The Winchester Mystery House was bought by Sarah Winchester, as a normal house, around 1884. She was the widow of William Wirt Winchester, who had been the second president of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company and only son of the company’s owner. When he died, at the age of 44 in 1881, she was grief stricken. Having already lost her only child to marasmus in the 1860s. Believing her family to be cursed she consulted a medium who, it is said, told her that the spirits of the people who had been killed by the winchester rifle were many and they wanted vengeance. The medium told her she had to move west, she originally lived in Connecticutt, buy a house and begin continuous construction on it so that she and the spirits could live in it. She was never to stop building on the house and if she did, she would die. She followed what she had been told, buying the house and beginning work on it immediately. She had an income, from her husband’s death and owning half of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company, that gave her the rough equivalent of $22,000 (£13,262) a day. The house was originally an 8 room farmhouse that stood on 162 acres in what is now San Jose, California. Construction work began on the house and continued for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the next 38 years. When Sarah Winchester died in 1922 at the age of 83 work on the house immediately ceased. The house itself is set out in such an odd way that certain doors open onto walls and has staircases that lead nowhere. It is claimed this was ordered by Mrs Winchester so that the spirits would get lost in the house. Staff also needed maps to find their way around. There are around 160 rooms including 40 bedrooms, 10,000 window panes, 7 chimneys, 2 basements, 3 elevators and 2 ballrooms. The number 13 also features heavily in the house. It once reached 7 storeys high but following damage in the 1906 earthquake it is now 4 storeys. The total cost of the building work has been estimated at around $5.5 million ($70 million;  £42,079,285 in 2008) After her death she left the contents of the house to her niece. It reportedly took the removers eight trucks a day for six and a half weeks to empty it. Today it is a tourist attraction, it is said to be haunted, and is open every day except for Christmas. Special tours are held every Friday 13th and Halloween. Thanks for reading.

Once again, it’s movie night… and it just might be your last one!

SHARP TEETH INVADING THE CAFÉ!

VERY, VERY THIRSTY FOR FRESH BLOOD!

FEARED BY ALL LIVING AND DEAD CREATURES!

IT’S BLOOD SUCKING BALDNESS!

—

HORROR TIME with Murnau’s classic Bram Stoker rendition of the legendary vampire tale, starring Max Schreck in his most famous role as Orlok, in tonight’s “Nosferatu” (1922).

Did you know that this flick was banned in Sweden
due to excessive horror?
The ban was finally lifted in 1972.

—

—

Enjoy it…while you can!

• 1900-1909

Lo irreal: La chica Gibson      

Dibujo creado por Charles Dana Gibson, pronto se convirtió en el ideal femenino de entonces y se transformó en todo un patrón de vida. Continúa…

Lo real: El vintage

El término era utilizado en las bodegas para señalar los vinos de las mejores cosechas, y derivó al mundo de la moda a partir de 1900 utilizándose en los diseños clásicos o retro. Como ejemplo actual tenemos los Oscar 2001 en los que Renee Zellweger y Julia Roberts lucieron uno de esos diseños vintage. Continúa…

1910-1919

Lo irreal: Fotografías de Hoyningen Huene para Vogue

Lo real: ‘La edad de la Inocencia’

Obra publicada por Edith Wharton en 1920, que recibiría el Premio Pulitzer un año después y que marcó un hito en el mundo de la moda, pues supuso una revolución para las mujeres que se vió reflejado en su forma de vestir. Continúa…

Lo real:

1920-1929

Lo irreal: ‘La Garçonne’

Publicada en 1922 supuso un gran eco a un nuevo estilo de vestir entre las mujeres de la época: pelo corto, pantalones y silueta tubular que masculinizan a la mujer creando una nueva feminidad. Continúa…

Lo real: Les Années Folles

A lo largo de los años 20′ la alta costura francesa vive su mejor momento. Son los años dorados de la moda, Vionnet, Poiret, Lanvin o Chanel liberaron a la mujer provocando un cambio en su manera de vestir y de pensar. Es una época para la exhibición del cuerpo femenino, la diversión y el consumismo. Continúa…

 1930-1939

Lo irreal: Greta Garbo y Marlene Dietrich

Son las máximas representantes de los años dorados del cine de Hollywood; años en los que la sensualidad, la provocación y el erotismo eran las máximas para toda creación filmográfica. Y no era menos en el mundo de la moda, en 1930 el modelo a seguir fueron las actrices como Greta Garbo y Marlene Dietrich, mujeres de hombros anchos y caderas delicadas, altas y delgadas. En este período el punto erótico se centró sobre todo en la espalda, resaltada por pronunciados escotes que provocaban más de un suspiro en el ámbito masculino. Las prendas de la época envolvían a la mujer en un halo de encanto, sensualidad y misterio. 

