Ssshhh!! Silent Film

[soitgoes...]

I remember a thread dedicated to silent film over at the old site. I think it was lost during the "Great Server Purge of Early '07". I thought a new one would be nice as I, a)like silent film, b)enjoy reading what others have seen, and c)like to get new ideas on what to watch.
I've recently watch 4 Chaplin shorts.

A Day's Pleasure - Quite uneven for a Chaplin film. I read because he was focusing on making his first feature, The Kid, he wasn't concerned about this one, and it shows. The film is basically broken down into three parts. The first has Charlie and his family getting set for their day long outing. Next they are on a ferry, the longest section. Last we find the Chaplin family once again in a car locked in a battle with a traffic officer. The last section is by far the funniest.

Sunnyside - Another letdown. Chaplin works as a farm hand. It only seems to pick up when his Tramp must compete with a well-to-do man for a lady. There are some good gags, but overall nothing special.

The Idle Class - This one was a good 'un. The Tramp invades a resort. From the golf course to a costume party where he gets mistaken for a wealthy husband with a bit of an alcohol problem, this one is all laughs.

Pay Day - A funny short that relies on some good timing and stunts. It shows the Tramp working in a construction site digging up a pitiful amount a dirt, an amazing bricklaying scene, and him eating everyone's lunch unbeknownst to him or everyone else. Then comes his pay and his wife, rolling pin in hand.

[monolith94]

Someday I want to write a book about silent film. Obviously, I need to absorb more information on the period and the artists, but I think I have some really interesting critical points to make about filmmakers like Harold Lloyd and Pabst and all of those fellows.

[Philosophe_rouge]

I actually decided to dedicate November to watching silent fims almost exclusively. I've seen a few, but am still missing a lot of the major ones.

I agree with you wholeheartidly on Sunnyside and A Day's Pleasure, both had brief moments of interest but overall were flat and overlong. My favourite Chaplin short I've seen so far is 1 A.M. but there are so many I still have to see.

EDIT: Strangely enough, I picked up a used copy of Gloria Swanson's autobiography today, should be interesting.

[Boner M]

Have you seen or heard of The Sentimental Bloke (1919), mono? It's a gem.

[Isaac]

I'm not sure if this will be a controversial opinion. I like silent movies a lot, but I honestly have very little use for the short films by Chaplin and Keaton. Chaplin may be remembered as a clown, but he was capable of creating great moments of drama in The Kid, The Circus and City Lights, and I just don't see enough of that in his short films. They seem very disposable to me.

On the other hand, I'm starting to realize that most of Keaton's films are about very elaborate schemes to the win the hand of a very shallow girl.

[Spinal]

On the other hand, I'm starting to realize that most of Keaton's films are about very elaborate schemes to the win the hand of a very shallow girl.

Does the substance of the plot really matter in this case?

[Isaac]

Does the substance of the plot really matter in this case?

I think it matters a little bit. I think it's interesting, at least, that Keaton used this particular device so frequently.

[soitgoes...]

I'm not sure if this will be a controversial opinion. I like silent movies a lot, but I honestly have very little use for the short films by Chaplin and Keaton. Chaplin may be remembered as a clown, but he was capable of creating great moments of drama in The Kid, The Circus and City Lights, and I just don't see enough of that in his short films. They seem very disposable to me.
.
I agree and disagree. The majority of the shorts I've seen from Chaplin, Keaton, and throw in Lloyd too, are the weakest part of their filmgraphies. They occasionally pull off something akin to their features though, like the aforementioned The Idle Class, which I was laughing pretty much from beginning to end. Shorts like that are worth wading through a handful of mediocre ones. Plus they have the added benefit of preceding their careers in feature length films. Sort of like a proving ground to test their goods. Lloyd was doing stunts on the side of a building three years prior to Safety Last! in High and Dizzy, something he'd use again in Feet First. Just watching their progression as performers is at least worth the 20-30 minutes it takes to watch one short, says I.
The moments of drama just aren't going to happen in a 20 minute slapstick short. There just isn't time to set up all the gags, as well as getting enough character development in to have the audience care about drama. The Essanays and Hal Roaches were paying them for laughs.
I do see where you're coming from. I suppose I just haven't lost a taste for them yet. I imagine only watching a handful of them at a time and then moving on to something else helps.

