Judith of Bethulia

The Biograph company has taken the original four reels and to those from the hundred and fifty thousand feet of exposed negative have added two reels. New sub-titles have been given the whole production. These are unusual in their artistry. Over dark atmospheric backgrounds, selected from the negative, sub-titles have been imposed. The effect is striking. Out of regard for the opinions of exhibitors, many of whom had complained that "Judith of Bethulia" as a title lacked those psychological qualities of appeal for which showmen as a class have such a keen sense, the enlarged production is issued under the name of "Her Condoned Sin." As the reissued picture treats of a Biblical period, not of to-day, it is under no handicap such as follows upon the bringing out of the vaults of a story where the characters are arrayed in a garb that was up to date a few years previously. Another fact that will impress itself upon the observer is that after all we have gained little if at all in a photographic way in the past three years. The photography of "Her Condoned Sin" is of the best. The whole subject is tinted and toned in a most effective combination of amber and light sepia. This treatment, together with the new titling, enhances the pictorial quality of a subject that at the time it was first presented to the public was conceded by many in a position to speak authoritatively to be the best all-around product of an American studio. - The Moving Picture World, February 3, 1917

With a good cast, an interesting story, and settings that are generally convincing, "Judith of Bethulia" is a worthwhile and enjoyable dramatization of the semi-historical story of Judith (from the Old Testament Apocrypha). It fits together pretty well, and tells the story with a good amount of action and some depth as well. It is also of historical interest, as an example of what movies were like in the era when full-length pictures were just about to become common.

Blanche Sweet stars as the heroine Judith, a popular and prominent resident of the town of Bethulia, near ancient Jerusalem. When the town is attacked and besieged by the Assyrians, Judith becomes her town's best hope, so she must be courageous and must also work through some dilemmas. Sweet does a very good job of letting us see what her character is thinking and feeling. The rest of the cast includes several names well-known to fans of silent films (some in smaller roles), and they help out as well.

Although this was one of the earliest feature-length films, most of the story-telling techniques work all right, and it shows only a few real signs of age (mostly in the more lavish or large-scale sets and scenes). While it's probably too 'old-fashioned' to appeal to most of today's movie-goers, it's a good movie that is worthwhile both for its content and its historical interest.

D.W. Griffith fuses Thomas Bailey Aldrich's long poem of Judith's story with its basis in the Apocrypha to derive this somewhat austere and powerful film of the widow's noble sacrifice to save her besieged city and its inhabitants from an invading Assyrian army, led by Holofernes. With JUDITH as Griffith's first feature length effort, he turns away from the commercial needs of the Biograph Company, the management of which desires to maintain its policy of making only one and two reelers, and his expenditure of $36000 is double the amount budgeted, reflecting his expanded use of sets and extras and providing the requisite exercise in preparation for his next major work: BIRTH OF A NATION, made as a free agent. Eighteen year old Blanche Sweet's performance is striking as she utilizes all of her wide range of expressivity, uncommon in one so young, to mirror the emotions of a woman who is physically attracted to a man, Henry Walthall as Holofernes, toward whom her only possible final act will be his death by her hand, as depicted in many a well-known painting. The supporting cast serves the sparsely titled production well, with emotional performances from Mae Marsh and Robert Harron as endangered lovers, and among the many bit players who animate the work may be seen Lionel Barrymore, Harry Carey, Antonio Moreno and Lillian and Dorothy Gish as victims of the invaders. This version is the four reeler rather than the one of six reels released later and is Griffith's answer to the full-length epics which were being imported from Europe; its release was delayed a year by Biograph to ensure that the director had left its employ, but this brought scant gain to the company: Biograph was soon defunct, while Griffith's star was rising.

The first feature-length film from DW Griffith, JUDITH OF BETHULIA tells the story of a young widow who saves her city (Bethulia) from the Assyrians by an act of treachery.

It's a warm-up for Griffith's masterpiece, INTOLERANCE, a few years later but still has merit of its own despite hammy acting and lackluster sets.

Blanche Sweet (then 18) stars as Judith and is very pretty but the acting style (it is 1914 after all) is still crude with waving arms and long dramatic poses. Henry B. Walthall is the head of the Assyrian army, Mae Marsh and Robert Harron play the young lovers, Lillian Gish is a young mother, Dorothy Gish is a young cripple, Kate Bruce is the loyal maid, Harry Carey is the traitor.

The extras (in heavy makeup) include Lionel Barrymore, Antonio Moreno, Elmo Lincoln, Mary Gish (mother of the stars), and someone named J. Jiquel Lanoe who is quite excellent as the head eunuch.

Certainly worth a look but this seems very amateurish compared to what was coming. The film is also famous for going well over budget and getting Griffith fired from Biograph Studio.

Judith of Bethulia tells the story of the Assyrian attack on the Israelite city of Bethulia led by Holofernes (Henry Walthall), and devout widow Judith (Blanche Sweet) who is to be the savior of her people.

Judith of Bethulia is the precursor to Griffith epics such as Intolerance and Birth of a Nation. The film itself somehow lacks the harmony that the following films do, but this was Griffith's first attempt at a full-length feature (though it was his second to be released), and for that props must be given. In fact, he composed it without the knowledge Biograph, for the company had decided against producing anything longer than two reels. Biograph refused to release the film until 1914, by which time Griffith had left the studio.

It is evident that the finished product is not what Griffith intended. The subplot between lovers Naomi (Mae Marsh) and Nathan (Robert Harron) is somewhat abandoned for the primary action between Judith and Holofernes, and then is re-acknowledged and tied up very quickly. His impeccable story telling and ability to evoke emotion are evident as always and the film is very engaging, but I cannot help but feel that the film is lacking in some aspect. The sets and costumes are however gorgeous as are the performances by the cast. Had Biograph been initially supportive of Griffith's dream, I believe the film could have been a masterpiece equaling Intolerance. We are instead left with a beautiful early attempt at such an epic.