Mr. Morrison has done a very fine thing in rescuing what can be saved of these old films from themselves (nitrate stock film destroys itself over time, but at the time there was nothing better for the price.) But his presentation of them is maddeningly sterile.
Not once is there a narration or description of what we are seeing (except for the title). Not once is there context for whose army we're looking at, what they're doing, whether this is thought to be 'combat footage' (though most is, obviously, not), even what year it might be. Were there no historians standing nearby to ask? Even I, an amateur, can see some things (what helmets are worn, type of cannon or tank) that might help a novice viewer get some context.
As it stands, the film is mere a curiosity, a set of pictures books lying open to show random pictures with no captions. Mr. Morrison has obviously done a hugely difficult task, and done it well. But the payoff is missing. The viewer has nothing to latch onto, no way to learn anything about what is being shown to him or her.
And the music? You're better off turning the sound off. The music, often simply a group of string musicians literally sawing away at their instruments, is only distracting. It doesn't do anything (but presumably get some grant money to keep the saw-ers all in spritzers) to help the movie. Couldn't Mr. Morrison have used music, and recorded words of the period, having spent so much time and effort to show us film of the period? What could be better than gramophone recordings, tinny and imprecise, to go with the grainy, discolored, warped- image film? Why is it a nimrod like me can think of that, but not Mr. Morrison?
To better appreciate the work here, take the video, wash out all the color (so its all in the grey it originally was - the nitrate-deterioration-affected other colors are just jarring, to no use), and put on some scott joplin or something instead of the soundtrack.
