Les lois de l'hospitalité

There has never been a more comic use of a `train' (if the label is appropriate) than in this film. This is ingenuity at its finest, the most sustained comic sequence I've ever seen. Travelling from New York ca. 1830 to the Appalachians to claim an `estate', Keaton on this journey provides the highlight of the film-and what a highlight it is! From the bouncing actions of passengers to the lifting and moving of track, this series of images is non-stop pleasure. A dog, a hobo, a man throwing rocks at the engineer, a mule-all are inspired catalysts to laughter.

Once Keaton (a McKay) reaches his destination, the movie changes pace. And despite many good moments, especially those when Keaton has taken up `permanent residence' at the Canfields, the humor never reaches the level of the first portion of the film. Nonetheless, Keaton's genius is evident throughout the film, and it is this ability to innovate that constantly amazes.

Although not Keaton's greatest film, this one has sure got some really great moments. The build-up is rather slow while the main plot is being established: 1830s Kentucky. Keaton gets invited by a pretty girl to attend her family dinner. What he doesn't realize until too late is that the family in question is his inherited mortal enemies in a blood feud that has been going on for centuries. The girl's father and brothers all want to kill him but is prevented from doing so until he has left their house (hence the title).

Our Hospitality has got some amazing action sequences but the tempo is very uneven. The early part of the film treats us to some beautiful replicas of old vehicles including trains and bicycles and also some of Keaton's usual train-rail comedy. The middle part, where Keaton guests his blood feud enemies is full of running in and out through doors. Up until now everything has been pretty slow. The last third of the movie though, is truly mind boggling! Keaton and a chasing gunman falls down cliffs, flows down rivers and waterfalls, jumps in and out of moving trains and so on while tied to each other with a rope around their waists. It must have been through watching this James Bond learned his action trade. Our Hospitality however, has also got a lot of comedy in its moments of unbelievable action.

Good fun.

"Our Hospitality" is Buster Keaton's first proper feature film. He starred in the dreadful "The Saphead" (1920), but had no input behind the camera, and "Three Ages" (1923) is more of an anthology of three shorts in parody of D. W. Griffith's mammoth "Intolerance" (1916). Thus, this was the first time he had to fully work out how to adapt to the longer format. He had Charlie Chaplin's "The Kid" (1921) and Harold Lloyd's "Grandma's Boy" (1922), and Fatty Arbuckle had already begun on his short-lived feature career, too, to guide him on the insertion of dramatic elements and how to base the gags around the character development, as opposed to the more slapdash, slapstick arrangement of the shorts, as nonetheless hilarious as they could be.

The result would remain one of his best features, although I'm partial to the cinematically-reflexive "Sherlock Jr." (1924). It's aged terrifically well, including an all-time great waterfall climax, but the amusing irony of its historical value is that the film is now nearly 100 years old, made in 1923, and it's fascinated with and mocking of a world from nigh a century before it, of 1830. And, from riding a dandy horse to prefiguring his own "The General" (1927) in ridiculous fashion with a replica train of the so-called "Stephenson's Rocket," so chosen precisely for how ridiculous it looked, Keaton demonstrates his dedication to production values. A lot of comedic mileage is had here of this "iron monster" of the tracks, to boot. I especially love the gag of a man tossing rocks at the conductor so as to collect the firewood he throws back at him in retaliation.

Nominally, the burlesque here is of the Hatfield-McCoy feud that plays out like "Romeo and Juliet" in the Appalachian Mountains. This begins with a cold open played dramatically straight establishing the ongoing feud back in 1910. I'm intrigued by the suggestion made by several others that this opening is like a bad D. W. Griffith drama, especially considering Keaton was no stranger to parodying dramatic filmmakers, including the aforementioned "Three Ages" or his merciless takedown of William S. Hart Westerns and Erich von Stroheim melodramas in "The Frozen North" (1922). Some of this may be seen with the other silent clowns, as well, such as Chaplin's "A Burlesque on Carmen" (1915) being an imitation of Cecil B. DeMille's "Carmen" (1915), and Mack Sennett's Keystone basically got its start by making fun of Griffith's one-reel last-minute rescues of damsels in distress.