Lo real: Coco Chanel es quien lleva los pantalones

Su gran personalidad y su particular estilo a la hora de vestir marcaron un antes y un después en el pensamiento de la mujer. Después de que Poiret les quitase el corsé, Coco Chanel fue más allá en su provocación y les puso pantalones. Toda una revolucionaria. Continuar…
 

1940-1949

Lo irreal: Caldeando el ambiente

Pese a la austeridad reinante en toda Europa en estos años, Nueva York y París se meten de lleno en una lucha por ser consideradas capital del arte contemporáneo. La moda se concibe como un arte en su máxima expresión y los escaparates no se utilizan sólo para vender objetos, sino también para contar historias a través de fotografías. Continúa…

Lo real: El New Look de Christian Dior

Fue todo un acierto que le consagró a lo más alto en el mundo de la moda. Tras los oscuros años de la II Guerra Mundial, la Línea Corola presentada por el diseñador en 1947 y más conocida por New Look, pretendía reencontrar a la mujer femenina y coqueta con faldas con mucho vuelo, cintura ceñida y hombros redondeados. Continúa…

1950-1959

Lo irreal:  American Way of Life

Tras una época gris de austeridad y reserva, en los años 50′ las pasarelas empiezan a reflejar unas ganas enormes de vivir y,  por supuesto, de consumir. Es el momento de salir de casa, tomarse un tiempo para el ocio y divertirse, dejando todo lo malo en el pasado. Y eso lo saben reflejar muy bien las revistas que presentan la moda como un juego, el juego de jugar a ser la deportista, la chica sweater, la pin-up, la chica ‘Greace’; incluso ser ama de casa tiene su punto. 

 Lo real: La Jolie Madame

La colección otoño–invierno presentada por Balmain en 1952, que recibió el mismo nombre que uno de sus perfumes, Jolie Madame fue una propuesta que definió el estilo de la mujer moderna, “que debe vestirse de acuerdo al momento del día y a la actividad social que desempeña”. El estilo de los vestidos es: corte medio, talle marcado y decoraciones.

This was one of the best plays I have been involved with. It was also clearly the most moving to my spirit. I have the entire play on tape and decided to share a bit of it with the world this weekend.

The Azusa Street Revival was a glorious outpouring of the Holy Spirit that began in Los Angeles, California in April 1906. In the beginning, the meetings ran seven days a week almost around the clock. William J. Seymour, an African-American led the great revival. Services continued at the 312 Azusa Street Mission even after the death of the pastor in 1922. This scene is from a Glenda Mohr theatrical production at Central Bible College in Springfield, Missouri. Circa Spring 2008.

1922 seyongeandqueenov8 Classic 1050×872 photo wallpaper of 1922 seyongeandqueenov8 Classic 1050×872
to view full size click1922 Seyongeandqueenov8 Classic 1050X872 photo ( 1922 Seyongeandqueenov8 Classic 1050X872 photo )

My Top 10:

1. The Battleship Potemkin
   

   The Battleship Potemkin (1925)

2. Greed
3. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
4. The Birth of a Nation
5. The Gold Rush
6. The Phantom of the Opera
7. The Hunchback of Notre Dame
8. Foolish Wives
9. The Last Laugh
10. The General
    

TSPDT Consensus Top 5 Films:

• #8 – The Battleship Potemkin
• #27 – The Gold Rush
• #30 – The General
• #51 – Intolerance
• #64 – Greed

AFI Top 100 Films:

• The Birth of a Nation – #44 (1998) – not on 2007 list
• The Gold Rush – #75 (1998) – #58  (2007)
• The General – #18 (2007) – not on 1998 list
• Intolerance – #49 (2007) – not on 1998 list

Nighthawk Awards:

• Best Picture: The Battleship Potemkin
• Best Director: Sergei Eisenstein (The Battleship Potemkin)
• Best Adapted Screenplay: Greed (from the novel McTeague)
• Best Original Screenplay: The Gold Rush
• Best Actor: Charlie Chaplin (The Gold Rush)
• Best Actress: Lilian Gish (Broken Blossoms)
• Best Supporting Actor: Donald Crisp (Broken Blossoms)
• Best Supporting Actress: Zasu Pitts (Greed)

Ebert Great Movies (in order that he added them):

• The General
• The Battleship Potemkin
• Greed
• Broken Blossoms
• The Last Laugh
• The Birth of a Nation
• The Phantom of the Opera
• Faust
• Safety Last
• Nanook of the North
• Cabiria
• The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
• Souls for Sale

1912 is where I begin this project because it was in 1912 that Richard III, the earliest surviving feature length film was released.  1926 is where this post ends because the Academy Awards began in 1927.  So this pretty much covers the pre-Academy era of feature films.

