Documentary: The Oviatt Building on DVD

[scotrace]

I've got my copy of the documentary The Oviatt Building on DVD, which was recently debuted at that venue, and it's an impressive piece of work.

As a midwesterner who has never seen the Oviatt building and knew next to nothing about it or its history, I went into it with fresh eyes. It is hard to imagine a more thorough treatment of this subject undertaken for video. From the biographical information about the original Alexander & Oviatt founders right through to the building's current designers and occupants, the story is well-told and feels very complete.
Seth Shulman, director and editor of the film, lends his excellent sense of timing to what must have been a daunting task - assembling a disparate collection of still photographs into an interesting, moving sequence. Though at rare times the transitions veer from the overall feel of the work, Seth Shulman did an exceptional and professional job of keeping the story visually interesting, well-timed and in sync with the narration. The visuals are greatly enhanced by the soundtrack, provided by Mora's Modern Rhythmists.
The narration itself is perhaps the high point of the film. Lena Purtu's quiet, involved delivery is perfectly matched with the fades and cuts depicting the extraordinary opulence of the Oviatt Building.
The film is striking for its sense of intimate access to original material. Interviews with surviving Oviatt family members (though the main characters are long deceased), along with first-hand stories of susequent owners and developers, blend with an astonishing wealth of photographs to give one the sense of gaining access to delicious insider secrets. Marc Chevalier, executive producer, is also host and storyteller, and his passion for the material is evident.
To the filmmakers' enormous credit, the spotlight remains on the Oviatt Building itself from first to last. The building is the star of the show, and we get to meet and know her grace, beauty and historic landmark charm in spectacular visuals and wonderful stories. The vibrant, soaring optimism of the 1920's is clearly conveyed, as are the tremendous stresses of the early depression years, the glamor of the Hollywood clientele, and the later, Homeric tragedies which befell James Oviatt and his small family. This is the story of the Oviatt Building, but it is also a grand tale reflecting Urban 20th century America.
This is well worth buying, well worth watching, and a great DVD to have in your collection.
The Oviatt Building DVD is available from Puzzled Pictures.

 

[Dagwood]

I just finished watching this excellent documentary, and highly recommend it!

If you have any interest in James Oviatt, the Oviatt Building, early Los Angeles, history, vintage fashion, art deco, or architecture, this is one DVD you won't want to miss!

 

[Brian Sheridan]

I also have a copy and have watched it a few times now. An excellent documentary!

 

[Nazimova33]

I recently bought it also. What a wonderful documentary. Mr. Chevalier did an amazing job! My congratulations to him..

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Bump! DVD copies are still available! :eusa_clap

.

 

[Dagwood]

Today is the 90th Anniversary of the opening of Alexander & Oviatt.

P.S. Pre-Oviatt Building.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Today is the 90th Anniversary of the opening of Alexander & Oviatt.

P.S. Pre-Oviatt Building.

Not completely true.


Alexander & Oviatt was incorporated on June 1, 1912: its founding partners were Frank Baird Alexander, James Zera Oviatt, and Frank Shaver ("F.S.") Allen. The capital stock was $10,000, almost all of which was provided by Allen. The store itself opened for business in September, 1912.


In short, Alexander & Oviatt began its life 97 years ago.


The blog's vintage advert is promoting Alexander & Oviatt's expansion of their second location on 6th St. near Hill St. (They'd moved out of the first location on 4th St. in 1915.)



.

 

[NicknNora]

I was already excited about watching this DVD and now after hearing all of the wonderful praise for the film I can hardly wait. I screwed up our original order on 8/17 so I had to re-order it yesterday. Now we'll have to wait even longer before we can watch it.:eusa_doh:

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Don't worry, it's coming soon!


Odd coincidence: I've just returned from a week-long research trip to little (and beautiful) Farmington, Utah, James Oviatt's hometown. Found out some very interesting things for the book...

.

 

[NicknNora]

Don't worry, it's coming soon!


Odd coincidence: I've just returned from a week-long research trip to little (and beautiful) Farmington, Utah, James Oviatt's hometown. Found out some very interesting things for the book...

.

Quit it! Quit it! You're killing me. lol I'm like a kid at Christmas I want the DVD and the Book and I want them NOW! lol lol Seriously, I can hardly wait for the film and the book. I'm so glad that you decided to write the book too.

 

[Tomasso]

Farmington, Utah, James Oviatt's hometown.

.

Was he Mormon?

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Was he Mormon?

He was the grandson of Ira Oviatt, a pioneer of the Mormon Church. James Oviatt himself was baptized and confirmed in the LDS Church, but quickly abandoned it. As an old man, he would laughingly describe himself as a "Jack Mormon", which means a Mormon who has lapsed from the faith and who drinks, gambles, etc.

.

 

[Dagwood]

Don't worry, it's coming soon!


Odd coincidence: I've just returned from a week-long research trip to little (and beautiful) Farmington, Utah, James Oviatt's hometown. Found out some very interesting things for the book...

.

I found this interesting (and maybe it will help in your research). From a 1934 lawsuit called Frederick Sage & Co. (Plaintiff) v. Alexander & Oviatt, Corp. (Defendant):

"...In August, 1927, plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract in Paris, France, whereby plaintiff agreed to manufacture and deliver to defendant at Paris certain store fronts, ceilings, and store fixtures, which were to be installed by defendant in its new store then being constructed in Los Angeles. Mr. Alexander, president of defendant corporation, was then in Paris, where, under the guidance of representatives of plaintiff, he was shown store fronts and fixtures manufactured by the latter. Desiring to have in his new store fixtures similar to those shown him in Paris, plaintiff's representatives were commissioned to make the necessary drawings and specifications for the equipment. By the terms of the contract defendant was to pay $106,920 in twenty-four monthly installments.

