The Buster Keaton Story

The Buster Keaton Story (1957)

** (out of 4)

Strange, inaccurate but slightly entertaining bio flick takes a look at the rise of Buster Keaton (Donald O'Connor) and his fall from grace due to the talkies (?!?!?) and alcoholism. The producers might have well called this THE JOE SMITH STORY because those familiar with Keaton are going to see very few similarities between his life and the events shown in this film. I understand that no bio film is going to be accurate because things need to be made up or left out for entertainment purposes. With that said, there's simply so much missing here and so many things looked over that I really wonder what the entire point of this film was. I'm sure Paramount wanted to get in on the bio-craze that was sweeping Hollywood during this period but this film does very little justice to Keaton. If you didn't know who Keaton was you'd never get the idea that he was a genius from this picture. In fact, the majority of the running time is devoted to Keaton's personal life, which includes having his heart broken by a Hollywood vamp but eventually being rescued by the woman (Ann Blyth) who has always loved him. We get a couple re-enactments from Keaton's professional career but they don't contain a single laugh including a pretty weak one from COLLEGE. O'Connor does what he can with the role and I think he gives a good performance but it's just not Buster Keaton he's doing. Blyth is also good in her role and we even get Peter Lorre playing a director in a small bit. No one should come to this film expecting a documentary on Keaton, that's very clear. However, I thought the film was slightly amusing simply because of how many liberties it takes with the truth. You're pretty much constantly glued to what's going on because you want to see what they're going to do next.

It's always been the case in Hollywood when "they" go to make a film based upon an actual historical event or do a biopic on an historical figure: they never get it right. The names and dates are usually correct but after that, it's pretty much whatever they think will sell tickets. And this picture is certainly no exception. The shame of it really is that this was made while Buster Keaton was very much alive and still relatively active in show business. But, obviously, he was never contacted concerning the facts about his own life. And that's a real shame. Donald O'Connor is great, for what he's allowed to show of Keaton's genius but the writers and producer were obviously much more interested in portraying Keaton as a base, alcoholic slob without any real feelings. And we who have read the books know that to be totally untrue. I'm surprised Keaton didn't actually sue the production company for defamation of character over this. I sure would have. In any case, despite Mr. O'Connor's valiant efforts to "save" this film, don't bother with it. Watch the documentary "Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow." You'll enjoy that much more.

I'm sure that Donald O'Connor gave Buster Keaton the performance of his life as he would like to be remembered. It certainly wasn't anything close to the life of the real Keaton.

In his prime Keaton, Lloyd, Laurel, and Chaplin contended for being the greatest of silent screen comedians with most conceding Chaplin was best. The others are still remembered for their wonderful routines and for the fact that they survived and made the transition to sound. So did the real Buster Keaton, but not as a star.

The best part of the film is Donald O'Connor recreating some of the classic routines that Keaton did from the silent screen. No doubt Buster worked with O'Connor because he sure got them down quite well.

Ann Blyth and Rhonda Fleming played the women in Keaton's life composites of women he was actually involved with in real life. Peter Lorre has an interesting part as well as a director who Keaton runs roughshod over in his star days, but who Lorre rather subtly gets back at when the movies transition to sound.

In real life it wasn't as simple for Keaton as talking or not talking. When later on he did do the bit parts in films that he scorns on the screen when producer Larry Keating offers him a role, Keaton did have a voice that matched his stoic stone face.

One thing I disagree with. In his case it was right for him never to crack a smile, very much like George Burns. But people like Red Skelton were always laughing at their own material and the audience didn't seem to mind. Different attitudes get different latitudes.

The Buster Keaton Story is not a great film, but O'Connor does well in the role and I'm sure Buster liked it.

Donald O'Connor does an amazing job recreating Buster Keaton's style and routines in this otherwise dreadful script, credited to Sidney Sheldon and Robert Smith. Buster was arguably a finer comedian than Chaplin, but fell into alcoholism for a number of reasons. This script has so little to do with his life it should never have been titled as it was. Read a real biography, and watch some of Buster's many wonderful movies, including his last, "The Railrodder". I remember watching "Waterworld (1995)", and thinking how poorly it compared to "Steamboat Bill, Jr. (1928)", not least on value for the money expended on making it. And don't watch another movie until you have seen "The General (1927)". His movies are his biography, not this rotten script.

The weird thing about this film is it's NOT the Buster Keaton story at all. The main character is a fictional studio executive named Gloria who falls in love with Buster (inexplicably, as he's portrayed as a graceless, unattractive slob) and puts her happiness and career on the line in order to nurture and protect him as he chases another woman, blows all his money and drinks himself silly. The surprisingly faithful recreations of classic Keaton routines dropped in awkwardly here and there do nothing to relieve the tedium of this glum, sour women's picture masquerading as a biopic.