Because these are the pre-Academy years no group existed to decide what was the best film of each year.  So if you’re looking to try to figure out what films to watch from this era, there are several ways to go about it.  First, you can look at TSPDT and their list of the Top 1000 films of all-time.  It’s a good place to start, though it leaves a lot to sort through.  You could try the AFI list which, between the two versions of 400 films in consideration, included 19 different films from this era (aside from the 4 films on the two versions of the top 100 they also nominated Richard III, The Cheat, The Poor Little Rich Girl, Broken Blossoms, Within Our Gates, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, The Kid, Safety Last, Sherlock Jr., The Thief of Bagdad, The Big Parade, The Freshman, Greed, The Phantom of the Opera and Ben-Hur).  There are 13 films from this era that have been featured on Roger Ebert’s Great Movies list.  You could also try focusing on one director in particular.  Charlie Chaplin began in this era making short films, eventually starting his feature directing career, though his only true classic during this era is The Gold Rush.  D.W. Griffith was the top director of the era and almost his entire career was done before sound ever made it to the screen.  There is Erich von Stroheim, who made far fewer films than Griffith, but each film is worth seeing.  Then there are the foreign directors, the ones who get missed if you stick to AFI, like all of the great silent work of Fritz Lang and F.W. Murnau.  While the #1 film on my list (and TSPDT) is Russian, 5 of my top 20 are German films (1 Lang, 3 Murnau and Cabinet).  But really, it’s hard to go wrong.  I’ve seen over 100 feature length films from this era and none of them are bad and only 2 of them are as low as **.5 (Dream Street and The Idol Dancer – two of Griffith’s weakest films).  Films that have managed to survive from this era usually have survived for a reason – either because of their director, their historical value or their quality.

To me, among the actors there are four main names that stick out: Charlie Chaplin, for his amazing ability, Lon Chaney for the way he would disappear into his characters, Emil Jannings, who in the silent era proved that language was irrelevant and Erich von Stroheim, who maintained a dignified air about him even when he was acting the complete cad.  Among the actresses, there was only one; Lilian Gish rises above everyone else in the profession during this era.

Of course, there are highlights of film history all through this era:

• 1912 – Mack Sennett releases the first Keystone Kops films / Carl Laemmle organizes several independent companies into Universal
• 1913 – Lon Chaney begins working in Horror films / D.W. Griffith leaves Biograph after over 500 shorts / Cecil B. DeMille rents a barn that will later become Paramount
• 1914 – Chaplin first appears on-screen as the Tramp / Louella Parsons becomes the first movie columnist
• 1915 – Film debuts of W.C. Fields and Douglas Fairbanks
• 1918 – Warner Bros. release its first film  (Four Years in Germany) / first Tarzan film
• 1919 – Chaplin, Pickford, Fairbanks and Griffith form United Artists / Oscar Micheaux becomes first African-American director
• 1920 – Marriage of Fairbanks and Pickford
• 1921 – Fatty Arbuckle trial
• 1922 – Will Hays appointed head of MPPDA / release of Nanook of the North
• 1923 – Introduction of 16mm film by Eastman Kodak / Hollywoodland sign is erected
• 1924 – Metro, Goldwyn and Mayer form to become MGM
• 1925 – Soviet Union begins to finance national filmmaking
• 1926 – Death of Valentino

My Top Film from each calendar year:

• 1912 - Richard III
• 1913 – Ingeborg Holm
• 1914 – The Avenging Conscience
• 1915 – The Birth of a Nation
• 1916 – Intolerance
• 1917 - A Man There Was
• 1918 – The Spiders Part I: The Golden Lake
• 1919 – The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
• 1920 – The Golem
• 1921 – The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
• 1922 – Foolish Wives (Nosferatu is my #1, but it’s Oscar eligible in 1929)
• 1923 – The Hunchback of Notre Dame
• 1924 – The Last Laugh
• 1925 – Greed
• 1926 – The Battleship Potemkin

Overlooked film of 1923:

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (dir. Wallace Worsley)

Lon Chaney as Quasimodo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923)

I had actually planned to write about the 1922 version of Oliver Twist, also starring Lon Chaney.  I had begun with talking about how if you have only seen Chaney in horror films, then your film horizons need to be expanded, how Chaney was one of the greats of the Silent Era, how he was the first great film Fagin but in spite of his acclaim, today it is easier to find a still of Ben Kingsley or Alec Guinness (or even Timothy Spall) when you Google the words “Fagin” and “Chaney.”  But then going through all the lists I came to a realization.  Hunchback is obscenely overlooked.  Ebert hasn’t covered it, it isn’t included in the Top 1000 (or even the doubling the canon extra 1000 films you can find there though the inferior 1939 remake is) and wasn’t among the 400 films by AFI under consideration for either their original list or the 2007 version.  Yet it is an essential Horror film (and made it to #19 on my Top 25 Horror List) and ranks only behind Phantom of the Opera in the Chaney pantheon.  It is an excellent early example of how books could be translated onto film and how the images we see up on the screen stay with us through our voyages in literature.

Have you read the book?  The odds are no.  Victor Hugo is much talked about and much adapted, but seems to be rarely read.  Les Miserables has been memorably translated into many different forms, but at 1463 pages (longer than War and Peace) isn’t read particularly much.  And of course, Hugo didn’t write a novel titled The Hunchback of Notre Dame.  The actual title of the book is Notre-Dame de Paris.  Hugo’s title emphasizes the cathedral’s place as the center of the book.  But films didn’t go for that.  The first film version was titled Esmeralda and this film pretty much set in stone the notion of Quasimodo as the central character and Hunchback as the title (which is what you will usually find on current printings of the book).

