ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL- 1921 dinosaur stop-motion in Silent Horror Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL- 1921 dinosaur stop-motion

Author	Comment
doctor kiss		#21	[-]
Jul 23 10 3:38 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Don Glut wrote: So, I think MOONBEAM came later, after Dawley and O'Brien parted company, as has always been believed. There are a couple of odd contradictions of this belief in a contemporary source, the Cathrine Curtis Corporation papers at the University of Wyoming American Heritage Center. I haven't seen these for myself, but the Heritage Center's catalog overview of them makes for intriguing reading (in particular the two remarks I've put in bold text): Cathrine Curtis Corporation. Records, 1920-1927. 7 cubic ft (2 boxes), acc. #07656 [...] The Cathrine Curtis Corporation (CCC) was founded in June 1919 by Cathrine Curtis, a pioneer woman filmmaker, as a motion picture production company. In 1920 CCC was approached by Watterson Rothacker, president of Rothacker Film Mfg. Company, about producing a motion picture based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novel "The Lost World" in conjunction with Associated First National Film Corporation and its general manager, John D. Williams. CCC entered into agreement with Rothacker to produce the movie, based upon Rothacker's claim that he had exclusive rights to the book and to Willis O'Brien's dinosaur models. While viewing the movies "The Ghost of Slumber Mountain" and "Along the Moonbeam Trail" in which O'Brien claimed to have done the special effects, Curtis noticed that the rights to the special effects belonged to Herbert Dawley, O'Brien's former employer. CCC sued Rothacker and Williams in 1922 for fraud, claiming that Rothacker had misrepresented his rights to the novel and to O'Brien's models; CCC also refused to continue production for fear of litigation brought on by Dawley. In the course of the suit, it was discovered that the models were stolen from Dawley by O'Brien and that Rothacker did not have the rights to the book. Rothacker and Williams settled with CCC for a release of contract and other expenses involved in planning for the production of the movie. [...] Collection contains materials relating to CCC and its production of "The Lost World". [...] Included are legal agreements; synopses for "The Lost World"; an adaptation of "The Lost World" by Charles A. Logue from Conan Doyle's book; a plan for production, including possible actors; publicity materials for "The Ghost of Slumber Mountain" and "Along the Moonbeam Trail"; legal materials relating to the lawsuits between CCC, John D. Williams, Watterson Rothacker, and Willis O'Brien (1923-24). If O'Brien really made a claim during the early 1920s to have done the effects in ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL, then I can't help wonder whether the film might indeed have predated THE GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN in its production; perhaps even a kind of 'dry run' for that more sophisticated work, which Dawley belatedly (re)cut and released in 1920/21 (to much lesser acclaim and success, it should be noted).
	Remove this ad
Ted Newsom		#22	[-]
Jul 23 10 9:50 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The stealing part is interesting. Wonder if Dawley considered the models works-for-hire, and Obie disagreed? It's about this time (give or take) that Obie submits a patent for the stop-motion procedure & models, isn't it? And IF IF IF... if there'd already been acrimony between Dawley and O'Brian by 1920... and IF "Moonbeam" actually predates "Slumber" and was made in, say, early 1919... and IF O'Brian actually did the animation on the earlier film... Dawley would have a motivation to make sure Obie's name appeared nowhere on the latterly-released "Moonbeam."