[Bosco B Thug]

I juuust had to watch The Birth of Nation (for class), probably the most irresponsible movie ever made. Not thinking about it in context with the time, didn't find any of it too impressive. The best thing about it is it's lively and detailed blocking of character acting and movement.

[Raiders]

Hm. Many of Keaton's short films are just about perfect. Then again, I don't really care too much about a well developed plot when watching short films. I also think his drama is far more sincere than Chaplin's, which felt a little mugging to me sometimes. Keaton was so unassuming and natural he was able to create a terrific sympathetic character without even trying. Chaplin occasionally shoved his character's big heart and little sense in our faces. I find this more bearable in short films, but then again I have seen all of about two of Chaplin's shorts.

[Isaac]

Hm. Many of Keaton's short films are just about perfect. Then again, I don't really care too much about a well developed plot when watching short films.I don't know that I need well-developed plot, either, but I need something more than endless gags. For short films, I prefer Méliès.

I also think his drama is far more sincere than Chaplin's, which felt a little mugging to me sometimes. Keaton was so unassuming and natural he was able to create a terrific sympathetic character without even trying. Chaplin occasionally shoved his character's big heart and little sense in our faces. I find this more bearable in short films, but then again I have seen all of about two of Chaplin's shorts.
To me, Keaton's drama services the gags. I don't think it's very sincere. In The General, he joins a war because the girl he loves will only love him if he joins the war. In College, he goes out for sports because the girl he loves will only love him if he goes out for sports. It isn't particularly compelling to me, and in his short films, they don't even bother with this primitive drama.

On the other hand, I think the scene in which the authorities try to take the kid away from the tramp in The Kid is as great and dramatic as any scene I've ever witnessed in a more serious film.

[origami_mustache]

I juuust had to watch The Birth of Nation (for class), probably the most irresponsible movie ever made. Not thinking about it in context with the time, didn't find any of it too impressive. The best thing about it is it's lively and detailed blocking of character acting and movement.


...but why wouldn't you think about it in context with the time?

[Spinal]

Even considering the time period Birth of a Nation comes from, it's still irresponsible and racist. It was protested during its initial release.

[Qrazy]

Hm. Many of Keaton's short films are just about perfect. Then again, I don't really care too much about a well developed plot when watching short films. I also think his drama is far more sincere than Chaplin's, which felt a little mugging to me sometimes. Keaton was so unassuming and natural he was able to create a terrific sympathetic character without even trying. Chaplin occasionally shoved his character's big heart and little sense in our faces. I find this more bearable in short films, but then again I have seen all of about two of Chaplin's shorts.

Check out Monsieur Verdoux. The drama is sincere while the big heart, little sense issue is completely inverted.

[origami_mustache]

Check out Monsieur Verdoux. The drama is sincere while the big heart, little sense issue is completely inverted.

My favorite Chaplin film.

[origami_mustache]

Even considering the time period Birth of a Nation comes from, it's still irresponsible and racist. It was protested during its initial release.


Obviously, but that isn't to say there is nothing impressive about it from a technical standpoint. There is no denying how revolutionary and influential Birth of a Nation was, both positively and negatively.

[Sycophant]

My favorite Chaplin film.Very interesting. I'm a fan myself, though it probably doesn't break my top five Chaplins. Am I wrong in thinking this one is oft-maligned?

[origami_mustache]

Very interesting. I'm a fan myself, though it probably doesn't break my top five Chaplins. Am I wrong in thinking this one is oft-maligned?

I seem to get that impression as well. Perhaps because it is such a far cry from the films people most often associate Chaplin with.

[Isaac]

I believe I have just seen the worst silent movie ever -- Salome (1923). Apparently, all men in ancient Palestine wore tights all the time and some of them wore wigs made out of marshmallows. Worst costume design ever.

On the other hand, I thought Lot in Sodom was quite a good late silent film from the director of The Fall of the House of Usher.

