User Reviews

Okay, it's true that people watching this well-intentioned movie today will very likely be offended by some of the over-the-top imagery of happy slaves singing and dancing and enjoying their bondage during the first portion of the film. This "happy slave" myth is advanced in the film--most likely to assuage the guilt of White America concerning the evil of slavery. However, once this section of the film is over, the rest of the film is amazingly well done and the treatment of slaves in the film is exceptional for its time. So, before you dismiss this film for some relatively minor racist images, understand that the 1920s saw an amazing re-birth of the KKK and the movie's message of love and tolerance is a strong counterpoint to this racist organization.

While the original story by Harriet Beecher Stowe is extremely melodramatic and, at times, silly, this film is actually better than this source material. Plus, as the movie was made after the Civil War while the book was made in the 1850s (before the war), they were able to give it a more satisfying conclusion--leaving the audience with an uplifting segment where the Union Army frees the slaves of Simon Legree's hellish plantation.

The movie gets very high marks for some of the camera-work--especially the rousing scene where Liza crosses the ice flow with her young son. While this sort of scene had been done before on film, its realism still makes it a high mark in the history of silent film. Acting is generally good--particularly by Mr. Lowe as Uncle Tom, though there were quite a few silly and overacted scenes here and there. And, while this was one of the most expensive silent films ever made, the film is quite lovely and it looks like they got their money's worth.

A little math exercise before I delve into a review of the picture. As I write this, it's been ninety two years since the movie's release, which itself was a mere sixty two years since the end of the Civil War. You could add another thirteen years to each comparison to account for the actual publication of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel in 1852 about the evils of slavery. At times it seems like we've come a long way and at other times, haven't come very far at all.

Having never read the Stowe novel, I may be at some disadvantage regarding comparisons to the film, although a good handful of reviewers offer significant insight on those points. What kept me off balance while watching was the obvious use of white actors to portray two of the principal characters, Eliza Shelby (Margarita Fischer) and George Harris (Arthur Edmund Carewe). I took that as a reflection of an era which might have considered black actors as not viable to portray historical figures or characters. That in itself I would consider racist, owing to a time that still hadn't come to grips in accepting equality between the races. The description of George as a 'yellow boy' and Eliza as a 'light girl', among other clues offered in the story that they were of mixed parentage was enough to move the story forward, but it sure was disorienting. Just as disorienting as the character of the young girl Topsy, actress Mona Ray in blackface. Her scenes were probably the most embarrassing in the picture, even if she was a friend to Little Eva (Virginia Grey).

From today's standpoint, virtually all the characters in the story are portrayed as caricatures and/or stereotypes, with the messaging in the movie to be entirely off base. As in the argument that the Shelby's represented a 'gentle rule' that was typical of the South. The film obviously wasn't meant to educate or elucidate, in fact it might have done harm to anyone expecting an objective view of history. More accurate was the treatment of racist characters like Lawyer Marks (Lucien Littlefield) and Simon Legree (George Siegmann), thoroughly despicable through and through.

However there are high spots in the movie relative to the cinematography and action sequences. Eliza's escape via the ice floes was stunningly filmed, and the sequences suggestive of angelic spirits was very nicely done. James B. Lowe was an effective choice for the role of Uncle Tom, portraying the character with grace and dignity. What the movie did more than anything else was to motivate me to get my hands on a copy of the novel to get a first person account of what Ms. Stowe was trying to say to her Nineteenth Century audience, unfiltered by the studio and director attempts to put out a commercially viable picture.

This is a beautifully photographed film and a lavish production. Recently, I've mostly viewed pre-1920s films, and it's pleasantly revealing to then return to the late 1920s and witness how gorgeous silent films became. Camera movements are fluid and plenty, as are the glossy close-ups, and sometimes the camera moves during close-ups. Even the backgrounds in close-ups are glossed over or manipulated in a way to affect. This production in particular features top-notch production values, including expensive sets and staging. The negative cost alone was reportedly nearly $1.8 million; moreover, historian David Pierce says only "Ben-Hur" (1925) and "Old Ironsides" (1926) had cost more. It shows from start to finish: opening on an ornate antebellum Southern plantation, complete with period costumes, the in-studio created snowstorm and ice flow getaway, the use of a real riverboat and in Legree's rundown home.

As it turned out, the film was a box-office flop, despite the immense and decades-lasting popularity of Stowe's novel and its stage adaptations. Updating the story to America's Civil War and bringing the Union army into the South was a mistake in all regards, but it's doubtful it would've done well in the South anyhow. Reportedly, the stage plays tended to be more faithful to the anti-slavery theme and sympathetic racial views of the novel in Northern US states, while they transformed the story into minstrel shows in Southern ones. With the Jazz Age, the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, segregation and widespread racism, screen versions of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" went out of favor. According to Pierce, this film fell over a half million short of breakeven. Nevertheless, it doesn't seem surprising to me that Carl Laemmle would approve of this production. After all, it had proved a popular source for decades.