The film certainly wanted to focus on Quasimodo and to give Chaney free reign to show his incredible talent (both for acting and for makeup).  The first shot of him, a couple of minutes into the film, captures him high in the frame, up on the balcony of Notre Dame, watching the proceedings of the Festival of Fools.  Then we cut to a somewhat closer shot and get the first hints of his grotesque looks.  Then there is the title card announcing the character and actor.  Then we cut again, this time to a close-up and we get our first real look at the hunchback: curved spine, distorted face, scar for a right eye, wild hair, rough hands covered with thick, dark hair.  It is a brilliant simultaneous slow and quick reveal that prefigures the same kind of theatrical effect we would get from the first look at the Phantom’s face only two years later.

Movie audiences hadn’t really seen anything like this before.  Here was this grotesque monster, leering and mocking the people below him, later stripped to be punished and determined to be grotesque through and through; yet their sympathies were touched.  He is so gifted that he is able to climb down the outside of the cathedral.  He is so devoted that he will go to any lengths to please those whom he feels he serves.  His love is so strong that in the end, death is more pleasurable than the concept of existence without his beloved.  He is so much more preferrable to Phoebus, has so much more honesty, courage and even dignity.  While it was Chaney who had conceived the project, even having say over the cast and director, and thus no question that his monster would be the center, it is his performance rather than any ego that makes him the star.

When Chaney died in 1930, death was already no stranger to Hollywood; yet no death before Chaney had robbed cinema of so much.  Valentino was revered by women everywhere and good films had been made by Ince and Stiller, but it was Chaney who had the most future to offer to film fans.  This film was the beginning of the crowning of Universal Studios as the champion of Horror.  Great Horror films had been made in Germany (Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Nosferatu, The Golem), but nothing like this had been seen in the States.  His Phantom would cement his reputation as the Man of a Thousand Faces and we can only imagine what kind of makeup we would have seen had he been around to perhaps star in Dracula or Frankenstein or The Mummy or The Wolf Man.

But instead he died.  We were denied the chance to see him become a huge Horror star in the sound era.  And he could have done it.  “No dialogue.  We didn’t need dialogue.  We had faces.”  Norma Desmond says that, of course.  And it’s true most of all about Chaney.  He had a great voice as was proved in his one sound film, but he didn’t dialogue.  He had that face, those moves, those natural abilities.  He was always a star, even if people don’t seem to remember the film that truly made him one.

[ipaper id=21989446]

Sete dias antes o Brasil havia conquistado dois títulos e em 29 de outubro de 1992, tinha a possibilidade de fechar o ano com chave de ouro ao enfrentar novamente o Paraguai – derrotado no dia 22 pelo Campeonato Sul Americano. Desta vez, porém, o confronto valia a Taça Rodrigues Alves.

Se o título em si não era lá tão importante, a conquista, com a vitória por 3 a 1, porém, mostrou o quanto tinha qualidade esta geração de craques brasileiros. Sem ser considerada ainda uma potência, o time tupiniquim, que repito, vencera sete dias antes dois títulos na mesma data e com times diferentes, se deu ao luxo, de praticamente montar um terceiro time.

Isso mesmo. Para a disputa da Taça Rodrigues Alves no campo da Floresta, a comissão técnica do Brasil se utilizou apenas de seis jogadores que haviam disputado qualquer um daqueles dois jogos e vencido os dois títulos anteriormente.

Do considerado time ‘A’ que vencera o Campeonato Sul Americano, ficaram o defensor Palamone, do Botafogo e o atacante Neco, do Corinthians. Do time ‘B’, que venceu a Copa Roca ante a Argentina vinham o goleiro Mesquita, da Portuguesa, o médio-esquerdo Nesi do São Cristovão, o ponta-direita Zezé do Fluminense e o atacante Gambarotta, do Corinthians.

O zagueiro Alexy, da Atlética das Palmeiras, o médio-direito Alfredinho, do Botafogo, o centro-médio Xingô, do Pelotas, o atacante Imparatinho e o ponta-esquerda Martinelli, ambos do Palestra Itália, completavam o misto brasileiro, que formava quase que um terceiro time, para uma terceira decisão, em sete dias.

Gambarotta, heroi da conquista Copa Roca, com dois gols, voltou a marcar. Porém, o grande nome do jogo foi o palestrino Imparatinho que marcou duas vezes. Rivas, maior artilheiro paraguaio em confrontos contra o Brasil, com quatro gols, marcou um deles nessa partida.

O time paraguaio derrotado nessa partida, ao contrário do brasileiro, tinha pouquíssimas alterações com relação ao jogo de uma semana atrás, no Rio de Janeiro. Destaque para o jogador e já treinador da sua seleção, Fleitas Solich, que mais tarde, como técnico, fez história no Flamengo, que comandou em diversas oportunidades entre as décadas de 50 e 70. Dirigiu a equipe carioca em 504 partidas e teve um aproveitamento de 66,14% de pontos.