[Qrazy]

I want a marshmallow wig. So I watched Murnau's Tabu. It was one of his lesser works but still pretty solid. The story is very simple and the metaphors direct but the visual storytelling is quality, particularly this early on in the history of the medium.

[Yxklyx]

I believe I have just seen the worst silent movie ever -- Salome (1923). Apparently, all men in ancient Palestine wore tights all the time and some of them wore wigs made out of marshmallows. Worst costume design ever.

On the other hand, I thought Lot in Sodom was quite a good late silent film from the director of The Fall of the House of Usher.

I wonder why he didn't direct anything after Lot in Sodom? Perhaps he started doing porn and IMDB doesn't list them? Salome was poor.

[megladon8]

I've just recently - mid-2007 - discovered Harold Lloyd, and boy-oh-boy he was funny.

Safety Last! was one of the funniest films I saw last year.

[Melville]

I've just recently - mid-2007 - discovered Harold Lloyd, and boy-oh-boy he was funny.

Safety Last! was one of the funniest films I saw last year.
I just discovered that my library has a collection of his films. I'll definitely pick it up later this week.

[ledfloyd]

i agree with Raiders that many of Keaton's shorts are near perfect.

Chaplin on the other hand, The Great Dictator is the only film of his I've really enjoyed. I didn't really care for The Circus, City Lights or Modern Times.

[D_Davis]

Someday I want to write a book about silent film. Obviously, I need to absorb more information on the period and the artists, but I think I have some really interesting critical points to make about filmmakers like Harold Lloyd and Pabst and all of those fellows.

You should.

[megladon8]

I just discovered that my library has a collection of his films. I'll definitely pick it up later this week.


Cool!

Is it this set?

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4774/lloydxf8.th.jpg (http://img267.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lloydxf8.jpg)


That's the one I got. The transfers are top notch, and it has some really good extras as well.

[Melville]

Cool!

Is it this set?

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4774/lloydxf8.th.jpg (http://img267.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lloydxf8.jpg)
I'm not sure. The library website doesn't have a picture. The library's collection appears to be only two discs, while the big number 7 on the cover of that one suggests more.

[megladon8]

I'm not sure. The library website doesn't have a picture. The library's collection appears to be only two discs, while the big number 7 on the cover of that one suggests more.


Well this 7-disc set is actually 3 separately available 2-disc sets, with another disc of extras thrown in.

So you probably got one of the separately available 2-disc sets.

Hope you enjoy it!

[monolith94]

Oh come on, Salome isn't THAT bad. But yeah, Lot In Sodom was the impressive film on that dvd.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Back peddling, the only Chaplin short I feel even approaches the quality, innovation and the laughs of a Keaton one is One A.M. (1916), and even then doesn't begin to reach the sheer wonder of something like the Playhouse. Honestly, watching many of Chaplin's early work I'm amazed he was so popular and loved early in his career, because most of his shorts are unfunny, repetitive and overly long. I do love his feature work though, City Lights has been a staple of my favourites since I first got into film. With the exception of maybe A Woman in Paris (and his post-Verdoux work, which I haven't seen) I think all his features are wonderful, and I watch them again and again without getting tired of them. I'm less familiar with Keaton's feature work, I've seen The General and Steamboat Bill Jr. Neither of which stand up against my favourite Chaplin, although the former is a masterpiece in it's own right. I need to see his other work though. I still haven't seen a single Harold and Lloyd :(

[Sycophant]

Chaplin on the other hand, The Great Dictator is the only film of his I've really enjoyed. I didn't really care for The Circus, City Lights or Modern Times.
I can't believe I'm giving you rep on a post where you profess not caring much for City Lights or The Circus, but that's just how damn much I love The Great Dictator.

[Isaac]

My top 7 movies of 1923:

1. Our Hospitality
2. The Hunchback of Notre Dame
3. Why Worry?
4. Safety Last!
5. A Woman of Paris
6. Scaramouche
7. Salome

[Yxklyx]

- 1923
1. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Wallace Worsley) 8
2. Why Worry? (Fred C. Newmeyer & Sam Taylor) 8
3. Our Hospitality (John G. Blystone & Buster Keaton) 8
4. Safety Last! (Fred C. Newmeyer & Sam Taylor) 7
5. Voice of the Nightingale (Wladyslaw Starewicz) [short] 7
6. A Woman of Paris (Charles Chaplin) 7
7. Merry-Go-Round (Rupert Julian & Erich von Stroheim) 6

Very similar lists. Of course, there aren't that many movies available to watch.