Additionally, the last time a director from America's heartland (this one's, Harry Pollard, came from Kansas) made an epic concerning slavery and the Civil War--D.W. Griffith's "The Birth of a Nation" (1915)--it was one of the biggest hits ever. Of course, those are about the only similarities between the two films, as an abolitionist wrote "Uncle Tom's Cabin", and "The Birth of a Nation" was based on a novel by a notorious white supremacist who wrote his book as a racist reaction to "Uncle Tom's Cabin". One other connection, however, is the casting of George Siegmann. He portrayed one of the more appalling racist characters in "The Birth of a Nation", as Silas Lynch, the mulatto made lieutenant governor who leads a black mob to seize control from white Southerners, deny their rights and rape their women. In "Uncle Tom's Cabin", he's the villain again, but as the slave trader and owner Simon Legree. Siegmann also gives the best performance here.

The narrative is also interesting and engaging, but flawed. This adaptation reworks Stowe's novel to focus less on Uncle Tom and more on Eliza, who, surely not coincidentally, is played by the director's wife. To me at least, those playing Eliza and her family are too clearly Caucasians, making the nature of their continued enslavement despite attempts of escape rather unbelievable. In the novel, Eliza and her family escape to Canada shortly after the chase on ice, which was followed by a shootout not included in this adaptation, so there wasn't this problem. In reality, it could be relatively easy for mulattoes this light of skin color to become free or pass as appearing Caucasian. Instead, here, we get rather absurd images of whites auctioned and enslaved among blacks in the South. (There were slaves who appeared white, by the way; I'm merely suggesting that the story is unconvincing in this respect and rather offensive for featuring Caucasian actors in the parts.) Caucasians in these parts weren't unusual, however, and, for romantic roles especially, it would've probably been controversial then to have them appear darker skinned. The 1914 film version, which I've recently viewed, also featured Caucasians as mulattoes, although it was more faithful to the novel--thankfully in this respect. (Also, a girl plays, for no apparent reason, Eliza's child, who in the story is a boy.)

An African American plays Uncle Tom, which was also the case in the 1914 film. James Lowe was too young for the part, though, and spends the proceedings not seeming to know whether to appear older or more vigorous and his own age. Topsy is played by a Caucasian in blackface and as somewhat of a pickaninny stereotype--this role seems to tend to be one of the more offensive. The two deleted scenes included on the Kino DVD feature Topsy and are more racist than anything in the rest of the picture.

As aforementioned, however, I did find the narrative engaging, as well as somewhat emotionally involving, and the film retains enough of Stowe's anti-slavery standpoint to be politically pleasing. More important, I think, it's visually engrossing. Sure, there are pictorially more amazing films from the late '20s, but this is still one of the better ones. The chase across breaking, flowing ice is reminiscent of the climax in "Way Down East" (1920). It also reminds me of the climax in "Our Hospitality" (1923), especially the waterfall suspense. The sequence in "Uncle Tom's Cabin" isn't as good as the ones in those two films, but it's impressive, nonetheless. Some shots of the rest of the blizzard are even, perhaps, more beautifully composed. Some compositions that especially struck me were those through windows and archways of characters looking at other characters. For the beauty of the image alone, this film is worth seeing.

(Note: The print does have constant speckling and some scratches due to age, but is, nevertheless, a very good restoration and transfer.)

I hate historical films, but "Uncle Tom's Cabin" wasn't bad. I didn't find it to be boring like other films. This story actually MIGHT have happened somewhere back in the old days, thus adding to a high level of verisimilitude. Slave escapes were very common back in the old days, as far as I know. The scene where Harry and Eliza escape from the plantation during the Winter really made me feel for the "Struggle", man. Now it is a silent film. For the record, I'm not the biggest fan. But it was 1927. What else could they do? They pulled it off wonderfully. The lighting was a nice touch too. The light really created a sort of aura around the actors while the background remained in a stellar darkness. I wouldn't recommend this movie to anybody really. As stated before, it isn't bad. It's just not my cup of tea.

If there is anyone who doesn't know where the sobriquet "Uncle Tom", to describe a complaisant Negro, came from, this is the place. The book that some say started the U. S. Civil War gets fairly good silent era treatment. Filmed just as the "dawn of sound" was beginning, there are sound effects and a brief semi-synchronised segment. The emphasis in the film is more on "Eliza", a very light complexioned slave (probably an octoroon), than on "Uncle Tom", who is almost a background lay figure. There is justification for this, for "Eliza", though virtually helpless as a female slave, is much more the rebel than "Uncle Tom". In the novel, Harriet Beecher Stowe gave him much more "presence".

Some characters are portrayed realistically, but the more villainous they are, the more they are limned as caricatures. For example, take "Simon Legree" and especially "lawyer Marks". The white actors seem inclined to employ the more irritating silent era acting mannerisms, much more than the black actors. But the two slaves of "Simon Legree" who specialise in flogging, behave more as clowns than actors. They are the exception, though. Take note of very young Virginia Grey as doomed "Little Eva", and the scene of "Eliza" crossing the ice. These are high points, and the river scene is very impressively filmed. Shades of Lillian Gish on the ice floes! I am not going to take up more space about the plot elements for such a well known story. My suggestion is seek out the novel and read it.