So, what if we extrapolate this insinuation that Keaton is imitating Griffith in the opening scene here. Note that Griffith, rather notoriously now, prided himself as a Southern--and what was once considered Western (Kentucky)--gentleman, son of a Confederate soldier. As a young man, he set out on his career by moving to New York City, which is where the movies were made at the time. This set him on a path of cinematically glamorizing his white Southern heritage with disastrous results (namely, resurrecting the Klan). Although he casts an African-American actor in the servant role, Keaton largely sidesteps any racial issues here, but he makes an utter mockery of Southern hospitality, as he comically exploits the Canfields' honor of not killing him while he's a guest in their home to stay alive--and while he's at it, romancing the Canfield daughter, played by Natalie Talmadge, also Keaton's real-life wife (their son and his father also make an appearance). To top it all off, Keaton out does Griffith's river rapids climax from "Way Down East" (1920)--not an easy task by any means, as that, too, is an awesome sequence.

Nobody matched Keaton for taking physical risks for his art, either. Reportedly, he nearly drowned when filming the sequence in an actual river. The breathtaking rope swing, on the other hand, was performed within a constructed set and with miniature scenery, as well as with an apparent and brief dummy substitution for Talmadge, although it looks fantastic and still probably wasn't exactly safe. This is the same guy who broke his neck in another water-based stunt in "Sherlock Jr." The only one who ended up dying from the production, however, was Joe Roberts, the heavy playing the Canfield patriarch, who had a stroke during filming and would subsequently die from another a month after wrapping. In the meantime, he returned to finish filming. For good and bad, they don't make 'em like this anymore.

This fine film represents one of the earlier attempts at "dramedy", long before the term was invented. The story has a highly realistic feel to it, yet the funny stuff is never far away.

The film does start a bit slowly as they set up the story, but things pick up quickly once the funny (but true, from an old photo) shot of 1810 Times Square hits the screen.

The little train which takes Buster to Kentucky is a hoot, and THAT is based on the real 1830's deal, too. Movable, bumpy, flimsy tracks and a couple nutty characters and situations are highlights.

My favorite bit in the whole film, though, is when poor Buster realizes the fabulous mansion he thought he was inheriting turned out to be a broken-down shack, ending his dreams in spectacularly explosive fashion.

The story was strong and believable, and the climactic (and very dangerous) scenes at the river and waterfall were amazing. As a matter of fact, these scenes are so impressive, it's easy to forget that they are funny; this is the only reason for me to not give the movie a 10.

Side note to those who have said the poor soundtrack detracted from the film: If you EVER have the opportunity to see this or other silent movies in their proper environment (A glorious movie palace with live musical accompaniment by theatre organ or an orchestra), DO it! The "half-live, half-canned" aspect is very important to the enjoyment of silents. It also keeps any film you've seen many times (as is often the case with "The General" or "Phantom") fresh. Even the same organist doesn't play the same film the same way every time, and a different organist can accompany the film in such a different way that it can almost fool you into thinking you're seeing a new movie.

I'm one of those lucky enough to have done so and there's nothing quite like it.

With a good dose of everything that one expects from Keaton - slapstick, stunts, chases, rich visual detail, and much more - "Our Hospitality" is enjoyable to watch, and it has some especially good sequences. The plot idea, with Keaton as an innocent outsider becoming entangled in an old-fashioned family feud, works pretty well, although it relies on comic details to overcome some rather routine characters.

A short prologue explains the feud in which Buster will soon be involved, and then we see New Yorker Willie McKay (Keaton) called south to claim a family inheritance, which will plunge him into the middle of the feud. One of the movie's highlights is the train ride south, a wonderful sequence that almost upstages the rest of the film. It's a long, leisurely series of comic snippets that works beautifully both as a period piece and as terrifically inventive comedy. There aren't any spectacular gags, but an impressive collection of amusing incidents and carefully done detail, and it's well worth watching over again to catch it all.

The main part of the film features Buster romancing the pretty young woman he met on the train, while trying to avoid her brothers and father, who are trying to kill him. It's pretty good, but except for a few clever shots most of it is not up to the standard of the first part of the movie. It picks up near the end with a very good chase sequence that has some memorable moments and that brings everything to a climax.

Overall, this is a fine film, enjoyable and well worth watching.