Ficha técnica: Brasil 3 x 1 Paraguai

Brasil
Mesquita [Portuguesa]; Palamone [Botafogo] e Alexy [AA Palmeiras]; Alfredinho [Botafogo], Xingô [Pelotas] e Nesi [São Cristóvão]; Zezé I [Fluminense], Neco [Corinthians], Gambarotta [Corinthians], Imparatinho [Palestra Itália] e Martinelli [Palestra Itália].
Técnico: Comissão

Paraguai
Denis; Mena e Paredes; Mirandas, Fleitas Solich e Benitez; Shaerer, Ramirez, Lopez, Rivas e Fretes.
Técnico: Manuel Fleitas Solich

Data: 29 de outubro de 1922
Competição: Taça Rodrigues Alves
Local: Campo da Floresta, em São Paulo
Árbitro: Francisco Abreu Balcó

Por Raoni David
—————————————————————–
On the last game of 1922, another title for Brazil

Just seven days after winnign two titles, as shown on the 22nd, The Seleção had another crwon on the line as they faced again Paraguay for the Rodrigues Alves Cup.

If the Cup was not that important, Rodrigues Alves was a President of Brazil in the early years of the 1900’s, the win consolidated a generation of Brazil’s best players. Without the hype of these days, Brazil managed to win a third title in a week with a different team from the prevois two. The staff called off for this game only six players that were on the field in São Paulo or Rio one week before.

From the team that played in Rio and won the South American Championship they called off the defender Palamone and the forward Neco. From the Copa Roca team came the goalie Mesquita, left midfielder Nesi, rigth winger Zezé and striker Gambarotta.

The new faces were back Alexy, rigth midfielder Alfredinho, midfielder Xingô, striker Imparatinho and left winger Martinelli. An amazing range of seven clubs represented in that game.

Gamarotta showed again his credentials scoring first, but Imparatinho went on to score twice to seal Brazil’s win. Rivas, who happens to be the biggest Paraguayan scorer against Brazil to the date with four goals, scored one in that game.

The Paraguayan squad in the other hand, was similar to that one Brazilwon one week before. Fleitas Solich was their main player and coach. He later came to Brazil, and on the bench of Flamengo he managed 504 games.

Brazil 3 x 1 Paraguay

Brazil
Mesquita [Portuguesa]; Palamone [Botafogo] and Alexy [AA Palmeiras]; Alfredinho [Botafogo], Xingô [Pelotas] and Nesi [São Cristóvão]; Zezé I [Fluminense], Neco [Corinthians], Gambarotta [Corinthians], Imparatinho [Palestra Itália] and Martinelli [Palestra Itália].
Coach: Staff

Paraguay
Denis; Mena and Paredes; Mirandas, Fleitas Solich and Benitez; Shaerer, Ramirez, Lopez, Rivas and Fretes.
Coach: Manuel Fleitas Solich

Date: 29th October 1922
Competition: Rodrigues Alves Cup
Place: Floresta Field, São Paulo
Referee: Francisco Abreu Balcó

Tradução de Fabricio Presilli

El Lissitzky, Russian born in 1890, was one of the few to influence the Bauhaus school of design in the early 1900’s.

Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge - El Lissitzky - 1919

His use of primary colours and shapes demonstrated the relationship between design and the events that took place. For example, Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge, designed in 1920, depicts the Russian Civil War. The red wedge symbolizes the Bolshevick army defeating the white circle, representing the Confederation of Counter-Revolutionary Forces.

Neuer was one of several lithograph pieces for the electromechanical show Victory Over the Sun. This piece belongs in the new style, Proun, created by El Lissitzky in 1920. Proun stands for,Project for the Affirmation of the New, which was his name for the “his new form of abstract art”.(Getty Research)

Neuer (New Man) - El Lissitzky - 1923

The rest of this article can be found at the Lorenzo de’ Medici Scuola Graphic Design Blog.

Greetings, one and all, and welcome to the second of our very special theme weeks – Vampire Week! Brain-Cravers took center stage last week, but this week belongs to the Bloodsuckers!

As we are apt to do, we start out with a very special micro-hero from EG, and boy, is it a special one! See, over the weekend, EG was able to watch a special episode of Wolfman Mac’s Chiller Drive-In. Wolfman Mac is the latest in the fine history of Horror Hosts (such as Sir Graves Ghastly, The Ghoul, and Dr. Shock) that we’ve had in the area. This weekend’s movie? None other than that 1922 silent classic, Nosferatu!

Inspiration struck, and the Steve Austin Book Club is proud to present one of the most famous vampires of all time, Count Orlok!

Keep a lookout, because we’ve got a week of vampire goodness ahead!

É famosa a história de que o expressinho do São Paulo, no começo da década de 90, sob o comando de Telê Santana jogou duas partidas por competições diferentes num mesmo dia. O que pouca gente sabe é que este fato curioso já aconteceu com a Seleção Brasileira, em 22 de outubro de 1922.

