Editing Tod Browning (section)

=== ''London After Midnight'' (1927) ===

[[File:Tod Browning, director (R), with (L to R) actors Polly Moran, Lon Chaney, on the set of London After Midnight (1927).jpg|thumb|Director Tod Browning and actors Polly Moran and Lon Chaney (dressed as Inspector Burke), on the set of ''London After Midnight'' (1927)]]
Whereas Browning's ''The Road to Mandalay'' (1926) exists in a much deteriorated 16&nbsp;mm abridged version,<ref>Eaker, 2016: "Unfortunately, ''The Road to Mandalay'' is in such dissipated state that it makes for burdensome, strained viewing. The only known print is a 16&nbsp;mm abridged version..." And: his 1927 "mystery melodrama"</ref> ''London After Midnight'' is no longer believed to exist, the last print destroyed in an MGM vault fire in 1965.<ref>Conterio, 2018: "1927's mystery chiller, ''London after Midnight'', is one of the most famous lost movies of all. The last known print was destroyed in the 1965 MGM vault fire."<br />Eaker, 2016: "...the fact that ''London After Midnight'' is lost is solely the fault of MGM."<br />Eisenberg, 2020: "There is some dispute over the year of the fire, with most historians agreeing it is either 1965 or 1967."<br />Solomon, 2006 p. 51: "...the lost film ''London After Midnight'', 1927..."<br />Barson, 2021: "...London After Midnight (1927; now lost)..."<br />Sobchack, 2006 p. 31: Among Browning's "minor group of mystery melodramas..."</ref>

''London After Midnight'' is widely considered by archivists the [[Holy Grail]] and "the most sought after and discussed lost film of the silent era."<ref>Eaker, 2016: The still-photo reconstruction by TCM in 2003 "is probably the only version of the film we, and future generations, will ever see."<br />Eisenberg, 2020: "Of all the "lost" films in the history of cinema that have remained "lost," London After Midnight has passed into legend as the equivalent of the Holy Grail."</ref> A detailed photo reconstruction, based on stills from the film was assembled by [[Turner Classic Movies]]' [[Rick Schmidlin]] in 2002.<ref>Eaker, 2016: "In 2003, Rick Schmidlin of Turner Classic Movies arduously produced a photo reconstruction of London After Midnight..."</ref>

Based on Browning's own tale entitled "The Hypnotist", ''London After Midnight'' is a "drawing room murder mystery'—its macabre and [[Gothic film|Gothic]] atmosphere resembling director [[Robert Wiene]]'s 1920 ''[[The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari]]''.<ref>Sobchack, 2006 p. 35: "''London After Midnight'' came from a story by Browning called ''The Hypnotist.'' And p. 36: Browning ``knew the work of Wiene on Caligari" (Sobchack quoting Edgar G. Ulmer, footnote 67).<br />Eaker, 2016: "Even from a stills-only reproduction, it is clear that Midnight is the original American Goth film. Chaney's vampire, partly inspired by [[Werner Krauss]]' Caligari..." And: "drawing room murder mystery..."</ref>

Sir Roger Balfour is found dead at the estate of his friend Sir James Hamlin. The gunshot wound to Balfour's head appears self-inflicted. The [[Scotland Yard]] inspector and forensic hypnotist in charge, "Professor" Edward C. Burke (Lon Chaney) receives no reports of foul play and the death is deemed a suicide. Five years past, and the estates current occupants are alarmed by a ghoulish, fanged figure wearing a cape and top hat stalking the hallways at night. He is accompanied by a corpse-like female companion. The pair of intruders are the disguised Inspector Burke, masquerading as a vampire (also played by Chaney), and his assistant, "Luna, the Bat Girl" ([[Edna Tichenor]]). When the terrified residents call Scotland Yard, Inspector Burke appears and reopens Balfour's case as a homicide. Burke uses his double role to stage a series of elaborate illusions and applications of hypnotism to discover the identity of the murderer among Balfour's former associates.<ref>Brenez, 2006 p. 96: "...the creation of a double...the vampire [a Scotland Yard inspector] in London After Midnight..."</ref><ref>Eisenberg, 2020: "The likeness of Chaney's "vampire," also popularly known as 'the man in the beaver hat'" And short plot synopsis.</ref><ref>Solomon, 2006 p. 51: "...it is the contrived haunted house in which a detective and his assistant, dressed in elaborate disguises, ensnare a murderer."</ref>

