~Love or Justice?~
~Review from Photoplay Magazine, September 1917~
The sacrifices that women make in pictures are perhaps a trifle more incongruous than those they
wallow in the legitimate. There are to a particularly luminous sacrifice in "Love or Justice?" created to
Lambert Hillyer. Psychology takes a back seat when it is a question of the sacrifices that picture
heroines dally with.

The heroine of "Love or Justice?" meets a man she once lived with, in a courtroom. She is being tried
for murder, and I need not say that she is innocent. Of course she is; otherwise she wouldn't  be a
heroine. He has become a famous lawyer, and his political future depends upon this case. He is the
prosecuting attorney, and if he loses the case his future will be ruined. So, I dare say, you can guess
what her sacrifice was. For this sake, and because she loves him, in her picture way, she declares that
she committed the murder, that she committed the murder, that she is absolutely guilty, and is
willing to suffer for her crime!

However, she is not allowed to pay the penalty. The guilt is properly accredited, and all ends as you
are quite sure that it would end. One's sense of plausibility is a trifle routed. These terrific sacrifices
get on my nerves, accustomed as I have been to those of the "legitimate" for years. Pictures go these
at least three better!

The incidents of "Love or Justice?" are many and complicated. The heroine is announced as a "woman
of the underworld," and the meeting place of the things is pleasantly set forth as belonging to "crime's
aristocracy." Nan falls in love with a young dope fiend, and accomplishes his reformation. Then they
live together, and he becomes known in the legal world. Her specialty is sacrifice, and even before she
makes the tremendous one to which I have alluded, she starts a smaller one, by departing, a la
Camille, for the sake of his career, and permitting him to think her unfaithful. The underworld
evidently turns out first-class heroines.

It was Miss Louise Glaum who played Nan. May I be allowed to confess that I had never seen her
before? One has to begin some time, you know. Miss Glaum struck me as being an actress of
extraordinary facial ability. The pictures are evidently in her line. She managed to portray variegated
emotion in a perfectly satisfactory manner. She is not pretty, but there is more valuable than beauty
for the roles that she interprets. Nan was extremely well done. Charles Gunn is, I am told, new to the
picture business. His stock of facial expressions is a trifle limited, but he was adequate, and I think he
preferred his lack of grimaces to the usual contortions of the picture hero. One of the characters in
this picture was entitled
Winthrop Haines, although he was not a theatrical manager or anything of
that sort. This role was well acted by J. Barney Sherry. Charles K. French gave an excellent picture of a

On the whole, a dramatic picture of far-fetched drama!

By Alan Dale
Directed by: Walter Edwards

Written by: Lambert Hillyer

Louise Glaum ...  Nan Bishop
Charles Gunn ...  Jack Dunn
Jack Richardson ...  Paul Keeley
J. Barney Sherry ...  Winthrop E. Haines
Dorcas Matthews ...  Phyllis Geary
Charles K. French ...  Judge Geary
Louis Durham ...  Lieutenant Dillon
~Remaining Credits~

Production Companies:
Kay-Bee Pictures
New York Motion Picture

Distribution Company: Triangle Distributing

Cinematography by: Chester A. Lyons  
Thomas H. Ince

Length: 5 Reels
Runtime: 50 Minutes
Released: June 10, 1917