"When the fixtures were received in Los Angeles and installed, no defects of any kind appeared either in the material or workmanship. Defendant for nine months after the installation made the monthly payments provided by the contract.

"However, early in 1929 the veneer on some of the cases began to check, blister and crack. In some instances it came loose from the cores. Doors and drawers became warped so as to make it difficult and in some cases impossible to close them. Mouldings and other decorative parts of the fixtures became loose and large cracks developed at the joints of the mouldings. In February, 1929, defendant wrote plaintiff advising it of these defects which had developed, and stated that no further payments would be made under the contract until the defects in question had been repaired.

"After attempts to adjust matters had failed, plaintiff filed suit to collect the balance unpaid on the contract. Defendant thereupon moved for an order of court requiring plaintiff to submit the disputed matters to arbitration as provided in the contract.

"Arbitration proceedings under the provisions of the Civil Code were agreed to, and the three arbitrators proceeded to examine the fixtures and take evidence bearing upon the controverted matters. In due course findings and award were made, signed by two of the arbitrators, allowing defendant $44,800 as damages due to the defects claimed. Appellant makes no objection to the allowance of $8,800 of this amount, but does vigorously contest the allowances of $36,000 which the arbitrators found was damages suffered by defendant because “plaintiff failed to manufacture said articles in a good and workmanlike manner and free from latent defects growing out of the process of manufacture, and failed to comply with said contract in the following particulars, to-wit.” The findings then proceed with a statement of ninety-one specified items wherein defects had developed and which were attributed to poor workmanship, or poorly seasoned material."

 

[Marc Chevalier]

.



Thank you, Dagwood! I can add some information to that.


When the store's fixtures began to warp and peel, Oviatt tried to sue the shipping company whose boat brought them from France to the U.S. He argued that the shippers, though negligence, had allowed moisture to seep into the crated fixtures. Apparently, this suit went nowhere, so Oviatt then went after the fixtures' British manufacturer and installer, Frederick Sage & Company ... and won!


.

 

[John in Covina]

How's Seth doing, haven't seen him in ages.

I have the DVD.

It's a fine documentary and a great window into that era in LA.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Thank you!


Seth is great: he's very busy working with film students, travelling around the state and the country.


.

 

[Dagwood]

I found another interesting case from 1933 called Alexander & Oviatt v. United States. Apparently, there was a dispute about how some of the imported items were classified under the Tariff Act of 1922. The question was whether they were works of art or, in addition, also items of utility. As the Court noted:

"There is no serious dispute concerning the basic facts. The articles were all produced in France by René Lalique, who is shown to be an artist, upon the order of Mr. Oviatt, one of the members of the importing firm, who testified:

"* * * I wanted them all to be originals, something that had never been ordered before * * * something that had never been done before * * *.

"They were apparently not imported to be sold, but for the purpose of adorning appellant's business house.

"The designs seem to have been the joint production of Mr. Oviatt and the artist. We have before us illustrative exhibits in the form of photographs of the several articles. The record discloses that Judge Cline, who wrote the opinion of the court below, formally, and as a part of the trial procedure, viewed the articles in their positions in appellant's establishment at Los Angeles.

"The clock is designed with representations of grapes and birds arranged in such manner as to surround the clockface. The chandeliers are said to depict the California palm tree. The door panels are 7 feet, 6 inches high, by 3 feet in width, and bear a design of angels, said to symbolize the city of Los Angeles, ringing the mission bells of California. There are also upon them the figures of two lions which form a part of the firm's crest. The window is stated to be sculptured to represent the importing trade (appellant's business), and it contains designs of California oranges, and also the lion figures of the crest. The panels of both doors and windows are composed of molded cold glass which is translucent, but not transparent."

"The court below, basing its finding upon the evidence, held all the articles to be works of art, but found that all were also articles of utility...."

The court also notes in conclusion: "That the clock and chandeliers involved are primarily articles of utility, although highly ornamented and made pleasing to the eye by artistic skill, is, we think, scarcely deniable, and, although there is argument on behalf of appellants to the effect that the door and window panels are not actually used as doors and windows, but have a strictly ornamental purpose, we may not overlook the fact that the trial court, after observing them in their respective places in appellant's establishment, reached a different conclusion."

 

[Dagwood]

Courtesy of the USC Digital Library, here is a nice picture of the Oviatt Building:

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I found another interesting case from 1933 called Alexander & Oviatt v. United States.

Ah yes ... a very interesting and oft-cited appeals case, which Oviatt lost. Actually, his argument was a strong one -- but it's hard as heck to beat the Federal government.


I've spent a year trying to find files of the original 1929 U.S. Customs case against which Oviatt appealed. (The files, if they're still intact, are in Washington, D.C.) Why my interest? Because during that original case, some very detailed photos were taken of the Oviatt Building's glass decorations: Lalique chandeliers, clock, doors and windows, etc. Many of these decorations have long since disappeared, and no other photos of them are known to have survived. I need these case pictures! lol

.

 

[NicknNora]

My DVD arrived today. I'm hoping to watch it today or tomorrow. :eusa_clap