Browning's "preposterous" plot is the platform on which he demonstrates the methods of magic and show culture, reproducing the mystifying spectacles of "spirit theater" that purport to operate through the paranormal. Browning's cinematic illusions are conducted strictly through mechanical stage apparatus: no trick photography is employed.<ref>Solomon, 2006 p. 51: "the paranormal occurrence seen in the film are staged illusions, [not trick photography]...the deceptions, as such, are revealed to the viewers." And p. 56: "...London After Midnight presents apparently supernatural phenomena as the work of stage magic."<br />Eaker, 2016: "The film...is essentially a drawing room murder mystery, with a detective hiring actors to play vampires in order to smoke out the guilty party through sheer fright. As with most of Browning films, the plot is painstakingly preposterous..."</ref> "illusion, hypnotism and disguise" are used to mimic the conceits and pretenses of the occult, but primarily for dramatic effect and only to reveal them as tricks.<ref>Sobchack, 2006 p. 31: ... the occult and the supernatural are used at one level for their dramatic value but are invariably revealed as tricks.``<br />Eisenberg, 2020: "The movie poster and lobby cards played up the film's crime story and assumed supernatural element."</ref>

{{quote box|width=30em|bgcolor=cornsilk | fontsize=100%|salign=center | quote= Mystery stories are tricky, for if they are too gruesome or horrible, if they exceed the average imagination by too much, the audience will laugh. ''London After Midnight'' is an example of how to get people to accept ghosts and other supernatural spirits by letting them turn out to be the machinations of a detective. Thereby the audience is not asked to believe the horrible impossible, but the horrible possible, and plausibility increased, rather than lessened, the thrill and chills. — Tod Browning commenting on his cinematic methods in an interview with Joan Dickey for ''[[Motion Picture Magazine]]'', March 1928<ref>Sobchack, 2006 p. 33</ref><ref>Solomon, 2006 p. 59: Variation on quote, small source cited.</ref>}}

After the murderer is apprehended, Browning's Inspector Burke/The Man in the Beaver Hat reveals the devices and techniques he has used to extract the confession, while systematically disabusing the cast characters—and the movie audience—of any supernatural influence on the foregoing events.<ref>Solomon, 2006 p. 58: "...London After Midnight presents apparently supernatural phenomena as the work of stage magic." And: see quote from Philip J. Riley, footnote #36. And pp. 58–59: "...the paranormal occurrences seen in the film are staged by police inspector Burke (Chaney) to catch a killer."<br />Sobchack, 2006 p. 33: "...critics found the 'plausible' ending of ''London After Midnight'' disappointing in [its] final refusal to accept the supernatural premises the film had set up."</ref> Film historians Stefanie Diekmann and Ekkehard Knörer observe succinctly that "All in all, Browning's scenarios [including London After Midnight] appear as a long series of tricks, performed and explained."<ref>Diekmann, Knorer, 2006 p. 74</ref>

Lon Chaney's make-up to create the menacing "Man with the [[Beaver hat|Beaver Hat]]" is legendary. Biographer Alfred Eaker writes: "Chaney's vampire...is a make-up artist's delight, and an actor's hell. Fishing wire looped around his blackened eye sockets, a set of painfully inserted, shark-like teeth producing a hideous grin, a ludicrous wig under a top hat, and white pancake makeup achieved Chaney's kinky look. To add to the effect Chaney developed a misshapen, incongruous walk for the character."<ref name=":4" />

London After Midnight received a mixed critical response, but delivered handsomely at the box office "grossing over $1,000,000 in 1927 dollars against a budget of $151,666.14."<ref>Eisenberg, 2020: "Despite the subpar reviews, the film was a hit upon its release, grossing over $1,000,000 in 1927 dollars against a budget of $151,666.14." And: "After all, there is nothing to indicate the film, as directed by Tod Browning, was any sort of masterpiece. The reviews on London After Midnight's release were slight at best."<br />Eaker, 2016: "...London After Midnight received mixed reviews upon its release in 1927, but the majority of the reviews were positive." And: "Of all the Browning/Chaney films, Midnight reaped the biggest box office."</ref>