Don Glut		#23	[-]
Jul 23 10 10:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	All very interesting food for thought. And I was just about to post a suggestion that maybe O'Brien had a "work for hire" agreement with Dawley, but Ted beat me to it. If Obie did, in fact, work for hire for Dawley, then Dawley -- or at least his company -- could, I believe, claim ownership of the stop-motion process. Like a film production company being the "author" of its score. But then we do have those photos of Dawley making and animating the MOONBEAM models ... and those models really don't look or move like anything we've seen Obie do before or after MOONBEAM (in my opinion, anyway)...and there are also those camera strange set-ups and compositions that we've never seen Obie do. And would Obie really "need" to steal those MOONBEAM models? And if Dawley cobbled MOONBEAM together from unused SLUMBER shots, why are the models totally different? And why does the animation conform to a different storyline than SLUMBER? Lots of questions. Don't know. But this could be the next big CHFB mystery to solve! But, as in a civil court case, I think we need to consider the preponderance of evidence. The only stop-motion dinosaur movie I know where Dawley claims to have done the animation is MOONBEAM, and it's a pretty crude effort by comparison to Obie's work. O'Brien, on the other hand, has a known, quite extensive (and evolving) body of work -- from those early Edison shorts through THE LOST WORLD and KING KING and right up through MIGHTY JOE YOUNG, etc. I suspect that Dawley may be to stop motion kind of what Pete Best was to the Beatles. Except I don't recall Best ever suing the Fab Four and claiming that they stole his music. I guess the original scenario still makes the most sense to me: Obie, working for Dawley, does SLUMBER ... Obie and Dawley have a falling out and Obie moves on ... Dawley then makes the inferior MOONBEAM with his own effects ... Obie's career takes off with getting the LOST WORLD gig, Dawley is resentful and smells money, claims Obie stole his models and techniques. etc. ... Obie does LOST WORLD, the KONGs and the rest, as they say, is history. Last Edited By: Don Glut Jul 23 10 10:28 AM. Edited 2 times.
Ted Newsom		#24	[-]
Jul 23 10 10:32 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	You're not getting my theory: that MOONBEAM came first... done by Dawley. He had, let's say, a working, rudimentary knowledge of cartoon animation, stop motion, and how to combine the two. He shoots the models (somewhat inexpertly), shoots the live action, then crosses paths with O'Brian, who's technically more sophisticated via his previous puppet shorts for Edison. They throw in together. Dawley puts the MOONBEAM stuff aside and they do the far more sophisticated GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN along similar lines-- two kids and Dawley as "leads," dream logic, little interaction with the models, etc. It's a success. They have a row over who "owns" the process and/or the models. Both have understandable claims to them. The LOST WORLD thing comes up. O'Brian understandably says he did the GHOST stuff (who knows if he actually said he also did MOONBEAM. We'll have to see.) Acrimony and lawsuits. Dawley hauls out the original MOONBEAM stuff-- what there is of it-- and slaps it together-- not even bothering to edit out the long animation passages in which the models don't move, ignoring the out-of-focus-in-the-foreground shots... etc. (Alternatively-- Dawley and O'Brian cross paths at the time of MOONBEAM. O'Brian does all or most of the MOONBEAM effects under Dawley's "direction," which is severely limiting. The potential is there, but it's just not good enough. They regroup and essentially "remake" the film as SLUMBER MOUNTAIN with all the same elements, albeit in a more sophisticated way all around. And again, there's acrimony.)
Barbenfouillis		#25	[-]
Jul 23 10 11:39 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Can anyone clarify something? I have an old email from BFI which states that they loaned their "667 feet on 35mm film" of Moonbeam to the Academy in 2008. Also my understanding is that the footage found in the Chatham Theater is generally not the same footage. Does the restored print include the BFI footage ... or doesn't it? Thanks, Steve The president takes his chair and explains to the members his plan of a Trip to the Moon. His schemes are approved by many. ... The man-servants bring traveling suits. President Barbenfouillis selects five colleagues to accompany him ... Nostadamus, Alcofrisbas, Omega, Micromegas and Parafaragamus. Last Edited By: Barbenfouillis Jul 23 10 11:48 AM. Edited 2 times.
