I just saw the unrestored shortened version of "The Light in the Dark" so keep this in mind when reading my review. This shorter version clocks in at 32 minutes and is, despite being greatly condensed, a very good silent short.
The film begins with a woman moving in at a boarding house. One of her neighbors (Lon Chaney) is clearly infatuated with her and the theme of his unrequited love is a very common theme in Chaney's films.
Suddenly, the film abruptly switches venues--now it's in Britain. A rich guy finds a golden cup half-buried in the ground. It's a fancy cup that glows and he announces to the world that it might just be the famed 'Holy Grail'.
Just after this, the lady becomes sick (heart-sick--a common movie malady) and things don't look good. But when he tells Chaney about the story of the Holy Grail (much of which I have never heard before and think they made up for the movie), he is determined to steal it and use it to cure her. Yes, in this film this legendary cup has the power to heal (thank goodness it didn't have the face-melting power like the Ark of the Covenant in "Raiders of the Lost Ark"!). The cup works its magic though the lovely lady is still sad--apparently she and the owner of the cup have some sort of romantic history together.
When the owner discovers the pair and the cup, he contacts the police. In the next scene, Chaney is being prosecuted for assault and theft, but the owner is touched by Chaney's friendship with the lady and decides the best course is to lie his head off. As a result, Chaney is found not guilty and everyone lives happily ever after...except for Chaney, who is once more left to lament his lost love as she leaves with the old boyfriend.
While the story is a bit antiquated, what impressed me about this one were the restrained acting and the nice cinematography. The film is very artistic looking and I liked seeing the glowy cup--a nice special effect for the time. It's worth seeing, but you might just want to look for the extended version instead--it probably is a better film but this is only conjecture based on my feeling that the original film length is almost always better than a truncated one (though there are definite exceptions).
The film begins with a woman moving in at a boarding house. One of her neighbors (Lon Chaney) is clearly infatuated with her and the theme of his unrequited love is a very common theme in Chaney's films.
Suddenly, the film abruptly switches venues--now it's in Britain. A rich guy finds a golden cup half-buried in the ground. It's a fancy cup that glows and he announces to the world that it might just be the famed 'Holy Grail'.
Just after this, the lady becomes sick (heart-sick--a common movie malady) and things don't look good. But when he tells Chaney about the story of the Holy Grail (much of which I have never heard before and think they made up for the movie), he is determined to steal it and use it to cure her. Yes, in this film this legendary cup has the power to heal (thank goodness it didn't have the face-melting power like the Ark of the Covenant in "Raiders of the Lost Ark"!). The cup works its magic though the lovely lady is still sad--apparently she and the owner of the cup have some sort of romantic history together.
When the owner discovers the pair and the cup, he contacts the police. In the next scene, Chaney is being prosecuted for assault and theft, but the owner is touched by Chaney's friendship with the lady and decides the best course is to lie his head off. As a result, Chaney is found not guilty and everyone lives happily ever after...except for Chaney, who is once more left to lament his lost love as she leaves with the old boyfriend.
While the story is a bit antiquated, what impressed me about this one were the restrained acting and the nice cinematography. The film is very artistic looking and I liked seeing the glowy cup--a nice special effect for the time. It's worth seeing, but you might just want to look for the extended version instead--it probably is a better film but this is only conjecture based on my feeling that the original film length is almost always better than a truncated one (though there are definite exceptions).