zpzjones Long thought lost or incomplete the Sea Hawk survives much the way i was seen in 1924. A long costume film about pirates it was directed by the dependable Frank Lloyd and stars Milton Sills. My only complaint with the DVD is that the film has been bathed in re-tint & re-tone. The color at times can be so rich one can't see details in the film. I'd much rather have seen the movie in pure black & white. At times this movie can remind one of Ben-Hur released a year later, especially in the at-sea sequences. As far as the filmmaking, everything is top notch but it is still 1924. That camera will not move but the pictorial capture is beautiful. Lloyd is dependable and like many Hollywood directors he won't give anything more than dependability. Kind of like Harry Beaumont directing Beau Brummel that same year. Lloyd, at least at this time, won't think of panning the camera or a deep soft focus as would King Vidor or Alan Crosland. But what he gives us is exquisite & exciting. I was glad to finally see this film after so many years. dir. Frank Lloyd, First National.

wes-connors In the brave, bold swashbuckling days when Queen Elizabeth reigned, and waves crashed mightily onto England's Cornish coast, seafaring knight Milton Sills (as Oliver "Noll" Tressilian) courts neighboring pretty Enid Bennett (as Rosamund Godolphin). Ms. Bennett's brother Wallace MacDonald (as Peter Godolphin) doesn't want her to wed Mr. Sills, calling him a "blood-thirsty buccaneer!" Their guardian, Marc McDermott (as John Killigrew), agrees, and swords are raised. Sills is merciful, but likewise handsome young half-brother Lloyd Hughes (as Lionel "Lal" Tressilian) kills Mr. MacDonald in a duel.Covering for his beloved brother, Sills allows himself to be blamed for Mr. Hughes act. Hughes is anything but grateful, making a deal with dastardly Wallace Beery (as Jasper Leigh) that lands Sills on a slave ship. While using his muscular frame on a ship's galley slave row, Stills gets cozy with partner Albert Prisco (as Yusuf-Ben-Moktar). The brawny men successfully break the chains that bind them, but Mr. Prisco dies in sniper fire. Making his escape, Stills rejects Christianity and converts to the Moslem faith of his deceased friend. Sills changes his name to "Sakr-el-Bahr" ("The Sea Hawk"), and enacts his revenge..."The Sea Hawk" had audiences coming back for multiple viewings, and was a big hit for First National; it also moved director Frank Lloyd further into the small circle of epic filmmakers. The film boasts big - and big-looking, thanks to Lloyd's incredible use of the picture frame - production values; and, it is beautifully paced. Watch how well Lloyd fills the screen during the "interrupted wedding" between Hughes and Bennett. Much of the seafaring footage was plundered to insert in later Warner Bros. films - and, it's likely not all of the stolen scenes were returned to the original; witness, for example, Sills' escape from slavery.Critically acclaimed, as well as popular, "The Sea Hawk" was cited as the year's "Best Picture" by "Motion Picture" magazine. "Photoplay" declared "The Dramatic Life of Abraham Lincoln" the winner, while "Film Daily" had "The Thief of Bagdad" edging out "The Sea Hawk" by one vote. Moreover, the later two immediately began placing high on "all-time" greatest film lists. The heroic Sills may be uncommonly staid; but, in hindsight, this is preferable to the usual overplaying. Hughes performed exceptionally; he rose to #6 in a "Motion Picture" star poll, with Sills behind at #13. Bennett has relatively little to do, but Mr. Berry certainly makes a good impression; soon, he would become the biggest star from the cast, which has a dozen notable actors.******** The Sea Hawk (6/2/24) Frank Lloyd ~ Milton Sills, Lloyd Hughes, Wallace Beery, Enid Bennett

Michael_Elliott Sea Hawk, The (1924) *** (out of 4) Oliver Tressilian (Milton Sills) goes from a rich man to slave and then works his way back up in this faithful adaptation of Rafael Sabatini's famous novel. Most people know the 1940 Errol Flynn version, which is considered a major classic but that version left me rather flat when i watched it a couple years ago. This silent version isn't a classic but to me it's somewhat more entertaining. The funny thing is that I praised the Flynn version for various battle scenes but it turns out that many of them were lifted from this film because Warner felt they couldn't top the scenes here. The battle scenes here are certainly the highlight and the slave mutiny is full of excitement. Sills, a major star in the silent era who is now forgotten, delivers a very strong performance but the screenplay doesn't offer him too much outside the lover/fighter part. Wallace Beery is also good in his role as another Captain but Enid Bennett is rather lame as the love interest. Towards the end of the film there's some nice tinted scenes but the real surprise was the hand colored flames, which appear in three scenes.

flavia18 As swashbuckling a pirate movie as you can imagine, spanning 3 continents, as many cultures and 2 religions, it is also a charming historical piece. I won't be discussing the entire plot of the movie, just touching on a few things.Though we often train ourselves to think that our forbears were stuffy and conservative while we are open-minded and liberal, this film, as so many silent films do, shows us differently. There are open statements about the falseness of Christianity *as practiced by the Christians as depicted in this movie*, and Islam is shown as a valid and equal alternative - you certainly wouldn't see any of that today! And it is the portrayal of Islam in the movie that prompted me to write, if only as a segment on a larger theme: historical accuracy. I'm not sure which was more interesting, the things they got right or those they got wrong.I was amazed to see how very realistic the costumes looked - one of the men even looked as though taken out of a portrait of the Earl of Leicester (Queen Elizabeth's "boyfriend") in old age, right down to the dark streak in the middle of his rather oval beard. I'm not used to silent movies getting it right, costume-wise. But my "faith" was restored at the first sight of the heroine. She was laughably dressed in a hodge-podge of Tudor, Elizabethan and 20's shaped clothes. It's only her beauty that keeps you (okay, maybe just me) from laughing outright. Though her outfits do improve somewhat, they never reach anywhere near the accuracy of the men's, nor do any of the women's. Oh well; they're costumed enough so you get the general feel of what they are supposed to portray; I suppose I shouldn't try to demand more! I am not nearly as much of an expert on period Arabian clothes, but I do believe they got the armor (the helmets, for sure) correct. They certainly looked like what most people expect - sometimes a director has to go for that. But when it came to Islam, and the customs of the surrounding culture, they were either amazingly accurate - like the marriage by declaration, and a married woman having to be veiled - or hysterically wrong. For instance, a young villain is said to be "harem-born & woman raised". It was silly to mention the first part - all babies are born where their mothers are - but the latter part would never have happened: boys were taken from their mothers by around age 7, especially boys of a ruling family; they would need to be trained in the arts of war and leadership. Then there was the amazingly convenient bit about how "Muslim law demands the captives be sold in the market place." Oh sure, tell us anything, what do we know? And the name "Fenzileh"?? Who comes up with these things? Same guy who came up with "Allahkibollah!" as an exclamation, I guess! :-) But I must stress that these errors are minor, and do not in any way detract from the movie as a whole. If anything, they add a bit of comic relief - if not as superb as that delivered by Wallace Beery, who amply demonstrates here how he came to be a lasting fixture in Hollywood. He is a stand out among the more usual posturing/gesturing done by most of the other players - none of whom can be truly faulted. I am sure that had not Milton Sills died so tragically young(ish), he would have been a major star for years to come.