doctor kiss		#26	[-]
Jul 23 10 12:38 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Barbenfouillis wrote: Can anyone clarify something? I have an old email from BFI which states that they loaned their "667 feet on 35mm film" of Moonbeam to the Academy in 2008. Also my understanding is that the footage found in the Chatham Theater is generally not the same footage. Does the restored print include the BFI footage ... or doesn't it? I can't believe that the BFI footage is included in the edit, which all the above descriptions seem to acknowledge is missing its opening --- when that whole fairytale establishing sequence seems to be such a major part of the 667/668ft. British print. There's no way Mother Goose or a fairy queen could simply go unmentioned, imho! But it would indeed be nice to hear that specifically confirmed from someone who was at the Academy screening. Bill Warren wrote: Dawley continued to make shorts through the rest of the 1920s, which I presume use stop-motion, but I'm uncertain about that. It doesn't clear up either way which order SLUMBER and MOONBEAM were produced in, but perhaps it's worth considering what Dawley did after those two movies... because for a while he continued to focus on prehistoric themes, trying to cash in on his SLUMBER success. Dawley joined forces with puppeteer and animator Tony Sarg for a lengthy series of shadow cartoons (billed as 'Shadowgraphs') from mid-1921, on which Dawley was credited as 'editor'. These animated precursors to The Flintstones chiefly featured cavemen and/or dinosaurs, and were pretty static in nature, with only one or two backdrops used in each. A few of these can be seen on YouTube, including the very first in the series, THE FIRST CIRCUS (rel. May 1921): Part 1 (no dinosaurs): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ZSyuYqP8k Part 2 (with dinosaurs): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd7fVH2SkKs And also THE ORIGINAL MOVIE (rel. April 1922): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n8rK1hCrJY Other entries in this series with a prehistoric theme included THE TOOTH CARPENTER (rel. May 1921), WHY THEY LOVE CAVE MEN (rel. July 1921, also still extant), THE ORIGINAL GOLFER (rel. Jan. 1922), THE FIRST EARFUL (rel. May 1922), THE FIRST DEGREE (rel. July 1922), THE FIRST BARBER (rel. Aug. 1922), and THE FIRST FLIVVER (rel. Oct. 1922). These are far easier to attribute precise release dates to, since they received regular distribution through Pathé, rather than being released on a States Rights basis, as seems to have been the case with ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL. If the argument is that ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL is static and a pale imitation of what had preceded in THE GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN, then the same might be said of these latter prehistoric efforts on Dawley's part, which again gained in quality only through the participation of another, more skilled animator than Dawley, Tony Sarg. When the Dawley/Sarg cartoon series was announced, THE GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN was still the reference point of past achievement in press reports, with Willis O'Brien's contribution acknowledged directly, as if to show that Dawley was 'at his best' when collaborating: After eventually parting ways with Sarg, Dawley then produced his own Shadowgraphs, based on fairytales: JACK AND THE BEANSTALK (1924), THUMBELINA (1924), JACK THE GIANT KILLER (1925), etc. These pieces of fairytale whimsy tie in far more closely with the bizarre Mother Goose / Queen Mab opening of ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL in the BFI print than anything in Willis O'Brien's output, and again point to Dawley as the likely main creator of that film. Whether before or after THE GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN. Last Edited By: doctor kiss Jul 23 10 12:43 PM. Edited 1 times.
Don Glut		#27	[-]
Jul 23 10 12:59 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	So Dawley teamed up with famous puppeteer Tony Sarg! One learns something all the time on this forum, thanks Dr. K. For decades I've had a 16mm print of another Sarg shadow/dinosaur movie, ADAM RAISES CAIN, but never knew of Dawley's involvement. I believe Sarg also made some very big puppets (dinosaurs, maybe, I don't recall off hand) for parade floats, possibly the Macy parade in NYC.
Ted Newsom		#28	[-]
Jul 23 10 1:10 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Doc, is there a date on that clipping anywhere? Steve-- no, the Academy print does not have any of the Mother Goose stuff, Queen Snore, or flying around through space. It starts on a printed intertitle card then cuts to a long shot of a biplane landing in an open field by a forest. There's a cut to a closer angle as Dawley and the two kids climb out. Don-- apparently Sarg and puppeteer Bil Baird developed the idea of "reverse marionettes"-- manipulated from below instead of above... and that's how all those balloons started, in 1928. Dawley... much as I've always thought of him as some guy who had nothing going for himself and just tried to steal Willis O'Brian's thunder... was actually a very accomplished guy. I await Steve Czerkas' book on Dawley, which ought to be really interesting. He was indeed a designer for the Pierce Arrow automobile company, from the 'teens through the close of the company in the late 1930s. He's credited as being the first to design headlights as part of a car's bumpers, for one thing. The movie end of things seems to have been a hobby for him, which paralleled an interest in live theater. Who knows, maybe he poured his Pierce Arrow money into his movie projects. Allegedly he appeared on Broadway in the 30s and 40s as well as on the radio, but if that's true, it must be under another name. He wrote a neat little book published in 1951 on how to produce amateur theatricals, and certainly does not come off high-handed or aloof. So you've got a guy with an artistic/theatrical side AND mechanical expertise-- an artist-designer... not too far off from what Obie was, a combination of artist and practical technician. Last Edited By: Ted Newsom Jul 23 10 1:39 PM. Edited 2 times.
