|
(Advert from The Times Thursday, Dec. 31, 1891) (Advert from The Times Jan. 16, 1892) ___ The Scotsman (6 March, 1894 - p. 5) “ALONE IN LONDON” AT THE THEATRE ROYAL. MELODRAMA of the most sensational description occupies the boards of the Theatre Royal this week. “Alone in London” is now a familiar play. It has gone the rounds for six or seven years, and has had a very successful run for works of its kind. Mr Robert Buchanan, as the dramatist, and Miss Harriet Jay have produced a very effective piece, brimful of exciting and thrilling scenes. The plot is, however, most improbable, and realism is only secured by great exaggeration. The story is the familiar one of an innocent girl lured from her virtuous home by the traditional villain, and cast off in London to pursue her career as a flower-seller. The seamy side of life in the great Metropolis is painted in dark colours. Human nature, however, is hardly ever so black as this play makes it, and the authors have evidently sacrificed probability to realistic effect. The vices and virtues of certain classes are very strongly depicted, but the picture is much overdrawn. The lights and shades of the play are not at all balanced, and when one has to see vice triumphant, and howls of execration greeting its triumph till the close of the piece, with only one gleam of joy and brightness in a sad life, it cannot be said to be a pleasant piece, even though Mr Buchanan seeks in it to point a moral. Messrs Miller and Elliston’s company gave a very capable representation of the drama last night. The villain of the piece, Richard Redcliff, who has decoyed the innocent heroine to London and left her to struggle in the slums, was admirably personated by Mr Harrington Reynolds. If he erred at all, it was in interpreting too freely the brutal aspect of the character, his almost fiendish cruelty seeming at times to bring the gallery in practical touch with the stage. His partners in crime had capital representatives in Mr Frank Withers and Mr Percy Bell. Miss Ada Hollingsworth gave a good representation of the poor waif, Tom Chickweed, and the part of the little boy Paul was most naturally sustained by Master French. As the sorely-tried wife, Annie Meadows, Miss Nellie Fletcher was thoroughly sympathetic; Miss Rose Pelham rendered the little which was given to her, as Ruth Clifton, in a most pleasing manner; and Mrs Maloney, the good-natured Irishwoman, found an excellent exponent in Miss Lizzie Howe. As a pair of strolling players, Miss Beatrice Goodchild and Mr Henry Eglinton provided most of the amusement which served to brighten the play; and the part of the large-hearted, honest, and manly miller, John Biddlecombe, had, physically and dramatically, a most suitable representative in Mr W. H. Brougham. The mounting of the play was most effective. There was a crowded attendance in the cheaper parts of the house, and in these quarters the play was warmly appreciated. ___ The Guardian (11 July, 1895 - p.9) QUEEN’S THEATRE ALONE IN LONDON. It may be a little galling to Mr. Robert Buchanan to know that while a rough and ready melodrama of this kind can obtain a record of 5,000 performances, most of his comedies and adaptations have practically passed into the limbo of forgetfulness. But, after all, “Alone in London” is good in its way. It is interesting, and has the saving grace that it is not diffuse at any point. The customary prolixity of melodramatic dialogue is absent. Certain heroic flights are indulged in, of course, but it may be said generally that there is no unnecessary “piling on” of the agony. It is a sordid story in the main, but we get a breath of fresh air at times. It is not entirely of the slums, although the greater portion of the incidents take place in or about London. The interest centres in the plotting of Richard Redcliffe and his thieving associates, the woes of Annie Meadows, and the chivalrous devotion of John Biddlecombe. The very violence of the light and shade enhances the effectiveness of the various situations, and many were the sympathetic exclamations and the unrepressed objurgations which came from an excited audience when an additional twist was given to the rack or a more than usually ingenious bit of villany was proposed. Messrs. Miller and Elliston’s company, which has for some considerable time past been charged with the representation of the play, is fully equal to all demands. Miss Madge Douglas-Barron