The Last Laugh (1924)

Posted on April 5, 2016 by 4 Star Films

Without sound, silent films become almost a completely visual medium and there was no one more visually-minded than German director F.W. Murnau. Aside from the opening title card and a message to begin the epilogue, he stays away from that kind of aid to tell his story and instead relies wholly on the image. His film does, however, boast a vibrant score, so that fills the void in the absence of dialogue.

Emil Jannings, the rotund, mustachioed leading man, stars as the veteran hotel porter, who is demoted to bathroom attendant due to his age and frailties. And it’s true that he always seems bent over and perpetually weary, but it only gets worse when he loses his esteemed position as the symbol of The Atlantic Hotel. Before he stood beaming ear to ear in his prim and pressed uniform that reflected his status. Then, he winds up towel in hand, resigned to stay hidden away in the bathroom. Now everyone could care less about him. It’s a tragic trajectory that this story takes.

The film opens at the lavish hotel which feels very similar to the grand hotel, and this along with the man’s apartment building are the main locations that Murnau works with. And he does set up his scenes so interestingly, whether it’s around a revolving door in the hotel or the staircase in the apartment. He’s constantly giving us a perspective of things with wonderfully textured, layered shots exemplified sublimely in such moments as Jannings superhuman feat carrying the large chest. Murnau gives it a wonderfully dreamy, ethereal quality, the way he clouds the frame. He also uses his actors in dynamic ways to fill the space in front of us. It hardly ever feels static or boring for that matter, because there’s almost always something of interest to be looking at.

This is a very heart-wrenching film, because, in a sense, at its core, it’s about aging gracefully and trying to navigate that season of life. Because, the reality is that, each one of us will grow old. Our bodies won’t be able to function like they used to. Our feet will grow weaker. Our eyes will become tired more easily. We can completely understand this man’s plight. He has pride and the shame of acknowledging his demotion is too much for him to bear. He tries to hide it, from the wife and from the neighbors, but, of course, they find out. His family is ashamed and his neighbors belittle him with glee. The saddest thing is this doorman is not a bad fellow, as illustrated by how he comforted a little girl who was being made fun of. He’s a good man, and he deserves better than this and yet life very often is not just. The gossips and the connivers seem to get ahead. The beatitude, the first shall be last, hardly ever seems to be true. In fact, the film pauses with the following title card:

“Here the story should really end, for, in real life, the forlorn old man would have little to look forward to but death. The author took pity on him and has provided a quite improbable epilogue.”

There is a major shift in tone as the doorman is left a huge sum of money rather unexpectedly, and he spends the days now eating heartily and generously tipping all his former colleagues at the hotel. It almost feels like a completely different story, and it’s the ending that we want as an audience. Except still lurking in the back of our minds is that this is very rarely reality. But there is some satisfaction that at least in this case Emil Jannings had The Last Laugh.

This film is literally a piece of film history that has thankfully been reconstructed for our viewing pleasure and I’m thoroughly glad it was. I’ve only seen Murnau’s Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans, which is magnificent. However, after watching this earlier work it made me realize I need to examine more of his filmography, including Nosferatu (1922), Faust (1926), City Girl (1930), and Tabu (1931).

4.5/5 Stars

Intolerance (1916)

Posted on March 1, 2016 by 4 Star Films

800px-Intolerance_(film) His ambitious follow-up to The Birth of the Nation a year before, D.W. Griffith’s Intolerance boasts four narrative threads meant to intertwine in a story of grand design. Transcending time, eras, and cultures, this monumental undertaking grabs hold of some of the cataclysmic markers of world history. They include the fall of Babylon, the life, ministry, and crucifixion of Christ, along with the persecution of the Huguenots in France circa the 16th century.

The stories are stitched together and become only a few touchstones in a contemporary tale of a young man and woman battling against the bleak world around them. The Dear One must try and recover her child from the clutches of a society crippled by corruption, while her husband must battle against a criminal past that looks to ruin his life forever. Each setting has its lulls and crescendos that fluctuate between the mundane and the overtly bleak.