[monolith94]

Was Way Down East 1923?

[Isaac]

Was Way Down East 1923?
Dude, shut up. You know how to use the internet.

I just watched the American version of Pabst's The Joyless Street. I didn't realize until now that it was severely edited from its original version, in which Greta Garbo was a secondary character. The one I saw was all about Garbo. I would really be interested in seeing the longer version.

[monolith94]

I was wrong. It isn't from 1923.

When I posted that I was running late for a date. I just felt oddly compelled to post something.

I can only hope that sometime in my future I will be forgiven.

The play itself, Salome, as written by Oscar Wilde really is quite marvelous, but much of the art of it comes from the whistful repetition of language, the unique phrasing of love from the mouths of its characters, something undeniably hindered by the silent screen. David Lynch would be a good adapter.

[Melville]

Well this 7-disc set is actually 3 separately available 2-disc sets, with another disc of extras thrown in.

So you probably got one of the separately available 2-disc sets.

Hope you enjoy it!
It turns out that I got 4 discs, which I'm guessing are the first two volumes of the 3-volume set. I just watched Safety Last!, but I'm unsure what else I should check out. The discs feature An Eastern Westerner, Ask Father, Girl Shy, From Hand to Mouth, The Cat's Paw, The Milky Way, Why Worry?, The Kid Brother, Bumping into Broadway, The Freshman, Billy Blazes, Esq., Dr. Jack, Feet First, Grandma's Boy, Now or Never, and High and Dizzy. Any recommendations?

[Yxklyx]

It turns out that I got 4 discs, which I'm guessing are the first two volumes of the 3-volume set. I just watched Safety Last!, but I'm unsure what else I should check out. The discs feature An Eastern Westerner, Ask Father, Girl Shy, From Hand to Mouth, The Cat's Paw, The Milky Way, Why Worry?, The Kid Brother, Bumping into Broadway, The Freshman, Billy Blazes, Esq., Dr. Jack, Feet First, Grandma's Boy, Now or Never, and High and Dizzy. Any recommendations?

If you can't watch them all then you should definitely watch:

Girl Shy
Why Worry?

and then...

The Kid Brother
The Freshman

P.S. Girl Shy has one of the best chase/race scenes in silent film and Why Worry? is like live Looney Tunes.

[monolith94]

Girl Shy is a beautiful, beautiful piece of filmmaking. Just brilliant.

[Melville]

Girl Shy was great; that madcap race to the wedding was hilarious. But unfortunately the disc with Why Worry is defective.:sad:

[Isaac]

My efforts to fill out my top ten of 1923 have led me to a little-known German expressionist film called Warning Shadows, about an 18th century dinner party that goes awry, sort of. Highly expressionistic, but different than any other expressionist film I've seen. Most of the reviews on IMDb are pretty middling, but I loved it.

[Yxklyx]

My efforts to fill out my top ten of 1923 have led me to a little-known German expressionist film called Warning Shadows, about an 18th century dinner party that goes awry, sort of. Highly expressionistic, but different than any other expressionist film I've seen. Most of the reviews on IMDb are pretty middling, but I loved it.

Cool, 1923 is a pretty weak year from what I've seen - maybe related to the transition from short films to feature films? So, anything new from that year is good to check out. My top 10:

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Wallace Worsley)
Why Worry? (Fred C. Newmeyer & Sam Taylor)
Our Hospitality (John G. Blystone & Buster Keaton)
Safety Last! (Fred C. Newmeyer & Sam Taylor)
Voice of the Nightingale (Wladyslaw Starewicz) [short]
A Woman of Paris (Charles Chaplin)
Merry-Go-Round (Rupert Julian & Erich von Stroheim)
The Treasure (Georg Wilhelm Pabst)
The Shock (Lambert Hillyer)
The Love Nest (Edward F. Cline & Buster Keaton) [short]

[Isaac]

I didn't think Three Ages was very good, except for the jumping off the building part. How does he do it?! But I'm honestly getting a little tired of Keaton. His movies just aren't different enough from each other.

