Buster Keaton - Sein Leben, sein Werk

I have to agree that this is the most thorough and well made documentary on Keaton I have seen. Of course it could be longer, but then you might as well just buy all of Keaton's movies and watch those instead and form your own opinion on his life (which this three part series will inspire you to do anyway). If you are looking for something to show a "newcomer" to the Keaton flock, this is it. If you are looking for a complete visual biography, this is it. A must see for anyone who wants to call themself a Buster Keaton fanatic.

This was an amazing documentary. Instead of the usual superficial and boring bio, it's jam-packed full of stories about the film making process and interesting anecdotes you'll hear no where else.

The show was presented in three 1-hour segments--going chronologically through his long career. One of the most memorable aspects was the film discussing his awful "bio-pic" (THE BUSTER KEATON STORY)--how it was mostly untrue and Keaton was not a hard-core drinker. Yes, he did have a drinking problem but it was short-lived and not a defining moment in his career.

Wonderful, thorough and lovingly made--an absolute MUST for fans of silent comedy.

FYI--Another similar project was created by the same writers for Harold Lloyd (AMERICAN MASTERS--HAROLD LLOYD, THE THIRD GENIUS) and Charlie Chaplin (UNKNOWN CHAPLIN). All three are terrific and must-see for fans of silent comedy!

This takes you from Buster's birth to death in about three hours and three installments with an emphasis on his body of work. It is unusual in that you get quite a bit of interview material from Raymond Rohauer, the man responsible for financially backing the restoration of Buster's films, destined for nitrate decomposition, in the 1950s. And you hear from Keaton himself throughout the documentary, in what looks like interview material that was largely done during the filming of "Buster Keaton Rides Again" made in 1964, two years before his death. Other prominent interviewees are his widow, Eleanor, who comments not only on the time she knew him but on what he had told her about earlier times. What's also insightful are interviews with some of the stuntmen and technicians who worked with him in his silent independent days and during his time at MGM. These aren't film scholars summarizing his work. All of these people actually knew the man.

It gets only a few things wrong. For one, Buster Keaton was not fired by MGM in person by Louis B. Mayer as a result of an argument between the two over his "party mobile" - a luxury motor home parked on the MGM lot. Instead, after "What No Beer?" opened, and was making good money, L. B. Mayer took advantage of the fact that Irving Thalberg was away convalescing due to a heart attack to fire Buster by telegram. And even that could have been patched up by Thalberg when he returned, but Buster demanded Mayer apologize. That was just not going to happen.

I'll also say that the Educational shorts Buster made in the mid 30s get short shrift here too. The documentary mentions "Grand Slam Opera", which in my opinion is brilliant. But some of the others are quite good even if you can tell they were rushed out the door.

Buster's humble but creative spirit comes through the entire documentary. For even as an older man, you can always see that fragile yet rambunctious spirit of his and the intense passion he had for his craft.

I use the phrase "America's greatest director" not ironically, not unqualified, & not because I admire or otherwise favor silents over "talkies." I use it because I honestly think it's true. & this biography reenforces that belief more than anything I've seen or heard with the exception of actually seeing Keaton's movies. But sometimes you need something to get people to see these movies, movies which may seem quaint or curious to people used to hearing dialogue & sound effects. This documentary does it.

You see, Keaton UNDERSTOOD. Sometimes his movies are corny, sometimes they aim high & hit low, but mostly they're amazing. Mostly they happily present a very scrappy & sympathetic (but not perfect) protagonist & the many foul-ups & challenges he faces. He doesn't fret or moan but simply takes his beatings & tries again. Unlike Chaplin's main characters, Keaton's hero is very often the least important figure in the shot - because the effect is far more important than some kind of identification with the protagonist. Gags & foibles are fluid; nothing seems contrived or extraneous because so

much thought has been placed into each shot, each moment, to render everything crucial to the story. There's a reason that silent comedies are valued (in general) more than silent dramas: comedies speak more to the human condition, & the outrageous in a comedy is accepted where the theatrics & overemoting of a drama seems downright quaint. Keaton knew this. Keaton thrived within this.

How his career was cut short & reduced to nothing is documented here (I'm giving nothing away; volume 2 is entitled "Star Without A Studio") as well as his own problems with alcohol. I am especially suspectible to people who have a sense of the successes & failings of their lives & come to a grateful, gentle end; Keaton, like Harpo Marx, felt blessed by the chances he was given & modestly rated his own body of work. But listen: if you see this documentary, you'll want to see the movies, even if the documentary does show most of his most spectacular stunts. Because for Keaton, context was important: the star can be shown running at the bottom of the screen while a hundred cops chasing him take up most of it. So too can a single stunt, even the best stunt of a movie, make little sense without the context of the film.

Find this. Buy or rent this. Watch critically, note the precision of every scene, the skill with which they are composed & shot & carried out, & then seek out the originals. You'll compare them with your favorite films, you'll find that somewhere in the silent age of movies someone was actually an artist, someone making *comedy*, & you'll understand why people today mention Keaton in reverent tones.

I adore so much cinema, but I am always, always impressed by the skill of Buster Keaton.

After Hollywood, and THE UNKNOWN CHAPLIN, Kevin Brownlow and David Gill did this documentary on Buster Keaton, and how he developed as the leading rival of Charlie Chaplin as number one comic of the Silent Period (Harold Lloyd is number three, and then - supposedly - Harry Langdon, Raymond Griffith, and Laurel and Hardy). Keaton had begun with his parents in a lively, knockabout vaudeville act (literally his father threw him about the stage). When he entered movies it was with Fatty Arbuckle's company, and as Arbuckle's friend and admirer. Unlike most silent performers, Keaton was interested about how movies were made, and actually took apart a camera to study it's workings. He learned to build jokes into his films to develop character. And he never lost his fascination with the power of what films could do. Look at a film like SHERLOCK JR., where he carefully spends time using cutting to make a series of improbable events occur on screen (such as jumping through the chest of a man standing in front of a wall). Chaplin plucks at the heartstrings, Lloyd takes ordinariness and perks it up with dangers, but Keaton is concerned on how man is at the mercy of nature and science. In one long sequence joke in OUR HOSPITALITY, Keaton is being chased to a waterfall set of cliffs. He ties himself to a rope hoping to climb up. An enemy finds the rope and ties it to himself, planning to surprise Keaton when he climbs up. Keaton sees this and yanks on the rope causing his enemy to fall off the top of the cliff into the waterfall, but as the body of the man fall down in the background, Keaton realizes the rope is still tied securely to his own body. Looking stoically into the camera and waiting, a moment later we see Keaton pulled off the screen by the falling body of his enemy. He can fight human enemies, but not the law of gravity.

Keaton did well until 1928, but then family and health problems hit him, especially his growing alcoholism. Stripped of his dignity by a studio boss (Louis B. Mayer) who had no time for has-beens, he became a gag writer. But he still occasionally made films in the sound period. The film shows how Keaton's rise occurred in the 1950s, spurred on by the rediscovery of many of his films. It is a remarkable story of a gifted genius who lived long enough to know he was not a drunken failure but universally admired.