Author Topic: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New  (Read 24777 times)

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #40 on: August 16, 2016, 11:02:11 PM »
I really liked Haynes' mix of cinematic techniques, creating a horror/musical/documentary.

Yeah, you can definitely see the roots of both Poison and I'm Not There.

pixote
« Last Edit: August 16, 2016, 11:06:30 PM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #41 on: August 17, 2016, 02:38:28 PM »
1920: Something New



Just Pals  (John Ford, 1920)

I wouldn't mind seeing more movies directed by this Jack Ford fella. Just Pals, his first film after moving from Universal to Fox, shows him to be a really efficient storyteller, wasting no time from shot to shot. Occasionally I wanted the editing to linger longer on some of the compositions — some of which, especially the long shots, deserve more appreciation than the editing allows — but photography is secondary to pace in this pleasant little film. In one span of five minutes, our hero, the town bum (a likable Buck Owens, who looks like he's auditioning to to play the Scarecrow in a western spinoff of The Wizard of Oz), is run out of town on a rail by the townspeople (I'm not being figurative), shot at by the sheriff, and hogtied by a gang of thieves (again, not being figurative). I preferred the easy-going idleness of the film's first half to the zany action of the second, but it's all a nice time at the movies.

Grade: B-

pixote
« Last Edit: August 28, 2016, 09:30:18 PM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #42 on: August 20, 2016, 03:16:01 PM »
1920: Bonus Shorts



One Week  (Buster Keaton & Edward F. Cline, 1920)

The build-it-yourself house that newlyweds Keaton and Sybil Seely put together based on sabotaged directions is a feat of comedic engineering. Had this not been made the same year as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, the oblong window frames and other inverted architecture might have seemed a sly wink at the art direction of Wiene's film. The stunts are almost too impressive, taking me out of the film as I fret about the safety of the actors. Maybe that's why the biggest laugh of the film, for me, is the completely innocuous moment when Keaton paints "WELCOME" on a mat, upside-down, only the spin the mat right-side up afterwards. I'm like, "See, Buster? You don't have to hurt yourself to make me happy!"

One Week is perhaps too set-piece oriented, with too much filmed at a distance. The style makes the stunts all the more stunning, but it robs us of Keaton's wonderful face and sense of expression, and that in turn makes the film something of a clinical exercise in cleverness — a human comedy that's not quite human enough. Just one or two more shots of Keaton's nonplussed mug would have had me laughing all the louder at the surrounding gags.

I'm excited to see more of Seely in Convict 13, The Scarecrow, The Boat, and The Frozen North. She provides a really wonderful  counterpart for Keaton here, with just the right amount of spark.



Grade: B+





Convict 13  (Buster Keaton & Edward F. Cline, 1920)

After the heightened cleverness of One Week, it's jarring to see Keaton performing such generic slapstick in Convict 13 — though not as jarring as seeing prison guards get shot to death in a otherwise benign comedy short. There are a few nice gags, of course — I was particularly amused by Keaton's use a golf club to paddle his makeshift raft — but Convict 13 is a disappointing effort overall. The score on the Kino Blu-Ray does the film no favors.

Grade: C+





The Scarecrow  (Buster Keaton & Edward F. Cline, 1920)

The Scarecrow isn't as technically impressive as One Week, but it might very well be the better overall film. There's just such a breezy joy to the comedy here, starting with the brilliant choreography of the breakfast scene. A small taste:



As always, I am in loving awe of the precision of Keaton's movements. He's magic. And I'm so happy that The Scarecrow includes more of the human touch that I felt was lacking in One Week. Case in point: I can't help but smiling now just remembering the moment when Keaton realizes the true intentions of the mad dog that's been chasing him.

One fascinating moment is when Keaton and Joe Roberts are looking at a picture of Sybil Seely (hugely likable, yet again) and Keaton remarks, "I don't care how she votes, I'm going to marry her!" It's a very timely line, given that the 19th Amendment had only been an official part of the Constitution for four months at the time The Scarecrow was released. (There's also a reference to saloons being empty, a nod to the 18th Amendment, which went into effect another seven months earlier.) It made me wonder what other films other the 1920s — and even of the 1930s — remark at all on women's suffrage. I can't think of many examples offhand.

I'm very curious to check out the Arbuckle/Keaton film The Cook, to see just how much Keaton borrows from it here. But The Scarecrow is delightfully fun entertainment, regardless, and I look forward to many future viewings.