Although some of the religious undertones are somewhat simplistic they still have some resounding power in their successive notes. A Christ subjected to the crucifixion sent there by hypocritical Pharisees. A mother crying to God that she might recover her child because the corrupt and evil seem to be having their way with her. These are the low points of despair. But just as Babylon fell at the hand of Cyrus the Great, our hero The Boy escapes the business end of the hangman’s noose literally by a matter of seconds. It’s perhaps the most intense and ultimately gratifying moment in a film that runs the gamut emotionally.

The film’s four arcs are certainly not in equal parts or equal in impact, but nevertheless, they suggest the complex plotting that Griffith was attempting to experiment with and it’s still quite impressive even by today’s standards. He takes such a broad, universal theme like intolerance and gives it legs in the form of a story that crosses time and space, cultures and languages to really meet all people where they are at. I will stop short of calling it overlong, because Intolerance is one of the truly epic films out there, and while it’s possible to lose a bit of the film’s cohesion, it nevertheless is an impressive endeavor.

So perhaps it’s true that he made the film due to people’s criticism of The Birth of the Nation — though it seems rightly justified. Still, even to this day, the film stands as an emblem of something more and perhaps the best “sequel” to a film of such a dubious nature. It cannot cover up for the sins of the former film, but it can certainly overshadow them. History has looked kindly on Intolerance and if it is not more widely known than its predecessor than it certainly deserves to be.

You could argue that D.W. Griffith was the first person to really explore the language that is film, as a mode of artistic expression. Because, although it may have cleaned Griffith out and ended up an unfulfilled commercial flop, there is no doubt that this colossal silent left an indelible mark on the industry. Perhaps Hollywood took note and began to turn away from the single-minded vision of auteurs in favor of a regimented machine that churned out a commercial product. That ‘s the Classic Hollywood period for you. However, Griffith perhaps unwittingly created many of the rules and dimensions that Hollywood would take to heart and systematically put to work in its future works. Furthermore, a case can be made that Griffith also set the groundwork for European cinema that often gave birth to loftier, more artistically inspired works altogether. Thus, the influence of Griffith cannot be understated. He was vastly important to the medium of film as we now know it.

4.5/5 Stars

Sherlock Jr. (1924)

Posted on January 7, 2016 by 4 Star Films

When I was just learning about silent comedy I would have said that it started and ended with Charlie Chaplin no questions asked. And it’s true that he most certainly is a starting point, but if you want to get even a small understanding of comedy you have to look at Buster Keaton (as well as Harold Lloyd). I’m not claiming a great deal of knowledge about silent films (I still have much to see and learn), but Keaton astounded me with his prolific output during the 1920s and his physical prowess. I did not appreciate The General (1926) that much the first time around, however, by the time I got to Our Hospitality (1923), Seven Chances (1925), Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928), The Cameraman (1928), The Navigator (1924), and of course this film, I completely changed my initial evaluation.

Since Sherlock Jr. is shorter than most of his other features it’s almost like Keaton cut out all the dross and what we are left with are sequences of cinematic gold. In this story about a projectionist obsessed with being a detective, there is surprising depth and inventiveness that is still magical today. The plot really is a film within a film, starting with Sherlock Jr. trying to win over the affections of his love (Kathryn McGuire) with a box of chocolates. But his rival (Ward Crane) does the same by more shady means and pins his dastardly deed on Jr. Now our hero is banished from the house and resigns himself to his projection room where he enters into a dream-filled sleep. It mirrors the film that is playing on the screen as he enters this world as a detective and fills it with all his real-life acquaintances. The fact that the girl comes back to him at the end feels rather superfluous because we automatically assume that is the case. It’s how Keaton gets there that’s ingenious

It easy to marvel at some of the visuals as Buster Keaton literally leaves his body and walks onto the screen, shifting between an array of backdrops in a thoroughly entertaining sequence. He’s pulling crazy stunts without CGI mind you, and many of them put his life and welfare on the line. He tries his hand at pool with impressive skill and pulls off some amazing parlor tricks including a disappearing act that not only stumps the thugs pursuing him but the audience as well.

