tension that it generates soon fizzles out.
Just a little bit of imagination could have given this film a lot more impact. Given the director, it is surprising how little skill there is in this feature. Probably the only thing really notable about it is the chance to see a young Mary Pickford in one of her early roles.
The story begins with two apprentice violin makers who are in love with the same young woman, and who both hope to win the same violin-making contest. As things develop from this starting point, the basic story-line is clear, but much of the action is inadequately explained and/or unclear. The physical effects of the film's age don't help in this respect, but that does not explain away all of the flaws. Moreover, there was a lot of potential for drama and emotion that is never developed or used. Thus, the small amount of dramatic tension that it generates soon fizzles out.
Just a little bit of imagination could have given this film a lot more impact. Given the director, it is surprising how little skill there is in this feature. Probably the only thing really notable about it is the chance to see a young Mary Pickford in one of her early roles.
Can't Let Some Crippled Guy Have Anything
Hitchcoc1 March 2017
In this story, two men, one of them crippled, are violin makers. They are part of a yearly contest where the person producing the best violin wins a gold chain. In this, there is a kicker. The winner also gets Mary Pickford. There are some changes of violins in an effort to try to derail the contest. The film makes it hard to figure out what is going on because the infirmity is not that obvious. We don't know if there is theft or deceit. It's interesting to look at, however, and certainly ten minutes well spent.
the two violins of Cremona
kekseksa3 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This is based on a one-act play rather than a story by Coppée that came out in 1876. Films of the play were made (possibly quite independently - Coppée had died in 1908) in both the US and France. This film by Giriffith was earlier (shot in April and coming out in June); the film by Albert Capellani for Pathé/Le Film d'Art came out in November or December and was not shown in the US until March 1911. Both films are the same length (12-13 minutes). So they provide a unique opportuity to compare the style of two of the most important film-makers in their respective traditions.
Neither is by any manner of means the best work of either film-makers and neither print is in very good condition.The srength of the Griffith film lies typically in its technique. It is shot closer so we see the characters' faces more clearly (although this would have been less important when the prints were sharp) but he also gives a sense of movement between the scenes (the impression that characters are leaving one room to enter another) while in the Capellani film the scenes are more statically presented. Griffith also makes better use of his small repertory so that the announcement of the prize, even if it looks hopelessly out of period, is rather more of an occasion.
The strength of the French film is that provides more context. We learn how the hunchback comes to be employed and a scene where he rescues a dog that is being mistreated establishes his geenrosity long before the competition and his adoration of Gainina is also established more effectively. A good deal of time is given to the actual playing of the violin and this represents a difference in theatre-practice where, in France, it had already become common, in the new large cinemas that Pathé was having built all over France, for their to be orchestral facilities that were perhaps lacking in US cinemas. Quite clearly these scenes of violin-playing were not intended to be silent. The period feel is more consistent and there is a more "noir" quality to the Capellani film. It is at Giannina's suggestion, for instance, that Sandro steals his rival's violin. Unfortunately this means that Capellani runs out of tiime rather at the end and the whole final section is rather rushed and Capellani does not provide a very necessary scene of Filippo's melancholy at the end as Griffith does.
I would not exactly say that honours are equal. Griffith's is the better film. But both have qualities that are typical of the two respective traditions (US and European) that were already beginning increasingly to diverge.
Neither is by any manner of means the best work of either film-makers and neither print is in very good condition.The srength of the Griffith film lies typically in its technique. It is shot closer so we see the characters' faces more clearly (although this would have been less important when the prints were sharp) but he also gives a sense of movement between the scenes (the impression that characters are leaving one room to enter another) while in the Capellani film the scenes are more statically presented. Griffith also makes better use of his small repertory so that the announcement of the prize, even if it looks hopelessly out of period, is rather more of an occasion.
The strength of the French film is that provides more context. We learn how the hunchback comes to be employed and a scene where he rescues a dog that is being mistreated establishes his geenrosity long before the competition and his adoration of Gainina is also established more effectively. A good deal of time is given to the actual playing of the violin and this represents a difference in theatre-practice where, in France, it had already become common, in the new large cinemas that Pathé was having built all over France, for their to be orchestral facilities that were perhaps lacking in US cinemas. Quite clearly these scenes of violin-playing were not intended to be silent. The period feel is more consistent and there is a more "noir" quality to the Capellani film. It is at Giannina's suggestion, for instance, that Sandro steals his rival's violin. Unfortunately this means that Capellani runs out of tiime rather at the end and the whole final section is rather rushed and Capellani does not provide a very necessary scene of Filippo's melancholy at the end as Griffith does.
