Sherlock Jr (1924) - a perfect movie

I went down the rabbit trail of silent era comedies this week. This church is held up by the three pillars of Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd (Their characters I have respectively titled as the Hapless, the Scamp, and the Buffon). Having watched several different works of art from these three, I think they should be considered required viewing and study for film making, stunt design, and comedy writing.

I think calling Keaton “hapless” is close - but not quite on the nose. He has an insane amount of luck, but just not when it comes to getting ahead in life. Chaplin's character is a homeless tramp, but he is more of a hilarious mischievous small-time criminal. And Lloyd, whether playing ‘Luckless Luke’ or ‘Harold’ with glasses has a graduate degree in clowning. They are all supreme stunt coordinators and performers.

I tried to make a critical comparison of the three, but I just don’t have it in me. They are all different and each very good. Keaton was my favorite. I did find a Chaplin movie called “One A.M” (1916) in which he plays a different persona than the Tramp. I believe he titled that character “the Inebriate” - it is 25 minutes of a well-to-do Chaplin trying to make it upstairs to sleep it off. It is very funny.

I will make this declaration - “Sherlock Jr” (1924) may be a perfect movie.

Buster Keaton plays an employee at a movie theater who gets into a bit of conflict with a cad who is trying to steal his girl. In the end all is set right. From top to bottom, you are looking at a hilarious character, a series of “dialogue” jokes with double meanings and wickedly clever puns, stunts that would make the “Fast and Furious” or “Mission Impossible” teams have to think hard, and visual effects that are really astounding (even without remembering this is from 100 years ago). Keaton takes you on this ride and makes you laugh and gasp and shake your head in disbelief. There are scenes in here that left me surprised he ever walked again. He uses very few inter-titles. He has mastered 'show, don't tell'.

I highly recommend it.

List of movies I watched - I laughed out loud during every one of them:

"Sherlock Jr" (1924) - Keaton
"One A.M' (1916) - Chaplin
"Safety Last" (1923) - Lloyd
"Neighbors" (1920) - Keaton
"The Railrodder" (1965) - Keaton

thanks Shaun - this is his LAST silent film ... and while not as fun as his much earlier work, it was a good example. He made one more after this just before he died of lung cancer.

"Making a Living" (1914) - Chaplin
"Lonesome Luke, Messenger" (1917) - Lloyd
"City Lights" (1931) - Chaplin
"Never Weaken" (1921) - Lloyd

Comments

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958) - it is a good deal better than the remakes

I got around to watching the original 1958 comedy caper film - the one that "Welcome to Collinwood" was pantomiming. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" is hilarious. It is 25 minutes longer than the remake and never once did I feel the need to check my watch. I even paused to go refill my water glass. There will be no problem telling who is who or how the story goes - it is well shot and characters are unique. The story is a simple and fun. Comparing the "BDoMS" and "WtC" - they are identical in terms of characters and scenes. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" street is terrific, and "WtC" is a slog. The biggest difference is seen in the dialog. In "Big Deal" the people just talk, like you might expect people to talk. They are funny, but not odd. The colloquialisms happen, but they aren't hard to see through. In "WtC", they are using a vernacular to make sure you are immersed deep in an Eastern European ethnic nei...

Lara Croft vs. Tony Stark - a comparison of Earth's mightiest defenders

I watched “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” (2001) recently. It is not nearly the deep exploration of the human psyche I remembered. Maybe that is why I had time to think that her story has a lot of similarities to the MCU Iron Man, just smashed into a single movie. There is not the same degree of character growth for Croft as for Stark, but there is an archetype here that stuck me. They are both: Athletic with distinctly styled dark brown hair Exceptionally smart & adventurous Utilize clever tools and gadgets Snarky / Funny / Patronizing to the people around Attended to by an attractive personal assistant Rich / Entitled / Play(boy/girl) / Philanthropist-ish Compelled to protect the world from BIG evil Driven by living up to a relationship with father In terms of contrasts: Laura Croft rides a motorcycle, listens to hip-hop and talks with a posh (and yet reed thin) English accent. Tony Stark was able to build [a hockey puck sized nuclear reactor] in a cave! With a box of scraps! (Jef...

Running with the Devil (2019) - Ok folks, let's make a ¿something?

How do you take a 100 minute movie with Nick Cage, Larry Fishburne, Leslie Bibb, and Barry Pepper - as well as Cole Hauser, Adam Goldberg and Peter Facinelli - and somehow make an unwatchable stew of tones and over the top cliches? I think you give it to a TV director, TV writer, and TV editor. I could not actually finish it. Even for me, that is pretty bad. It is a series of scenes that could have been part of a TV-series, but they weren’t. They were just the beats from a TV-series. Maybe it was put together by some people who read the wikipedia article for “Traffic” (2000) - then sketched a storyboard for a telenovela - then remembered they were making a movie and just cut it back down from there. It is like it has been sequentially translated into 2 different languages, each time by someone who wasn’t a native speaker. Set designs were thrifty, but not too cheap. Cinematography is somehow gray and lurid at the same time. If there was a highlight, it is the music. It was the onl...

Robs takes on Media and Entertainment

Search This Blog