E não foram quaisquer adversários, e nem jogos sem relevância. Para decidir o Campeonato Sul Americano, que mais tarde seria chamado de Copa América, fez-se necessário um jogo desempate contra os paraguaios. No mesmo dia, haveria a disputa da Copa Roca, contra os argentinos.

A seleção que já estava na disputa da Copa América disputada no estádio das Laranjeiras no Rio de Janeiro e que pode ser considerada a principal, ou a que contava com os melhores jogadores da época, seguiu na disputa e não decepcionou ao vencer o Paraguai por 3 a 0.

A base do time era paulista, com sete jogadores contra quatro dos cariocas. Formiga do Paulistano marcou duas vezes, e Neco do Corinthians uma, decretando a vitória brasileira, e o segundo título da competição na história.

E o que fazer com a disputa da tradicional Copa Roca, contra os argentinos, marcada para acontecer em São Paulo, no estádio Parque Antártica? A confederação, à época a CBD, convocou um segundo time, em que os paulistas novamente eram maioria. Apenas dois jogadores eram cariocas. Vale lembrar que no histórico dos confrontos entre os países havíamos perdido quatro e vencido três jogos, em nove disputados.

Aliás, a última vitória brasileira havia sido há sete dias, pela Copa América, por 2 a 0. O Brasil jogou com o time que derrotou o Paraguai e foi campeão, e a Argentina era praticamente a mesma que jogaria também a Copa Roca, uma vez que já estavam em solo brasileiro.

Pois não é que o time ‘B’ do Brasil venceu. E os visitantes ainda saíram na frente. Porém, Gambarotta, mais um corintiano, marcou duas vezes e o Brasil venceu por 2 a 1.

Confira abaixo, as duas fichas-técnicas.

Campeonato Sul Americano: Brasil 3 x 0 Paraguai

Brasil
Kuntz [Flamengo];Palamone [Botafogo] e Bartô II [AA São Bento-SP]; Laís [Fluminense], Amílcar [Corinthians] e Fortes [Fluminense]; Formiga [Paulistano], Neco [Corinthians], Heitor Domingues [Palestra Itália], Tatu [Corinthians] e Rodrigues I [Corinthians]
Técnico: Comissão

Paraguai
Denis; Gonzalez e Paredes; Miranda, Fleitas Solich e Benitez; Schaere, Capdeville, Lopez, Rivas e Prates
Técnico: Manuel Fleitas Solich

Data: 22 de outubro de 1922
Competição: Campeonato Sul Americano
Local: Estádio das Laranjeiras, no Rio de Janeiro
Árbitro: Servando Perez

Copa Roca: Brasil 2 x 1 Argentina

Brasil
Mesquita [Portuguesa]; Grané [Ypiranga-SP] e Clodô [Paulistano]; Abatte [Paulistano], Faragassi [Ypiranga-SP] e Nesi [São Cristóvão]; Leite de Castro [Botafogo] (Brasileiro) [Minas Gerais-SP], Zezé I [Fluminense], Gambarotta [Corinthians], Tepet [Ypiranga-SP] e Osses [Ypiranga-SP]
Técnico: Comissão

Argentina
Tesorieri; Celli e Castaldi; Chabrolin, Médici e Solari; Rivet, Chiesa, Gaslini, Francia e Cesari.

Data: 22 de outubro de 1922
Competição: Copa Roca
Local: Parque Antártica, em São Paulo
Árbitro: Antônio Carneiro de Campos

Por Raoni David
—————————————————————-
Brazil wins two titles in the same day!

There is a famous true tale in brazilian football that remembers a day back in the early 90’s when São Paulo played twice in the same day, a game for a local tournament and another for a continental one. What many people don’t know is that the Seleção also had two games in the same day, back in 1922.

And those games were valid for titles. In the final match of the South American Championship Brazil had to face Paraguay in Rio, and for the Copa Roca a game against Argentina in São Paulo.

The Seleção was already in Rio for the South American Championship, all the games were played in the Laranjeiras Field. This team beated Paraguay 3 to 0 with a great performance from Formiga and Neco, two of the majority of players that had contracts with São Paulo clubs back then.

And what about the other match in São Paulo? The Brazilian FA (at that time called CBD), called off a “second” team, mainly from players of the São Paulo league, just two guys that played in the second game were from Rio.

After just seven days of their last meeting, a 2 to 0 Brazilian win valid for the South American Championship, Brazil won again 2 to 1, with two goals from Gambarotta.