doctor kiss		#29	[-]
Jul 23 10 1:23 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ted Newsom wrote: Doc, is there a date on that clipping anywhere? Yep, although it's a slightly awkward fit in the chronology, given that the Dawley/Sarg movies first entered general distribution in May 1921: Brownsville Herald (TX), November 6th, 1921, p.5
Barbenfouillis		#30	[-]
Jul 23 10 1:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ted Newsom wrote: Steve-- no, the Academy print does not have any of the Mother Goose stuff, Queen Snore, or flying around through space. It starts on a printed intertitle card then cuts to a long shot of a biplane landing in an open field by a forest. Well then, I'm holding out for that footage to be added before I fly out to the West Coast on my biplane!! Seriously, I find this kind of odd since the BFI person said that they loaned their footage. I sure hope that the Academy didn't miss their opportunity to add it at a future point. Maybe there were some kind of rights issues involved in the viewing that you guys saw...? Anyway, thanks Ted for filling us in. Steve The president takes his chair and explains to the members his plan of a Trip to the Moon. His schemes are approved by many. ... The man-servants bring traveling suits. President Barbenfouillis selects five colleagues to accompany him ... Nostadamus, Alcofrisbas, Omega, Micromegas and Parafaragamus. Last Edited By: Barbenfouillis Jul 23 10 11:21 PM. Edited 2 times.
	Remove this ad
Don Glut		#31	[-]
Jul 23 10 2:05 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	We may have actually been the first viewers to even request seeing MOONBEAM. The lady at the Academy told me we'd have to wait a week to see it -- so it could be transferred to a viewable format. So I suspect there was no editing done, either, incorporating any of the missing footage. Oh, and seeing MOONBEAM is just one of many reasons to visit us out here in "La La Land."
Bill Warren		#32	[-]
Jul 23 10 2:20 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ted Newsom wrote: Steve-- no, the Academy print does not have any of the Mother Goose stuff, Queen Snore, or flying around through space. It starts on a printed intertitle card then cuts to a long shot of a biplane landing in an open field by a forest. There's a cut to a closer angle as Dawley and the two kids climb out. There are some shots of the pterosaur while the plane is still in the air, aren't there? Was the footage the BFI loaned the AFI labeled as being ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL, or as "Early English Fantasy"? If that was the case, perhaps AFI doesn't know that these two batches of footage represent one rather than two movies.
Ted Newsom		#33	[-]
Jul 23 10 2:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Duh! Of course! How could I forget!!! (Well, they looked so dorky, actually, it was easy.) Wow. What a glop of Alzheimer's. Yes, it starts out with a title card, some of the dorky pterodon/biplane miniatures (or paper cut-outs) on a black, painted-cloud sky, then goes to the plane landing. And once the trio gets out, there are still a couple more cutaways to the flying cartoon monster which, presumably, is supposed to be "following" them.
Barbenfouillis		#34	[-]
Jul 23 10 2:48 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bill Warren wrote: Was the footage the BFI loaned the AFI labeled as being ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL, or as "Early English Fantasy"? I had specifically asked BFI about the title "Along the Moonbeam Trail". By that time, both findings were known. I had discovered the BFI connection in the great little internet newsletter called "The Silent Treatment" (March 2008) which originally broke the Moonbeam story. Incidentally, randomly re-reading that TST issue again (about 6 months ago?) led me to, on a whim, contacting not only BFI but the Academy which told me about the public viewing availability which I posted here. Only point being is that if you catch a sniff that a film is supposed to be with some archive or collector, it doesn't hurt to shoot an email and ask if the rumor is true, what their plans are, etc. You always get a polite response. Did the same with another item (unfortunately can't mention the title as yet) - got an answer that the film was restored and scored but needed DVD funding. On another whim, contacted a DVD distributor specializing in that kind of item about the opportunity. With one now in communication with the other, the two may go halfsies last I heard. This is the kind of thing that even an interested hobbyist can do sitting on his butt in front of his p.c. Steve The president takes his chair and explains to the members his plan of a Trip to the Moon. His schemes are approved by many. ... The man-servants bring traveling suits. President Barbenfouillis selects five colleagues to accompany him ... Nostadamus, Alcofrisbas, Omega, Micromegas and Parafaragamus. Last Edited By: Barbenfouillis Jul 23 10 3:13 PM. Edited 4 times.