But at least I now have a semi-presentable top ten list of 1923.

1. Warning Shadows
2. Our Hospitality
3. The Hunchback of Notre Dame
4. Why Worry?
5. Safety Last!
6. A Woman of Paris
7. The Ten Commandments
8. The Shock
9. Three Ages
10. Scaramouche

Ah, small victories.

I also thought The Ten Commandments was good, although preachy. Great special effects.

[soitgoes...]

Yeah Three Ages is my least favorite full-length Buster Keaton film. A rather immemorable film, except for the car falling apart.

I really need to get cracking on watching more from this era. I think my next silent film will be Vidor's The Crowd.

[Isaac]

I think if Neil LaBute had made a film in the 1920's, it would be a lot like Ernst Lubitsch's The Marriage Circle, what with the lies and the jealousy and the scheming and the general douchebaggery.

[Brightside]

The best Chaplin short I've seen would have to be The Immigrant. That and The Adventurer are great for shorts.

[soitgoes...]

I love history. It was always my favorite subject in school. When I read, I tend to enjoy non-fiction history books over anything else. So when I watch films from the early silent period, before 1920, it's mostly for the historical record. Entertainment and artistic merit tends to be lacking, as filmmakers are still trying to figure out what this new medium can offer. Since I love history, including the history of film, watching these early films aren't necessarily a chore, but how can I compare them with what was produced at the peak of silent films at the advent of sound? I try not to; rather I give the filmmakers the benefit of the doubt. After all how can I find fault with a 13 minute short with the simplest of story lines, sets made out of what looks to be cardboard, and the most basic camerawork and editing when only 20 years prior a sneeze caught on camera was groundbreaking.

The past few days I have watched Louis Feuillade's Les Vampires. This truly is unlike any film I have seen. A serial, it is composed of 10 parts of varying length (between 15 and 60 minutes). Though the title might suggest something supernatural, it is actually a crime thriller of sorts. Each episode is self-contained with a cliffhanger to draw the viewer to the next one. Think comic books. It pits reporter Philippe Guérande against les Vampires, a Parisian crime syndicate led by the infamous Irma Vep, among others. There are twists and turns, murders and kidnappings, a lot of things that might be taken as being cliché, but at the time were probably fresh and innovative. All in all it was an enjoyable few nights of film watching. It opened my eyes to what early silent films could offer. I'm not expecting greatness by all, but it's exciting to think that it might be there all the same.

[Boner M]

I watched Girl Shy a few days ago and agree with the praise in this thread; it felt a lot more like an actual film than Safety Last, which I also enjoyed immensely, but found the plot seemed like a sketchy afterthought, or at least a thin excuse to string together a bunch of set pieces, however impressive they were.

[Yxklyx]

My efforts to fill out my top ten of 1923 have led me to a little-known German expressionist film called Warning Shadows, about an 18th century dinner party that goes awry, sort of. Highly expressionistic, but different than any other expressionist film I've seen. Most of the reviews on IMDb are pretty middling, but I loved it.

This was very good. Thanks for the recommendation.

[Isaac]

I believe I have just seen the worst silent movie ever
So I've found a new film to earn this distinction -- Larry Semon's 1925 version of The Wizard of Oz. Semon himself plays the scarecrow, or, I should say, a farmhand who briefly disguises himself as a scarecrow late in the film. He has about four times as much screen time as Dorothy. I generally wouldn't dwell on differences between the film and the source material, but the changes are so terrible. It's pretty much all slapstick. Really bad slapstick. It's almost 50 minutes before they arrive in Oz. What do you think is the appeal of this story, Larry? Do you think anyone really wants to watch you chase a bee?

[Isaac]

If you're going to make a movie called The Headless Horseman, it would be nice if the titular horseman made an appearance earlier than ONE HOUR INTO THE MOVIE. Especially if your movie is only 68 minutes long.

That was almost as bad as The Wizard of Oz.