South American Championship: Brazil 3 x 0 Paraguay

Brazil
Kuntz [Flamengo];Palamone [Botafogo] and Bartô II [AA São Bento]; Laís [Fluminense], Amílcar [Corinthians] and Fortes [Fluminense]; Formiga [Paulistano], Neco [Corinthians], Heitor Domingues [Palestra Itália], Tatu [Corinthians] and Rodrigues I [Corinthians]
Coach: Staff

Paraguay
Denis; Gonzalez and Paredes; Miranda, Fleitas Solich and Benitez; Schaere, Capdeville, Lopez, Rivas and Prates
Coach: Manuel Fleitas Solich

Date: 22nd October 1922
Competition: South American Championship
Place: Laranjeiras Field, Rio de Janeiro
Referee: Servando Perez

Copa Roca: Brazil 2 x 1 Argentina

Brasil
Mesquita [Portuguesa]; Grané [Ypiranga] and Clodô [Paulistano]; Abatte [Paulistano], Faragassi [Ypiranga] and Nesi [São Cristóvão]; Leite de Castro [Botafogo] (Brasileiro) [Minas Gerais], Zezé I [Fluminense], Gambarotta [Corinthians], Tepet [Ypiranga] and Osses [Ypiranga]
Coach: Staff

Argentina
Tesorieri; Celli and Castaldi; Chabrolin, Médici and Solari; Rivet, Chiesa, Gaslini, Francia and Cesari.

Date: 22nd October 1922
Competition: Copa Roca
Place: Parque Antártica Stadium, São Paulo
Referee: Antônio Carneiro de Campos

Tradução de Fabricio Presilli

by Jonathan Burrello

In my last article, I praised the awesome splendor that is “Frankenstein” and I mentioned how iconic Boris Karloff’s image as the infamous Monster has become. I also mentioned another, possibly even more iconic character: Dracula. Hungarian actor, Bela Lugosi, is practically synonymous with Bram Stoker’s legendary Count. Lugosi made a career of playing evil and supernatural villains with an aristocratic air. He played twisted doctors, cursed men, and many other grotesques, but it is his role as the charismatic Count Dracula that keeps him alive in the public’s eye. Bela Lugosi gives a spooktacular performance making Tod Browning’s (“Freaks,” “The Unholy Three”) classic film “Dracula” (1931) a must-see.

Before Lugosi donned his famous cape, however, there was another great movie vampire. Haunting up the silent cinemas in 1922 was Max Schreck as Count Orlok in F. W. Murnau’s “Nosferatu.” Orlok does not look like your average vampire. Unlike Lugosi’s Dracula, which everyone copied from Christopher Lee to Jack Palance to Frank Langella to William Marshall to Gary Oldman to George Hamilton to Leslie Nielson, etc., “Nosferatu” looks bizarrely unfamiliar and—as a result maybe—more unsettling. With his naked skull, pointed ears, high shoulders, tall stature, long spindly arms and fingers, gaunt features, demonic eye-brows, and jagged incisors, Max Schreck’s vampire is in a class all his own. When Werner Herzog (“Fitzcarraldo,” “Grizzly Man”) directed the remake of “Nosferatu” in 1979 they made actor Klaus Kinski up to look exactly like the sinister bloodsucker from the original and it really worked. Both versions of “Nosferatu” are sure to delight with fright, but I strongly advocate seeing the 1922 version first.

Both “Dracula” (1931) and “Nosferatu” (1922) follow pretty much the same storyline.  A mysterious aristocrat (a.k.a. Vampire) is visited by a hapless solicitor. By the time the visitor learns the truth it is too late and the Count is soon on a voyage to more urban environs (Renfield is played by horror favorite Dwight Frye in “Dracula”). Once established in his new home the Count begins to feed. This is pretty much all you need to know for either film. Beyond this there are many differences. Dracula is more outgoing than Orlok for instance. While Dracula mingles with oblivious socialites, Orlok lurks in the shadows. Since Orlok looks more like a malnourished rodent than a human being it makes sense he wouldn’t be as charming and seductive as Dracula.

I am a big fan of both films. They have the old, spooky castles shrouded in spider webs and that aura of Old World mystery. They have immediately recognizable villains that we catch ourselves rooting for. Both films suck you into their own Gothic fantasy and don’t let go.  “Dracula” also features the fantastic horror treasure, Edward Van Sloan (“Frankenstein,” “The Mummy”) as Dr. Van Helsing (an added bonus to be sure). Where monsters like King Kong, the Hunchback, the Phantom, the Wolf Man, and Frankenstein’s Monster are all misunderstood outcasts who are never truly evil and may be presented more as victims, it is refreshing to see an apologetically wicked character that has the world seemingly wrapped around his finger and delights in his mayhem. Unlike future vampire movies, which would try to portray vampires as tormented pariahs, “Nosferatu” and “Dracula” make no bones about their vampires’ evil nature. They relish the kill and this is what makes the Count so engaging and horrific. There is only one goal: suck blood. Simple? Yes, but it works.

“Nosferatu” and “Dracula” are two masterful classics of the horror genre with fantastic atmosphere and enchanting performances. Need I bother telling you what a magnificent double-feature they would make? Celebrate Halloween this year with a few awesome Counts.

Títulos ainda não eram uma rotina da Seleção Brasileira, quando em 15 de outubro de 1922 enfrentou a rival Argentina pela semifinal do Campeonato Sul Americano, o embrião, ou o começo do que seria consagrado como Copa América.