Ted Newsom		#35	[-]
Jul 23 10 4:25 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ah, yes, that would be that crappy vampire comedy with Lon Chaney, yes?
Sid Terror		#36	[-]
Jul 23 10 5:17 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	How about this scenario? Dawley wants to make a dinosaur movie so he outlines, maybe even comes up with a screenplay for ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL. He needs a way to do the effects so meets up with O'Brien. They start tossing around ideas, MOONBEAM is shelved for now, but they go forward with GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN. It's a hit. Dawley says to himself "What do I need this Willis O'Brien guy for? I watched how he made his models and animated them, so I can just do that for myself now." Goes forward with Moonbeam. O'Brien says "Hey wait a minute...those are my techniques you are using!" Dawley placates him by giving him a technical advisor credit and some dough because that way he gets to say "From the two people who brought you THE GHOST OF SLUMBER MOUNTAIN" to the rubes. The film comes out (The Three years in the making thing is actually kinda true for once), but the film does so-so business. They have their falling out. The film has made it's rounds anyway and is pulled from release. Messy court and patent stuff. Dawley loses and says "eff that guy" and cuts off O'Bie's credit from all existing prints which is why when the prints of this lost film are later found, the credits are missing. Dawley goes on to do films with Tony Sarg. "Hey, this guy has a great idea here, kinda similar to what O'Brien did." They part ways and Dawley continues to make the Shadowgraph movies without Sarg. Do we see a pattern forming here? Last Edited By: Sid Terror Jul 23 10 8:38 PM. Edited 2 times.
Don Glut		#37	[-]
Jul 23 10 5:53 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Also, I find it telling that, while Obie and Sarg enjoyed their own successful careers in puppets and animation without Dawley's help, Dawley's one solo effort with stop motion -- at least it seems to be his only such effort -- and also with dinosaurs, turned out to be such a relatively inferior product.
Bill Warren		#38	[-]
Jul 23 10 8:08 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I doubt that the credits list O'Brien; a standard format for such had not yet been established. I doubt that OBie had anything to do with MOONBEAM TRAIL, and if Dawley really was trying to put distance between himself and O'Brien, I don't think he'd include his name anywhere. Incidentally, some of the films of the amazing Charley Bowers are avaialble on YouTube. He was doing stop motion of a very different kind at the same time as O'Brien.
Sid Terror		#39	[-]
Jul 24 10 12:05 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bill Warren wrote: Incidentally, some of the films of the amazing Charley Bowers are avaialble on YouTube. He was doing stop motion of a very different kind at the same time as O'Brien. I would HIGHLY recommend the films of Charley Bowers to anyone who may not be familiar with them already. In his way he was incredibly more advanced than O'Brien or any of his contemporaries. He'd also often have several animated models on screen at the same time, rather than the one or two the other guys did. Sometimes it is even difficult to see everything the first viewing because there is so much going on.
Don Glut	In the course of the suit, it was discovered that the models were stolen from Dawley by O'Brien	#40	[-]
Jul 26 10 10:17 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The phrase "it was discovered" is not explained. Could that be simply paraphrasing a one-sided statement/claim made by Dawley? And if true, could it refer possibly to O'Brien "stealing back" his models from GHOST? I doesn't specify which models Obie allegedly "stole." And could the statement in that document regarding O'Brien claiming to have done MOONBEAM be just another Dawley claim? To me, the original scenario is still the simplest and makes the most sense. O'Brien is hired by Dawley to do SLUMBER. They have a falling out. Dawley later does MOONBEAM, at the same time trying his own hand at the animation with less successful results. Later yet, O'Brien is offered the much bigger and more prestigious LOST WORLD. Smelling money, Dawley makes his claims against O'Brien and sues. Dawley subsequently teams up with Sarg while O'Brien's career continues via LOST WORLD, KING KONG, etc. Another thing to consider. In those very primitive movies O'Brien did for Edison, his animation is a lot more lively than anything seen in the lethargic animation done for MOONBEAM, and the angles/camera set-ups in MOONBEAM are very un-Obie, in my opinion -- which to me suggests that Obie had nothing to do with MOONBEAM.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

ALONG THE MOONBEAM TRAIL- 1921 dinosaur stop-motion