Even after reading a full breakdown of how he was able to literally vanish into thin air I’m still utterly baffled. Every time it causes me do a double take. Then, of course, there’s his wild ride on the handlebars of the motorcycle, which has some beautifully comic stunt work. It’s stuff you certainly would not want to try at home and it would be unthinkable today, but that was the brilliance of “The Great Stone Face.” He was literally willing to put his life on the line, and whereas Chaplin was adept at pulling at our heartstrings, the often emotionless Keaton does not try that. He wins us over with his resilience. In him, I find a figure of a very relatable temperament although he was more of a daredevil than I could hope (or want) to be. That just makes me respect and marvel at what he can do. If you want to see slapstick and sight gags at their zenith then take a look at Buster Keaton. Sherlock Jr. is always a good starting point.

5/5 Stars

The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)

Posted on December 9, 2014 by 4 Star Films

As cliche as it will sound, this is one of those films that transcends the years for me. It is still that powerful after so many decades.

Using low angles and numerous close ups Carl Theodor Dreyer pulled me into this story early on. It was tense and claustrophobic causing the viewer to become emotionally involved in the trial and the plight that surrounded Joan.

The actors that he chose have wonderfully expressive visages that are so distinct even with out makeup of any kind. Then there is Falconetti who undoubtedly has a pair of the most expressive eyes ever shown on the silver screen.

I watched the film without any score so the complete silence was a new experience for me, but it forced me to pay particular attention to the images. Those were enough to keep my attention by making me squirm and empathize the entire time.

By the end of the film there is an immense connection for Joan built because she seems an innocent victim. A martyr to be sure who reflects the sufferings of Christ. That is the story of The Passion of Joan of Arc. Certainly a simple tale but a master work of silent cinema nonetheless.

I am intrigued to see more from Carol Theodor Dreyer especially because his filmography is so sparse.

4.5/5 Stars

Seven Chances (1925)

Posted on September 3, 2014 by 4 Star Films

We’ve seen a derivative of this story many times before, but thanks to Buster Keaton, Seven Chances has a lot of marvelous comedic moments created by his wonderful physical ability.

The story goes something like this: Boy meets girl and he loves her but never makes his move. Now he has the chance at $7 million if he gets married before his 27th birthday. But that’s today so all he has to do is marry his sweetheart Mary. It sounds so easy until he complicates the whole situation with muddled words and misunderstandings.

Now he only has a matter of time to find another bride. His law partner puts down a line of candidates, and he strikes out each time earning a face full of laughs in reply. Even the secretary and coat attendant turn him down his pitiful plea.

He drives off desperate for a bride and his buddies put an ad in the paper sure to grab him a wife. Jimmy waits patiently at the church, but there’s a problem. Hundreds of women show up and soon turn into a mob bent on clobbering him for making fools of them.

Then and there begins one of the grandest, most epic, and extraordinary chase scenes of all time. Forget Bullitt or The French Connection, this is the seminal chase scene. It’s mind boggling to think how many extras they used and all dressed in drag no less. It is difficult not to marvel at Keaton’s physical prowess because that is where he tops Chaplin. He’s fantastic at scampering about, sliding around, and making pitfalls in general, given the right environment. Soon the world becomes his playground with coattails flying and droves of angry women hot on his heels.

He hitches a ride on the spare tire of a car, dangles from a crane, does frantic Australian crawl across a pond, rides a falling tree, and of course, dodges an avalanche of fake-looking boulders. All I can say is Keaton could have been a professional dodgeball player, but we can be thankful he stayed with film. He was pretty decent at comedy too.

Needless to say, Jimmy gets back in the nick of time, or did he? Of course, he did! It seems like he’s the only one who cannot plant a kiss on the bride. At least he has one now, and Mary is far more important than the money. That’s all that really matters.

Chaplin was great because his Tramp had so much expression. The Great Stone Face was great for the exact opposite reason. He lacked it. His nervous fidgeting or obvious dismay in all situations heightens the comedy making the laughs even more hilarious.

His two buddies are a comical pair in their own right with their differing heights and good-natured blunders. They get caught up in Jimmy’s unfortunate predicament and get knocked about a bit as well.

Keaton may have had greater films, but in his golden age during the 1920s, he could hardly do any wrong. Seven Chance has one of the greatest sustained comedy sequences of any of his films and it certainly does showcase his skills. He gave Chaplin a run for his money, literally.