I would not exactly say that honours are equal. Griffith's is the better film. But both have qualities that are typical of the two respective traditions (US and European) that were already beginning increasingly to diverge.
2 by Griffith
Michael_Elliott29 February 2008
Violin Maker of Cremona, The (1909)
** (out of 4)
Griffith short about a violin contest where the winner gets to marry a young girl (Mary Pickford). Here's another failed attempt at comedy from the director. I've seen around six or seven of these comedies and he just doesn't seem comfortable.
What Drink Did (1909)
** 1/2 (out of 4)
Another Griffith drama showing the abuse of alcohol. A man goes out drinking with his buddies while his family waits for him at home. When he finally goes home he's drunk and abusive but this doesn't stop him from going back to drink. This is a good film but my God did Griffith go way, way, way over the top in trying to get his message across. The over-dramatic situation at the end almost wants to make you laugh. Mary Pickford makes an early (and brief) appearance here.
** (out of 4)
Griffith short about a violin contest where the winner gets to marry a young girl (Mary Pickford). Here's another failed attempt at comedy from the director. I've seen around six or seven of these comedies and he just doesn't seem comfortable.
What Drink Did (1909)
** 1/2 (out of 4)
Another Griffith drama showing the abuse of alcohol. A man goes out drinking with his buddies while his family waits for him at home. When he finally goes home he's drunk and abusive but this doesn't stop him from going back to drink. This is a good film but my God did Griffith go way, way, way over the top in trying to get his message across. The over-dramatic situation at the end almost wants to make you laugh. Mary Pickford makes an early (and brief) appearance here.
A Preliminary Sketch
Single-Black-Male2 March 2004
The 34 year old D.W. Griffith reworks the story set by Francee Cooper. He divides the mainstream from the marginalized in this film, reconstructing America in the process. He paints a picture of characters that his audiences would want to have fellowship with, allowing the mainstream to identify with the Griffithiana community. He is not a deep thinker, but a frustrated writer with an ambition that has yet to be realised. He overpaints this film, reading too much into Cooper's work. He does give it some sort of shape that it didn't possess before, but he does that to shape his perception of American history rather than tell an engaging story.
Griffith Attempts a Love Story
Tornado_Sam13 January 2023
Among the many shorts released by Biograph under the direction of D. W. Griffith in the year 1909 was this brief film that is a mix of a historical drama and a love story: historical in the sense that it takes place presumably in the past based off of the clothing and story, and romantic in its plot. It's an unusual film for Griffith because of this, as many of his works even during this time appear to be largely set in a contemporary time period. Despite this, in the scheme of things the film is not especially noteworthy - from my memory there isn't any cross-cutting or closeups, just the usual long shots that make it come off as little more than a filmed stage play to the audience.
What actually occurs in the film is semi-confusing to some, and the plot is not always clear at times. Apparently, the film is about a couple of violin makers who both want the prettiest girl in town, but one of them is badly deformed and decides to sacrifice all hopes of winning her hand in marriage via the violin making competition and give his violin to the other maker. What is most confusing here is that, try as I might, I don't remember any of the characters being disfigured in the slightest, which leads me to believe the acting clearly wasn't enough to convey this crucial aspect to the audience. It then becomes unclear as to why the contest is shifted in the other violin maker's favor, etc., all because this detail is unclear. A short that needed some more work.
What actually occurs in the film is semi-confusing to some, and the plot is not always clear at times. Apparently, the film is about a couple of violin makers who both want the prettiest girl in town, but one of them is badly deformed and decides to sacrifice all hopes of winning her hand in marriage via the violin making competition and give his violin to the other maker. What is most confusing here is that, try as I might, I don't remember any of the characters being disfigured in the slightest, which leads me to believe the acting clearly wasn't enough to convey this crucial aspect to the audience. It then becomes unclear as to why the contest is shifted in the other violin maker's favor, etc., all because this detail is unclear. A short that needed some more work.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
