The inset post goes into more detail about his filmgoing and the history of BEN-HUR, but this is the key quote:

QUOTE (Dec. 11, 1926)

“I saw "Ben-Hur" last September, & found it intensely powerful.

My liking for broad scenic & architectural effects made me appreciate the settings very much, while my lifelong admiration of Rome & her warlike civilisation gave me many a thrill as the legions & their imperial eagles marched across the field of view.

Speaking of the cinema—it is my deepest regret that I never saw "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari", which everyone tells me had more of the truly weird & fantastic than any other film ever made.”

END QUOTE 🛑

I’m sorry to say that, while he tried to see CALIGARI on multiple occasions, it seems that HPL never got to witness it directly.

Would any of you put BEN-HUR and CALIGARI in the same sentence (nearly), in talking of classic silent films?

Filming location then and now at 9400 Culver Blvd in downtown Culver City, California from the Our Gang / The Little Rascals movie Your Own Back Yard, 1925 vs Today. More about this filming location here: https://video.chrisbungostudios.com/quickpreview-ourgangthelittlerascals-yourownbackyard-part2.html

Mary Pickford, Norma Shearer and Marie Dressler from the book. Crossing the Border: Canada’s Forgotten Actresses of the Silent Film Era

(58 Seconds) A full 360 degree panorama of downtown Culver City, California from 1925, and what that same intersection looks like today.

This is a quick preview video of the filming locations then and now used in the Our Gang / The Little Rascals movie Your Own Back Yard. Part 2 of 3.

Watch the video HERE: https://video.chrisbungostudios.com/quickpreview-ourgangthelittlerascals-yourownbackyard-part2.html

That’s right, folks: in case you didn’t know, Lovecraft was a significant cinephile, and amongst his firsthand quotes about silent films, he was a HUGE fan of Charlie Chaplin.

I’ve posted about this before on this sub, but here’s a quote which I don’t think I have shared:

“Mr. Chaplin hath indeed a unique charm of manner; the more marked when unobscured by the coarseness & crudity of the film wherein he is acting. I was much delighted with the film preceding "The Count" — “One A.M." in which Chaplin is the only character; with the exception of a hackney-coachman in the fore part of the play.

Charles, in this film, is labouring beneath "The Power of Wine".

He also makes another escape from his traditional costume, appearing as once before in immaculate evening garb. At least, it is immaculate when the film begins. Charlie, though he might not shine in a comedy of wit & repartee, is indeed an enemy to melancholy! He has his own particular place in the world. I can even forgive him for [REDACTED]”

(That final redaction is a bigoted joke, finishing up on his glowing review)

Hello, I posted something similar in r/UniversalMonsters but I thought here would also be a good place to ask. Does anyone have access to a copy of the silent version of the cutting continuity for this version of the film? I'm researching the production and editing of the film in my free time and finding a copy of this version of the script has proven quite difficult. I would absolutely love to be able to read it.

Even found the original promotional still image that was cut out and used to make it!

This thing is in wonderful condition. Obviously far from perfect and definitely showing its age, but it’s unrestored with minimal small tears, never been folded and only has a few small pin holes. Not bad for 109 years old. So thrilled to add this rare piece of silent film history to my collection! Here’s to hoping the full film is recovered someday.

I’ve recently been exploring D.W. Griffith’s films and I’ve been thinking a lot about The Birth of a Nation (1915).

It’s honestly one of the most complicated films in cinema history. On one hand, Griffith’s technical achievements are undeniable, the scale, editing, camera movement, and way he helped develop the language of narrative cinema are still incredibly influential. It’s hard to watch it and not recognise how much it shaped filmmaking.

But at the same time, the film’s racist content and its portrayal of history cannot be separated from its legacy. Its influence goes beyond cinema and it played a role in spreading harmful ideas, which makes it a difficult but important film to discuss.

I’m curious how others view Griffith today. Do you think it’s possible to appreciate the technical innovations while still fully acknowledging the damage and ideology behind the film? And how do you think modern audiences should approach films like this?

By completely ignoring and refusing to encounter The Birth of a Nation or even other Griffith films like Intolerance(which is something I see quite often), I think we miss an important part of film history. Recognising the harmful aspects of a work does not mean we have to erase its existence or deny its artistic influence. We can acknowledge both the technical achievements and the deeply damaging ideas behind it, and that complexity is what makes studying cinema so interesting. Do you think films like The Birth of a Nation should still be actively studied and watched, with proper historical context, or do you think some films are better left untouched?

So my daughters favorite film is modern times and she loves Charlie Chaplin. We were wondering if anyone had any recommendations for a book with lots of pictures about Charlie Chaplin even maybe a good coffee table book?