is a sympathetic heroine. Messrs. George Young and Percy Bell as the villain in chief and his humorous confederate realise exactly what is expected of them, and Mr. H. Percival is duly vigorous and emphatic as the honest countryman. The low-life humours of Mr. Lonnen meadows and Miss Grace Geraldine as a “humble professional” and a street hawker were hugely relished. ___ The Scotsman (20 April, 1897 - p.6) “Alone in London,” the drama by Mr Robert Buchanan and Miss Harriet Jay, was the holiday attraction at the Grand Theatre last evening. The play has been touring for eleven years, and still holds the play-going public. Miss Edith Blanche took the part of Nan the Flower Girl. There was a large audience. ___ The Guardian (10 August, 1897 - p.5) QUEEN’S THEATRE ALONE IN LONDON. The vitality of some of the old melodramas is remarkable. Some there are of which the public seem never to tire. It is so with the “Lights o’ London,” which occupied this theatre last week, and we have another example of long life in the play “Alone in London,” which was given to the world a good many years ago by Mr. Robert Buchanan and another. “Alone in London” has been played again and again in Manchester, yet some playgoers are not tired of it, as the reception accorded to it last night plainly showed. Miss Edith Blanche, as Nan, the flower girl, easily won and secured the sympathies of the audience; and the part of her “disreputable husband” was effectively sustained by Mr. Magill Martyn. Indeed, the characters generally—and there are a great many—were in capable hands. In the comic passages of the piece Mr. Lonnen Meadows, “a humble professional,” was highly amusing. ___ The Guardian (29 May, 1900 - p.8) THE THEATRES “ALONE IN LONDON” AT THE THEATRE ROYAL. Mr. Robert Buchanan had already made his mark not only in dramatic but in other fields of literary effort, so that his personal and immediate share in the authorship of this play must originally have come as a surprise to everybody. And yet the piece is not only good of its kind, but it has now for fourteen years been accounted almost a classic in this curious domain of melodrama. That it should have achieved this distinction is at once praise and dispraise. In order to have done so, it cannot have departed far from the beaten track; to have thus followed the lead of smaller men—mere mechanics, nailers-up of situations and sensations—is not a matter on which the author can plume himself. As melodramas go, “Alone in London” is effective enough. It is just about as true to life as the turbulent canvas billows which illustrate the sluice gates in the fourth act are to nature. But its main success lies not only in the directness of its purely melodramatic effects—the betrayed village maiden, her love for her child, her dog-like devotion to her villainous husband, his brutality and final attempt to murder her,—but in some interesting odds and ends of character. The lad Tom Chickweed—a character originally played by Mr. Buchanan’s collaborator, Miss Harriet Jay—is a case in point. He is a good-hearted waif, with many a human trait which goes straight at the heart of a general audience. The philosophic thief Jenkinson is unquestionably own cousin to our friend Elijah Coombe of “The Silver King,” and there is enough unction about the scoundrel to make him distinctly amusing after a fashion. A straightforward countryman and a garrulous Irish woman are among these episodical sketches, and if none of them are “creations,” they are at least entertaining figures. The purely mechanical sensation is wofully disappointing, there is not a thrill in it, elaborately as it is engineered. But some of the scenic effects are very good indeed, one of the best being a picture of the Houses of Parliament during a sitting of the House, as seen from the Surrey side of Westminster Bridge. By an ingenious arrangement of gas lamps, diminishing in size, a fine effect of perspective is obtained. The company engaged in the representation of the play is quite equal to any demands the authors make upon it. Miss Vera Beringer, as the sorely tried heroine, is duly emotional without becoming extravagant in either voice or gesture. Miss Sydney Fairbrother is a sympathetic Tom Chickweed, and Miss Ada Elliston, a débutante, and the daughter of a popular local manager, played a colourless part with considerable promise. Mr. William Clayton as the scoundrelly husband, Mr. Percy Bell as the