4.5/5 Stars

Review: City Lights (1931)

Posted on August 8, 2014 by 4 Star Films

A comedy romance in pantomime. That’s just exactly what City Lights is, because, despite the fact that talkies had been around for approximately 4 years, Chaplin was hesitant to transition his Tramp over to sound. In many ways, I can understand why since the universality of his character would be gone and Chaplin’s own voice would give a very different feel to the little man. With his great popularity and artistic control, Chaplin made this film and Modern Times without dialogue. All he used were synchronized sounds and musical scores. As audiences can attest to, it worked out just fine for him.

This film opens with the Tramp in all his glory sleeping on a statue during its public unveiling. He is rudely awakened and shooed off on his way. He drifts down the boulevards finally meeting a lowly flower girl, showing her kindness before moving on. Although I am partial to Paulette Goddard, Virginia Cherrill plays the blind girl believably and she is a wonderful love interest for Chaplin’s character.

His next acquaintance is a drunken millionaire (Harry Myers) bent on committing suicide. His attempt is unsuccessful partially in thanks to the Tramp. He even gives the man a few positive words as is his custom (Tomorrow the birds will sing, be brave, face life!).

And there you have it. Chaplin introduced his audience to the two people who would be closest to the little man. The two new chums head to a high society hang out where they nearly get in a fight over everything from a bottle of seltzer to a chair, and even the floor show.

The Tramp goes back to the girl, and as another act of kindness he purchases her whole basket of flowers for $10 and continues to masquerade as a high society swinger. As the next title card reads, the sober dawn awakens a different man. Thus, The Tramp is initially rejected by his friend from before, but the drunken millionaire gets reincarnated once again and they begin a wild rager. The next morning the cycle begins again with the Tramp being thrown out.

The Little Man has taken it upon himself to be somewhat of a guardian angel for the blind girl who has become his love. Money is needed if she wants to have a home, and despite getting fired from his job, he resolves to get the funds the next best way. In a boxing match. This is where my favorite sequence, which plays out in the ring, comes to fruition.

The Tramp is seemingly outgunned, but that does not stop him from duking it out. He uses the referee, hugs, and anything else at his disposal to try and not get clobbered. The scene had to be choreographed extensively because at moments it looks just like a dance perfectly synchronized between the three characters. The so-called dance becomes even more uproarious when he begins to tackle his opponent and then unknowingly takes out the ref next. The fight seems even with each man falling down repetitiously as the ref tries to say the count. Unfortunately, the little man cannot hold out and he loses the pot.

One final time he runs into his millionaire friend just back from Europe, and he gets the much-needed money for his girl. Matters are complicated by burglars and a misunderstanding with the police. All works out in the end and the flower girl has her home and enough over to get a surgery to allow her to regain her sight.

Chaplin’s character pays the cost though, winding up in jail because of the “stolen” funds. When he gets on the outside he is more destitute than ever, but the girl’s business is now flourishing.

He runs into her and eyes her happily. Little does she know who this man is. This is not the debonair gentlemen she was expecting. She laughingly proclaims, “I’ve made a conquest.”

Only when she touches his hand by chance, reverting back to her old self, does she comprehend who this really is. This is her savior, the one person who radically changed her entire life. He is dressed in tatters and barely has a penny to his name. But he did have kindness and compassion for her.

A lot has been said about the final moments of the film where she has her “aha” moment, and he responds accordingly. What strikes me is how Chaplin so effectively reveals the nervous charm of his character. His fingers are constantly near his mouth, flower in hand. He states the obvious (You can see now). Then, the film closes with his face lit up with another nervous smile, fingers still in mouth.

It is hard to say where the story goes from this point. That’s not the important part here, though. The important part is that in both of The Tramp’s relationships his two friends cannot see who he truly is. The girl is physically blind and the millionaire is blinded by his stupor. They easily accept him in certain circumstances and yet they truly do not know him.

He, on the other hand, seems to accept them no matter the person they are at that moment. He is faithful and compassionate to them in all circumstances. It seems that perhaps the Tramp truly knows them because he is not blinded like they are. Again, I marvel about how so much can be pondered thanks to the actions of an unassuming vagabond. He is a remarkable little man with a very big heart.