Naquela época, até os confrontos com os argentinos não eram comuns. A primeira vez que se enfrentaram foi em 1914, com uma goleada dos ‘hermanos’, por 3 a 0. Esta partida de 1922 era apenas a nona da história entre as seleções e até então a vantagem era argentina, com quatro vitórias, dois empates e duas derrotas.

Atualmente a vantagem é brasileira, com 37 vitórias e 33 derrotas. E o curioso é que o Brasil teve vantagem no número de vitórias sobre a Argentina pela primeira vez somente em 1995.

Por isso essa vitória por 2 a 0, que credenciava o time brasileiro para a disputa da decisão da competição contra o Paraguai, pode ser considerado muito importante. Ainda mais porque um ano antes, as equipes se enfrentaram em um quadrangular que decidia a competição e com a vitória sobre o Brasil, a Argentina ficou com o título. Mas desta vez não, e graças a dois corintianos. No estádio das Laranjeiras o avançado Neco inaugurou o placar ainda na primeira etapa, mas no fim, aos 42 minutos. Também no fim, mas da segunda etapa, o médio e capitão Amílcar Barbuy decretou a vitória brasileira. Uma espécie de vingança do ano anterior.

O time brasileiro que tinha como homem central do seu comitê técnico o senhor Ferreira Vianna Netto, além de Célio de Barros, que atualmente nomeia o Estádio de Atletismo no Complexo do Maracanã, ainda contava em sua fileira com ícones dos primórdios do futebol brasileiro, como o palestrino Heitor Domingues e Laís, médio do Fluminense.

A curiosidade fica por conta da grande mudança de jogadores sofrida pela seleção em cerca de um ano. Dos que foram derrotados contra a Argentina no ano anterior, apenas o goleiro flamenguista Kuntz, e o médio direito Laís seguiram na equipe. Toda essa mudança se deu mesmo com a manutenção da comissão técnica. De toda forma, as modificações surtiram efeito, tanto que diante do Paraguai, o Brasil conquistaria a sua segunda Copa América da história.

Ficha técnica: Brasil 2×0 Argentina

Brasil
Kuntz [Flamengo]; Palamone [Botafogo] e Bartô II [A. A. São Bento-SP]; Laís [Fluminense], Amílcar Barbuy [Corinthians] e Fortes [Fluminense]; Formiga [Paulistano], Neco [Corinthians], Heitor Domingues [Palestra Itália], Tatu [Corinthians] e Rodrigues I [Corinthians]
Técnico: Ferreira Vianna Netto

Argentina
Américo Tesorieri; Celli e Sarasibar; Chabrolin, Médici e Solari; Gaslini, Libonatti, Chiessa, Francia e Rivet
Técnico: Américo Tesorieri

Data: 15 de outubro de 1922
Competição: Campeonato Sul Americano
Local: Estádio das Laranjeiras, no Rio de Janeiro
Árbitro: Francisco Andreu Balcó

Por Raoni David
—————————————————————

A win over Argentina to triumph the South American Championship

At a time when the Seleção was not used to win titles all the time, the Brazilian team faced Argentina for the semis of the South American Championship, the first steps of what we know now as Copa América.

At that time even matches against rivals Argentinians were not as common as these days. The one in 1922 was only the ninth in history, by then Argentina was on advantage at the head-to-head confrontation with four wins, two ties and two losses. Nowadays this advantage is Brazilian, with 37 wins and 33 defeats, the first time Brazil passed the Argentinian wins as only in 1995.

This 2 to 0 victory is so important not only because it was agains Argentina, after that win Brazil had to face Paraguay in a final match to decide whose would keep the trophy. Even more importance should you consider that one year before Brazil faced Argentina and lost at hoem in Rio. This time the players from Corinthians led the way, Neco scored the first goal and team captain Amílcar Barbuy doubled it to seal Brazil’s win.

A key figure in Brazil squad was Ferreira Vianna Netto, the coach of the team, and Célio de Barros, that gave his name to the track and field complex in Maracanã. Other notables were Heitor Domingues and Laís.

A major change in the squad took place over only one year, just the keeper Kuntz and the midfielder Laís were in the team in 1921. The change proved rigth because not only Brazil got a win this time over Argentina, they won the final match against the Paraguayans as well, to get their second continental trophy.

Brazil 2×0 Argentina

Brazil
Kuntz [Flamengo]; Palamone [Botafogo] and Bartô II [A. A. São Bento-SP]; Laís [Fluminense], Amílcar Barbuy [Corinthians] and Fortes [Fluminense]; Formiga [Paulistano], Neco [Corinthians], Heitor Domingues [Palestra Itália], Tatu [Corinthians] and Rodrigues I [Corinthians]
Coach: Ferreira Vianna Netto

Argentina
Américo Tesorieri; Celli and Sarasibar; Chabrolin, Médici and Solari; Gaslini, Libonatti, Chiessa, Francia and Rivet
Coach: Américo Tesorieri

Date: 15th October 1922
Competition: South American Championship
Place: Laranjeiras Stadium, Rio de Janeiro
Referee: Francisco Andreu Balcó

Tradução de Fabricio Presilli