comic villain, Mr. John Clyde as the good-hearted country miller, and Mr. Lonnen Meadows as a “humble professional,” in other words an itinerant street mountebank, gave creditable support. ___ The Scotsman (23 October, 1900 - p. 5) “Alone in London” was presented at the Grand last evening by a very strong company under the direction of Mr Robert Buchanan and Miss Harriet Jay. The part of Nan the flower girl was ably sustained by Miss Vera Beringer, and she was well supported in the drama. A large audience appeared to extract a considerable amount of pleasure from the rendering of the familiar story. ___ The Scotsman (19 August, 1902 - p.6) THEATRE ROYAL. “Alone in London,” by the late Robert Buchanan and Harriet Jay, is the play at the Theatre Royal this week, and as usual when this drama comes to Edinburgh, the cheaper parts of the theatre were crowded last night. The company responsible for the production—Mr J. F. Elliston’s—is a capable one, and the drama suffers nothing in its representation. The villainy of the swell mobsman and his accomplices, the sufferings of the heroine and her child, the benevolence of the rich banker, and the humour of the “professional” and his wife, were all brought out effectively, and the audience hissed, cheered, and laughed heartily in turn. The swell mobsman was capably represented by Mr Stephen Ewart, and Mr J. W. Wilkinson and Mr T. H. Solly were successful in the characters of his accomplices. As Nan, the heroine, Miss Gertrude Evans won the sympathy of the audience. The other members were capable performers. ___ The Guardian (25 August, 1909 - p.7) “ALONE IN LONDON” AT THE QUEEN’S.—At the Queen’s Theatre this week a company directed by Mr. Charles Gibbon gives “Alone in London” once more. The company includes several members who have experience in good work, and the play has the touch of talent that was in everything written by Robert Buchanan—in this case a collaborator with Miss Harriett Jay. _____ That’s the last review of a theatrical performance of Alone in London I’ve come across. However the story doesn’t end there. In June, 1915 a film version was released, directed by Larry Trimble and starring Florence Turner. The details are as follows: ALONE IN LONDON (1915)
(based on the play by Robert Buchanan and Harriett Jay)
Directed by Larry Trimble
Produced by Turner Film Company
Cast:
Florence Turner Nan Meadows
Henry Edwards John Biddlecombe
Edward Lingard Redcliffe
James Lindsay Chick
Amy Lorraine Mrs. Burnaby
Format: 35 mm. Length: 5 reels / 4525 feet.
BFI synopsis: “A crook tries to make a thief of his boss's son and ties a flower girl to gate of canal lock.” Hal Erickson in the All Movie Guide gives the following information: “American film star Florence Turner is Alone in London in this 4-reel British mystery. Turner goes against the grain of her established screen image by playing a meaty character role as a woman inexorably involved in crime. Henry Edwards co-stars as one of the “good guys,” while Edward Lingard represents the “bad” contingent. Ms. Turner, the onetime “Vitagraph Girl,” was herself the producer of Alone in London; it was the last in a successful series of British productions financed by Ms. Turner in conjunction with England’s pioneer filmmaker Cecil M. Hepworth. The director was Larry Trimble, Turner’s lifelong friend. Alone in London was based on a play by Harriet Jay and Robert Buchanan, which presumably ran longer than the film’s allotted 48 minutes.” The All Movie Guide also has this brief biography of Florence Turner: “At age three Florence Turner began appearing in stage productions, and was already a veteran actress when she joined Vitagraph at age 21; the year was 1906 and the dawn of popular cinema was at hand. Credited only as the Vitagraph Girl, she became one of the screen’s first stars. In 1913, she went to England with Larry Trimble, her frequent director and long-time friend; they performed together in London music halls and formed Turner Films, their own production company. Turner sometimes co-wrote and/or directed her own films. From 1916-20 she lived in the U.S.; from 1920-24 in England; and after 1924 in Hollywood. However, her popularity had greatly decreased as the popularity of films boomed; she went on to play secondary roles and eventually had to beg for work. In the ’30s she was put on the MGM payroll, but it was an act of charity: she was used only as an extra and in bit parts.” |
|