5/5 Stars

Review: Modern Times (1936)

Posted on August 6, 2014 by 4 Star Films

Modern Times: A story of industry, individual enterprise, humanity crusading in the pursuit of happiness

With those words, Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times opens with the final installment of The Little Tramp. Clocking in at a little under 90 minutes, Chaplin is still able to do so much, because he does not waste a single segment of film. This is one of the most wonderful pieces of social commentary that Chaplin was able to dream up to reflect the life and times of his audience — to reflect these modern times.

As was his style with The Great Dictator as well, he pokes fun and critiques his targets all under the guise of comedy. He sets the stage at the industrial factory that the Tramp works in. In a precursor to the famed I Love Lucy conveyor belt episode, it is the Tramp who must fight against the constant stream of nuts and bolts. Breaks and lunch become a thing of the past, and the little man suffers a nervous breakdown that leads to mayhem involving a wild ride through the cogs of the machinery as well as some oily madness.

Right off the bat, Chaplin poked fun at this mechanized system that is overseen by a Big Brother-type figure who spends his idle moments at his desk working on puzzles and reading Tarzan serials.

After the Tramp is forced to leave his job following the series of mishaps, he is confronted by numerous issues that Chaplin gleefully exploits. These include communism, the police force, prison, and even drugs (smuggled nose-powder).

Through the Tramp character, Chaplin comments that with the state of the nation during the Depression it was better to be in jail than out in the world. At least you got a bed and food. It was better than unemployment or starving to death with the police constantly on your backs ready to quell any riots.

These sorts of issues are explored through the character of the Gamin (Paulette Goddard). She becomes the Tramp’s love interest for the rest of the film, but the circumstances of their meeting are important. She was attempting to steal a loaf a bread from a bakery truck. It was not out of malice but desperation to feed her family.

The antics are often funny throughout these sequences, but the reality is, she and her sisters lose their father, and they are already motherless. The future is bleak and there is no help to be found with the Depression at its peak.

Here is where possibly my favorite part of the film begins. The two vagrants imagine themselves living in a middle-class household with fruit they can pick from outside their window and a cow that comes up to their door to be milked. They have a fully furnished home with furniture, ottomans, drapes and a fully stocked kitchen. This is their American Dream and that is where their hope lies. One could say that this was the consumerism culture of the post-war 1950s in a nutshell.

Next, the Tramp becomes a night watchman in a department store and for the evening he and the Gamin have the place all to themselves: To roller skate, eat, and use the beds and furs as they please. It is a moment of relaxing diversion from their normally grungy, monotonous lives.

Finally, they find a home as well. It is a real fixer-upper, but it’s home and that’s all that matters. They have each other, and they seem happy enough making do. The Tramp goes back to his 9 to 5 at the factory only to get kicked out once more. The pair of them land work at a local restaurant only to have juvenile officers come after the fugitive Gamin after an uproarious floor show from the Tramp.

Thus, they are once more on the road again. But that never stopped them before, and with his inexhaustible spirit the little man cheers on his love, “Buck up, never say die. We’ll get along!”

They walk off down the highway with new resolve but more importantly they have each other. If they ever do find that elusive lifestyle I am not sure it would be all that it is cracked up to be. The life of a Depression Era vagabond was no picnic, but I think the gift of the Tramp is he is able to make the best of all circumstances. He may look to a better lifestyle in the future with hope, but he does not need it to bring him happiness. Because the reality is, it never could completely satiate. I tip my hat to you for once little man, because for someone so humble you teach us a great deal about ourselves.

Chaplin did it again bringing us a near silent picture in the age of talkies. Although I admit it might seem awkward at times, this film uses sound and the score wonderfully to accentuate the images onscreen. Chaplin did not need the needless babble of dialogue unless it was for comic effect. After all, he and Paulette Goddard had enough chemistry beforehand, they didn’t need words.

5/5 Stars

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927)

Posted on October 26, 2013 by 4 Star Films

Directed by F.W. Murnau, this silent film follows the lives of a man and his wife. A woman from the city meets the man and suggests that he drown his wife and sell his farm so they can be together. Then, the man takes his innocent wife out on the lake with evil intentions. He is about to go through with it, but ultimately cannot. The wife flees and they take a trolley to the city. The man asks for her forgiveness, and they walk through the city finally reconciled.