So how are we to regard this film and the source novel. Ms. Stowe certainly intended it as an anti-slavery tract, and it was very effective following publication circa 1856. This film tones the anti-slavery sentiment down quite a bit, but only someone obsessed with "political correctness" could call it racist in a malicious sense.

If you are not familiar with Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel then my review will have some spoilers. This film got way more right than wrong. At this remove (in time) it is difficult to consider the film without including the racist details, in addition to those in the original novel. What makes this difficult is that the intention in both cases was not to be racist.

Unlike the novel, this does suggest a mostly idyllic life for enslaved people and that most slave owners were good. What I found great about the novel is that she presented white attitudes in a full spectrum. Miss Ophelia, a Northerner, is an abolitionist, but racist. St. Clare is a truly good man but a failure as he is aware that slavery is wrong but does not fight it as it provides him a comfortable lifestyle. I wish the movie included his personal man servant, I think his name is Adolphe, who is fascinating. He is effete, with exquisite taste. St. Clare says that he is spoiled and lets him share his clothes and do as he likes. In some ways the most horrifying moment in the book is when St. Clare prematurely dies and his vicious wife, Marie, immediately sells Adolphe and Tom further south. He understands exactly what is in store for him, as do we.

One of the reviews here, and excellent one by Kekseka compares this film to the 1914 one with Sam Lucas. Lucas originated the role of Tom in theatres when Harriett Beecher Stowe was still alive. He would have been very young then, as Tom should be. He is always depicted as elderly. He is supposed to be young, strong, educated (he reads the Bible to enslaved people) and highly principled. I do think both of these films caught the fact that is not the stereotypical (false) impression of an 'Uncle Tom' but is a Christ figure who is willing to give up his life for principles but not to follow orders if they hurt others I think it was awesome that the 1914 film starred the original Tom from the stage, but he was 68 by then.

The film changes a number of things, mostly that take away from the book's impact. It removed young George Shelby, who was placed to be a kind of white savior, but isn't. He doesn't get to Uncle Tom in time; the book does not shy away from white failure. The devastating weakness of the elder Shelby and St. Clare, the sadism of Marie St. Clare and Simon Legree. The book opens with what I interpret as a pedophile. The slave trader is going to take Eliza, a very beautiful young woman who could easily pass for white, but instantly forgets about her when he sees the enchanting little Henry dancing. Here, Stowe does what in real life her minister brother, Henry Ward Beecher did in his church: shock white audiences by presenting enslaved people who looked like them, with the suggestion that even children had no rights when purchased.

In that regard, it would be so difficult to cast this film without appearing racist. They were more successful in 1914, but the 1915 Birth of a Nation began to change all that. In my opinion the casting of Marguerita Fischer as Eliza was inspired. The part of Topsy is always going to be problematic as the character has to visually repel Ophelia but cause her to face her own racism later on.

A remake of Uncle Tom's Cabin that is worthy of the novel would be something to see. If done right, as the novel was, it would force Americans to face head on the racism that stills pollutes the entire country. It was no accident when Lincoln met Harriet Beecher Stowe that he said, "so this is the little woman who started the Civil War."

Uncle Tom's Cabin (1927)

*** (out of 4)

Universal dropped $2 million on this adaptation of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, which had been one of the best selling books other than the Bible. The film tells the story of slaves Eliza (Margarita Fischer) and George (Arthur Edmund Carewe) who, after being married, get sold off and spend the rest of the film trying to locate their kid. Also sold off and taken away from his family is Uncle Tom (James B. Lowe) whose prayers don't sit too well with his new master. One has to consider when this film was made and what people then actually thought about black people. This movie has its heart in the right place but I'm sure many would watch this film and find it nearly as racist as something like THE BIRTH OF A NATION. With this film, the blacks are shown to be human but we get the same stupid stereotypes that had hampered countless films before this one. We get blacks standing around with their eyes bugged out with large smiles on their face. We get the "so happy to be a slave" routine, which includes fun dancing and singing. It's always rather strange to see the slaves being shown as happy as their rich owners. The roles of Eliza and George were light-skinned characters in the book and they're played by white people here. That's somewhat to be expected as most black characters were played by whites in blackface but thankfully the director didn't do that here with Uncle Tom and many of the supporting characters. This film was groundbreaking in the use of black actors and on a historic level, this keeps the movie entertaining throughout. Lowe also gives the best performance in the film and delivers a character who will certainly touch the viewer in his strength. The actor does the role justice, which is all you can ask for. Virginia Grey made her film debut here and is quite charming. The rest of the cast members act as if they're doing a stage play but they're fairly good. The film does have a few interesting technical achievements with two coming during a death scene where we get a beautiful camera shot and then a nice special effect of a spirit going to Heaven. The ending is also quite powerful as Uncle Tom's master goes crazy and begins abusing various people.