Wings (1927)

Written by Hope Loring & Louis D. Lighton
Directed by William A. Wellman

Few people know this about me, but I love Hollywood history, especially the “Golden Age”, generally defined as 1917 to the early 1960’s. There are two areas here that routinely draw my interest: the transition from silent films to “talkies”, and the heyday of the Studio System, the 30’s and 40’s.

Wings rides the cusp of that first topic, straddling both sides of the not-so-clear delineation line between silent and sound films. Initially released in 1927, the film is, truly, silent: there is no proper soundtrack on the film reel itself. As the film played, theater operators simultaneously either played a phonograph record with sound effects already synced, or, like a radio show, would create the sound effects live in the theater, while an orchestra or organist played the score, composed by J. S. Zamecnik.

Concurrently to the release, and initial success, of Wings, Producer Louis B. Mayer contacted 35 other powerful figures in the Hollywood film industry, from five different branches of industry; these 36 men and women would create the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Throughout the next two years, among many other activities, they created 12 “Awards of Merit”, or the Academy Awards. The two biggest awards bestowed during that first ceremony, in 1929, were Unique and Artistic Picture, which was awarded to Sunrise, and Outstanding Picture, which was awarded to Wings. Before the following years’ ceremony, the Academy merged the two awards into the Academy Award for Best Picture, and retroactively decided that Wings was the recipient for that award.

So, did it deserve it?

Obviously, that’s hard to say without watching the other nominees, but I must admit, I was pleasantly shocked by how much I enjoyed the film. I’m a casual fan of silent films themselves, but haven’t seen too many of them (my first, and most recurring, encounter with a silent film was the Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera, which I’ll discuss more about shortly). I’ve never had an issue with title cards or melodrama, and I find them to be an interesting look into the birth of modern cinema (which is part of the reason I wanted to watch all these Best Picture winners in the first place).

The plot of the film is surprisingly complex, given how simple it is: two enemies, in love with the same girl (who only loves one of them), go off to fight in the Great War (as the film opened about 12 years before the start of WW2). While training as pilots in France, they become close friends. Meanwhile, a girl back home, madly in love with one of the men, briefly ends up as a military hospital driver in France, as well. 91 years later, its definitely become formulaic, but given the newness of the medium in 1927, that can’t be faulted against it.

impressive for 1927 standards, and would be recreated in 2017’s The Last Jedi as an homage

As generic as the plot is, I still found myself engaged, however. The biggest reason for that was my absolute astonishment at how technologically advanced the film was. Just two years earlier, Universal’s Phantom of the Opera featured static shots and large amounts of overacting. I was shocked when the camera in Wings actually moved, following its subjects through the action. Not to say that there wasn’t a lot of locked down cameras, there was, but there’s a sophistication about the camera moves that seems ahead of its time. A great example is the opening shot inside the Café de Paris, in which the camera glides over tables, passing between five separate couples before ending on a close up of main character John (Jack) Powell and his champagne glass...and all of it in focus! Compared to what a camera can do today, it’s not so spectacular, but I can imagine that it amazed audiences back in its day.

Wings also set a bar for future aviation/war films, by showing multiple (and I mean...MULTIPLE) sequences of aerial dogfights and warfare. The film could have probably condensed these down a bit (it’s a silent film that clocks in at over two hours, which is incredibly impressive), but they are thrilling, nonetheless. Director William A. Wellman, himself a WW1 pilot, also taught his actors how to fly, so the multitude of close up shots of the actors in the pilots seats are real, which instantly makes the scenes that much more engaging, as well.

Another point I liked was the score. This restored version of the film featured the original that had been written by Zamecnik, and it was absolutely beautiful. Granted, it has been re-orchestrated for a modern audience, but as far as my research has shown, this is the same score that was actually written for the film. A fun note for the score, for me, was the main love theme, which shares a phrase from the song “Happiness”, from the musical You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown.

Charles “Buddy” Rogers, Clara Bow, and Richard Arlen

The performances in the film are pretty good, especially the three lead actors (Charles “Buddy” Rogers, Clara Bow, and Richard Arlen). Bow was the main draw for the film’s audience, but her role is the least substantial of the three (indeed, her whole subplot of being an ambulance driver in France could have been dropped, had the role been filled by a lesser-known actress of the time. Bow had even stated how insignificant her role was to the arc of the film). There’s a subplot about a patriotic immigrant that seems pretty progressive for the time, but doesn’t go anywhere and is dropped by midway through the film.

I don’t really consider myself a fan of war films, but Wings certainly captured my attention, deftly soaring above its genre into something quite excellent. It’s a great film, and one any self-proclaimed film enthusiast should see at least once. It’s a very promising start to a long list of Best Pictures, and the films that follow on that list have a lot to live up to.

FINAL GRADE: B+