Over the day they get their picture taken, go in a barber shop, and have fun at an amusement park. They travel back home by boat and then a massive storm hits. The man searches for his wife to no avail, and then he encounters the exuberant city woman. In his anger, he begins to choke her, but his wife is still alive! He rushes to her bedside and they kiss. This film is wonderfully complex and artistic for a film without any talking. Unlike Chaplin or Keaton this is a great dramatic silent film that does not utilize slapstick comedy, and yet it still finds ways to be funny.

I had forgotten just how funny this film is in parts, and it nicely complements the very memorable love story. Visually this film is extraordinary with its multitude of landscape and city scenes that often overlap and are superimposed on one another. In this aspect, it reminds me of the experimental visuals of Keaton’s Sherlock Jr.

However, this film is very atmospheric and more emotion-filled than the other film. Furthermore, despite the lack of real dialogue, it is almost a misnomer to call this movie “silent.” It most certainly features sound, which often dominates certain sequences and also adds a great deal of feeling to the romance and cityscape. Sometimes it is the chime of bells, the honking of horns, intense background music, or just lively street chatter.

Despite the general story of redemptive love that dominates Sunrise, there are also some charming asides during the visit to the city. Each and every stop has a surprise, whether it is a suitor in the barbershop, the couple posing for the camera, the slipping of a strap on a lady’s dress, or a drunken pig on the loose at the carnival. Ultimately, the film reverts back to this song of two humans, and the temptation of the city and that type of woman loses its luster in comparison to nature’s sunrise and the innocent wife. It is a wonderful allegory and Murnau skillfully develops the cinematic space in unconventional and interesting ways.

5/5 Stars

The General (1926)

Posted on June 17, 2013 by 4 Star Films

This silent film starring the great Buster Keaton, tells a simple story with comical results. Keaton is Johnnie Gray, a Southern engineer who loves his locomotive and his girl. As it turns out Union spies steal his train, The General, and they also take his love captive. Now Johnnie must track them down and save his fair southern belle. After many a comedic antic, Keaton finds himself behind enemy lines and he is now on the run. However, he does eventually get the girl and then warns the Confederates that the Union forces are coming. Because of his great bravery, he is rewarded with the rank of Lieutenant even though he was not enlisted. Although this film might seem slow to the modern audience, if put in context the, the bouncy score, the slapstick comedy, and Keaton can all be enjoyable. “The Great Stone Face” was one of the few who gave Chaplin a run for his money.

4/5 Stars

Keaton and Lloyd

Posted on June 10, 2013 by 4 Star Films

I have been well acquainted with the films of Charlie Chaplin which always seem to couple romance and comedy so nicely with the character of the Tramp.

However, I had seen very little of Buster Keaton and I had only heard of the name Harold Lloyd. Recently I have finally had the pleasure of taking in more of their work and I must say I have a new appreciation for them. With their respective films it is understandable how they were able to give Chaplin a run for his money. Keaton always appears as a solemn figure whether he is a Confederate soldier, a detective, and so on. He does not try and win our sympathy or affection but he is always determined to take on whatever his world throws at him. His various hilarious and often life-threatening antics cause us to cheer for his characters and in turn we also grow to respect Keaton for his talent as an actor and a director. (Recently I have been able to see Sherlock Jr., Steamboat Bill Jr., and Our Hospitality).

Then, there is Harold Lloyd, the number three man of the silent era comedians. Lloyd had his own persona that he developed to perfection. He was the nerdish fellow who always wore the same pair of glasses and the same hat. He makes us laugh because of his naivete and various antics including scaling a building only to dangle from a clock (Lloyd actually only had eight fingers to accomplish this feat because of an accident). This causes us to empathize with him much like we would with Chaplin, but their styles could never be confused with each other. (I was able to watch Safety Last! and The Freshman).

That is the beauty of these three men because each one created his own legend and so each one is an icon in his own right. People might fight over who is the best of the group, but really there is no comparison since they all went in different directions. Although these films may be an acquired taste, I hope to be able to watch more in the future sometime!

http://youtube.googleapis.com/v/zsyRhRR5Iu4&source=uds

http://youtube.googleapis.com/v/Hr2aj1ibVYE&source=uds