The Great Buster

If it wasn't for the lengthy and amazing documentary about Buster Keaton by Kevin Brownlow that was made back in the 1980s, "The Great Buster" would seemed like an even better documentary. The problem is that the 80s film was simply perfect in every way....and was long enough to thoroughly explore the man's art and life. Now, nearly 30 years later is this other film....though "The Great Buster" is a bit different in style. Sure, it shows film clips...but much of it also includes interviews with folks who either knew him or loved his work. Most of this I really enjoyed...though WHY they had Johnny Knoxville among these interviewees is beyond me....especially when he compares "Jackass" and "Bad Grandpa" to the refined and brilliant work of Keaton. It's like comparing a Hummel figurine to a Michelangelo masterpiece! Fortunately, he was only a small part of the film and the rest of it was quite good. Having Peter Bogdonovich narrate was a bit plus, as he's one of the foremost film experts and directors there is....and I highly respect his knowledge and craftmanship you see in making this movie. I could tell it was his labor of love.

For fans of Keaton as well as the unitiated, it's well worth seeing. But do yourself a favor....find "Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow" and see it first. I know it's on YouTube and a few DVDs are floating around out there. It is THE definitive story of Buster Keaton. Then, see "The Great Buster" as well....you'll be happy you did.

If you are not familiar with Buster Keaton, I guess this is not a bad place to start. However, unlike it's subject matter, this documentary is quite mediocre. In this age of great documentaries, this one still starts and ends in a traditional way - by starting with Buster's birth, career, etc. Even structurally, the docu is not well thought-out, suddenly showing a greatest-hits type compilation at the end, after having finished Buster's life story with his death. It has nothing new to add or show, except a few talking heads on what Buster meant to them. Most of these had either no connection to Buster, or they are not appropriate people to speak to (I mean, do you really care what Johnny Knoxville thinks of Buster Keaton?) It's a pretty lazy piece of film-making that is also not very well-researched.If you can, try to catch the three-part 1987 British docu called "Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow".

Fine documentary on the life and art of silent film star Buster Keaton. Written and directed by Peter Bogdanovich (THE LAST PICTURE SHOW, PAPER MOON, MASK), this was the last film he made as a director, and it's fitting that his final film is a love letter to one of the early stars of film and follows his career from the days of silent films through the Golden Age of Hollywood, all the way through the 1960s on the eve of the New Hollywood revolution. Not only does the film celebrate the life and art of Keaton, the film serves as a document of the evolution of American film and the Hollywood studio system. Featuring contemporary and archival interviews with diverse personalities, including Dick Van Dyke, Johnny Knoxville, Paul Dooley, French Stewart, Richard Lewis, Carl Reiner, Bill Hader, Mel Brooks, Cybill Shepherd, Werner Herzog, Nick Kroll, Quentin Tarantino, Leonard Maltin, Ben Mankiewicz, and Norman Lloyd. While the film serves as a loving celebration of Keaton, it's not particularly revelatory. It works best as an introduction to Keaton for the uninitiated, but is nonetheless worth watching for Keaton fans for the many interviews and rare archival footage of Keaton and his work outside of his classic films.

I became aware of Buster Keaton in the early 1970s, when THE GENERAL played on PBS, and I bought and read his ghost-written MY WONDERFUL WORLD OF SLAPSTICK. Those were the days when all we had were memoirs with a few stills. Now, almost half a century later, almost all of Buster's work is available if you want to see it and are willing to pay a bit extra for stuff that's out of print. Yet Peter Bogdanovich's documentary tells the same story now. albeit with some clips from the 1960s, and kind words from Quentin Tarrantino and Bill Hader: can't get the young kids in unless there's someone they've heard of.

I understand that. We want people to give Buster a try, and centenarian Norman Lloyd talking about being on the set when Chaplin and Keaton were working together won't do it. Also, the story as offered is a wonderful, simple one that offers a beautiful narrative: great artist makes fatal mistake, then struggles back thanks to the love of a good woman. Yet, once you delve deeper into Keaton's films and his life, it quickly becomes far more complicated than that. So what you are left with are the clips of Buster's stunts.

And what stunts they are! People may argue endlessly about who the greatest slapstick pratfaller was, but no one will ever dispute that Keaton was among the best, and because of that, he created grand gag sequences that no one but Jackie Chan has ever come close to equaling. So if you don't know Keaton, beware. The story, like all finite stories, is hopelessly simplistic and at times false -- Keaton had a lot more control over his Educational shorts than this movie would have you believe, for one -- but take a look at it anyway, for the many clips and short sequences. Because the things this movie gets right is that Buster was one of the greatest film makers of the 1920s, and a daring and enormously effective comedian and actor.

People's collective sense of humor change with time. But, this reminds me of people frantically trying to keep up with technology that is supposed to make their lives easier. Just as we become more and more addicted to and dependent on technology and all its modern gadgets - we gradually lose our own resourcefulness and creativity.

This is what happened in movie industry with comedies (and not just comedies). First we had silent B&W movies where you needed to be a genius to make audience laugh with no use of sound and color, with things you could barely call special effects today and smart use of dialogues only when necessary. A while later, it was easier for actors and directors as they could use all those things to make a good movie. Need for ingenuity lowered.

Then suddenly, the only thing that worked was actors swearing in almost every line they spoke. Nowadays, almost exclusively, directors rely on swearing, sarcasm and cheap irony (in other genres blood, nudity, violence, etc.).

Need for ingenuity practically disappeared. Or do we need it more than ever?

One of such original genius of the silent era was Buster Keaton. And he pretty much did all his best work himself - he wrote the scenes, directed them, acted in them and pulled many highly dangerous stunts to achieve perfection each time. This documentary by Peter Bogdanovich (Petar Bogdanovic in Serbian - he's my countryman :)) puts the Great Buster under the spotlight right in time as the cinema is crying for it. And it will serve as a quality intro for announced restoration of the comic's top movies. Bogdanovich's choice of talking heads is questionable, but some of them are obviously selected to draw the younger audience.

It is truly a celebration of Keaton's legacy but also a reminder what the real, healthy humor is all about - not vulgarity and humiliation, but simplicity, originality and inventiveness. This brilliant comic was known as the Great Stone Face, but - as pointed out by Cybill Shepherd (and as told by John Ford once) - you act with your eyes, not with your face.

I just hope that at least a part of today's spoiled audience that only ask for new, loud, fast (and senseless) movies will recognize the great value of Buster's works - all presented timely and nicely by Bogdanovich - and discover it for themselves. I sure will, although I decided this already after watching The General.The Genius Buster - the one we need today...