Grade: A-





Neighbors  (Buster Keaton & Edward F. Cline, 1920)

Neighbors only really came alive for me during the amazing stunt at the end (pictured) involving The Flying Escalantes. It's a treat to behold, and I can only wish it were part of a more engaging and funny overall film. Much of Neighbors feels like very rote slapstick, unfortunately, with too few sparks of Keaton's originality.

Grade: B-

pixote
« Last Edit: July 27, 2017, 03:29:20 PM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #43 on: August 20, 2016, 06:19:28 PM »
One Week is in my Top 100, where it pulls together all the cleverness with some wonderful, simple characters.  This is superior to The General, which is fantastic stunt work mixed with plot, but One Week was truly funny, one of the greatest comedies ever.  The Scarecrow had some great scenes, and it most reminded me of Tati, with many surprises, but not nearly as many bellylaughs.  I'd flip your ratings of these two films around.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #44 on: August 20, 2016, 08:39:48 PM »
One Week is also my favorite of this lot. Such a delightful film.

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #45 on: August 21, 2016, 05:10:22 AM »
I'd flip your ratings of these two films around.

That definitely seems to be the most popular opinion, and I wonder if I'd be in that group if I'd watched the first in the opposite order. Maybe The Scarecrow would have warmed me up for One Week, rather that the other way around. I think my comments on the distancing nature of One Week would still be valid, though, at least for me.

I'm most excited now for The Boat, which I'm told can be viewed as the unofficial end of a trilogy that starts with The Scarecrow (courtship), continues with One Week (marriage), and concludes with The Boat (family life).

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #46 on: August 21, 2016, 10:10:14 AM »
Huh, I'd never heard that.  I'll have to rewatch these in that order.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #47 on: August 21, 2016, 12:24:13 PM »
Trilogy might be too strong a word. It was more someone suggesting that you could edit the three shorts together into a fairly cohesive and wonderful feature.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #48 on: August 21, 2016, 02:33:21 PM »
One Week (Edward F. Cline, Buster Keaton, 1920)

I just watched this the other day. Keaton is the undisputed king of physical comedy.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Year-by-Year: Something Old, Something New
« Reply #49 on: August 28, 2016, 08:26:05 PM »
1920: Something Old



The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari  (Robert Wiene, 1920)

I'm so glad I rewatched this because the 2014 restoration by the Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau Foundation is impeccable. If you're any sort of fan of Caligari and haven't one of the new Blu-Ray releases (from Kino or Masters of Cinema), you owe it to yourself to do so.

Judging by the picture gallery included on the Kino release, the real star of Caligari is Hermann Warm, who designed most of my favorite sets in the film, including the amazing "Way Home", pictured above. I look forward to comparing Dreyer's Passion of Joan of Arc and Vampyr, to see if I can spot Warm's influence on those other early classics.

The whole film is expressionist delight, from start to finish — with the notable exception of the village backdrop at the fair, which is laughable and out of place, looking as it does like a Dr. Seuss illustration. At the other end of the spectrum, though, is the masterful shot of Cesare breaking in through the bedroom window and snatching Jane out of her bed. That moment epitomizes the film at its visual best, with aesthetics that continue to feel fresh and original ninety-plus years later.

It's almost ironic that a movie so rightfully reknowned for its visuals relies so heavily on intertitles — and hyper-verbose intertitles at that. Those long titles occasionally break the film's spell (an effect made more pronounced when reading digitized subtitles of those intertitles, the latter of which at least are stylized to match the film's mood). The hypnotic flow is also interrupted by the act breaks (it's a film in six acts) and the many iris outs and iris ins. I found myself repeatedly having to reset my focus, despite having being utterly captivated a second before.

The other reason for my lapses of focus is that the story isn't one hundred percent compelling. The key scenes are fantastic, but the connective tissue is lacking, appropriately ceding the spotlight to the visuals. The unreliable narrator aspect is interesting, but it makes the film almost too muddled, denying any sort of coherent reading of it — or maybe that's just my own limitation.

The acting is over-the-top, mostly in a good way, but the guy who plays Alan, the narrator's best friend (and Cesare's first on-screen victim) is absolutely horrible. He gets the film off on poor footing, and it takes a little time for the rest of the cast to lose his stink. But most of them do, especially Werner Krauss as Dr. Caligari himself. And it remains crazy to me that the same actor played Cesare in Caligari and Major Strasser in Casablanca.

Grade: B+

pixote
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 12:37:19 AM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

 

love