The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight (1897)

A Saturday Globe poster for the Corbett-Fitzsimmons fight of 1897.

The world’s first feature film

The world’s first feature film. What comes to your mind when you read that? Probably a silent narrative feature, perhaps a historical epic like The Birth of a Nation (1915).

But what if I told you that the picture widely considered the world’s first feature film didn’t really tell a story. There were no costumes, no extras, no music. It was simply an 1897 prizefight between James J. Corbett and Bob Fitzsimmons, who duked it out for fourteen three-minute rounds.

A scene from the Corbett-Fitzsimmons fight.

A little history

The film was created by Enoch J. Rector, a promoter of boxing pictures who worked with Woodville Latham at his Kinetoscope Exhibition Company. The company’s purpose? To merge the public’s love for cinema with its love for boxing.

Boxing is no longer the ultra-glamorous phenomenon it used to be, with modern fights bringing in disappointing results in terms of both live audiences and streaming. But in 1897, it was a wildly popular spectator sport, drawing in huge crowds both at the gate and in cinemas. Generally, each short round of a fight was a separate feature. Enoch changed that with The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight.

John L. Sullivan, a boxing superstar who was defeated by Corbett just a few years before the Corbett-Fitzsimmons fight. Check out that stache…

What makes The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight worthy of the National Film Registry?

Enoch used a technology known as the Latham loop (the original design of which is claimed by, like, five different men) to make his film. The Latham loop created two slack film loops in a camera or projector. This slack film protected the filmstrip from vibration and tears, meaning that longer shots could be taken without the film ripping. This was necessary as The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight in its original cut lasted well over an hour and a half, though only fragments survive today.

A diagram of the Latham loop. You can see the two slack film reels at the top and bottom, which protect the film from tearing.

Unlike other boxing films, The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight featured an opening segment before the match featuring heavyweight champion John L. Sullivan (whom Corbett had recently defeated) and his manager. It also introduced the referee and showed both fighters entering the ring in all their robed glory. These “extras” were atypical of other boxing pictures, setting Enoch’s production apart and creating a new template for future films of this type.

Film reel fragment from the fight film, which is currently for sale for the modest sum of $5,500.

Enoch obtained exclusive filming rights to the fight, making him the only game in town for those who couldn’t attend the fight in person. It was covered extensively in the papers, including by Wyatt Earp (yes, that Wyatt Earp, mustache and all), and public interest in the fight was substantial. Often shown with live commentary accompanying it, the film debuted in no fewer than eleven cities across America and the UK.

Wyatt Earp had a lot to say about the Corbett-Fitzsimmons fight. He believed that Fitzsimmons committed a foul against Corbett, who lost the match, a claim disputed by Fitzsimmons.

An important aspect of this widespread availability is that women, who were typically barred from attending live boxing matches (you know, because of our *delicate* dispositions), were perfectly able to view the film of the match. On the other hand, the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union was, ahem, vociferous in its efforts to keep women from seeing boxing films, including The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight, going so far as to try to make mailing the reels illegal. These efforts were ultimately largely fruitless, and women attended the screenings of Enoch’s film (albeit in disputed numbers).

An exhibition poster for the fight film, put out by Veriscope.

My thoughts

I’ll be honest: this one’s not for me. I’ve never been much into watching others do sportsball (with or without a ball involved), and without music or intertitles in the remaining fragments, it was hard for me to stay focused on this one. It’s not a “bad” film by any means, but I wouldn’t watch it again without a real reason.

Check out the fragments if you like, but don’t expect to be knocked out by the production (see what I did there?).

Camille