Sherlock Jr.

There are many comedians of the silent film era but when discussing who among them is the best, it always boils down to two names: Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Is it primarily because their works are are more prominent? Either way, it's their films everyone remembers more.

Now with Keaton's Sherlock Jr., it doesn't take much to see why he's so revered all these years later. Made at the height of his fame, it predated The Purple Rose of Cairo by several decades with its main storytelling aspect. But of course Woody Allen is no match to Keaton. (Let's be honest, no one is.)

Back to Keaton for a moment. He was someone who was willing to put his own neck on the line for the sake of others' entertainment. Here in Sherlock Jr., he does that in a literal sense. (There's one stunt that resulted in his neck being fractured, something Keaton didn't know until many years after the fact.) It's a miracle he lived as long as he did.

But also of note in Sherlock Jr. is how many of its shots are framed. Much like what he would do with The General two years later, Keaton utilizes the techniques of the time and puts them to good use. And as seen with his other films, it works.

Sherlock Jr. is a Keaton film through and through. Featuring many traits of his noted works, it also serves as a tribute to movies themselves. Because after all, who doesn't go to the movies to escape from reality and broaden their imagination? (It's been happening for decades, and there's no sign of that stopping anytime soon.)

My Rating: *****

The Cameraman

Edward Segdwick and Buster Keaton's The Cameraman opens with the titular photographer (Keaton) becoming instantly smitten with Sally (Marceline Day) and trying to woo her afterwards. And much like Keaton's earlier works, what ensues are a lot of physical hijinks.

Similar to The General from the previous year, The Cameraman relies a great deal on Keaton's physicality. And when you watch him in action, it's a transfixing sight. (The fact he survived the many stunts in his films says everything you need to know about Keaton's professionalism.)

The Cameraman was Keaton's first film while under contract for MGM but it was that contract that marked the beginning of the end of his career. He was restricted to what he could put in his films, which must have affected him a great deal. (That said, MGM would use the film as an example for other directors as to how to make a comedy.)

And although it's a comedy, The Cameraman has its moments of poignancy as well. There are more somber moments throughout the film but there's a shift in mood from a slight flicker in Keaton's eyes. (Pay attention to his features during the end of the beach scene.)

The Cameraman may have been solely credited to Segdwick but this is Keaton's handiwork through and through. From the various pratfalls to the many gags, it's clear as to why there's a constant debate between him and Charlie Chaplin as to whom is the best silent-era comedian. (And it's a debate that'll never end.)

My Rating: *****

The General

When it comes to films of the silent era, that is something I'll openly admit to being a beginner to. The only titles to have been seen by me include the likes The Gold Rush, Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans and Pandora's Box. Suffice to say I need to fix that.

One legend of the silent film era I so needed to catch up on was Buster Keaton. There are some disputes over whether he or Charlie Chaplin was the true master of the silent comedy. Those disputes alone convinced me I needed to see something of Keaton's.

So what better Keaton film to start with than The General? (Always start with the more prominent film, that's what I always follow.) And boy, it is funny. (Certainly not something you'd say about a film set during the Civil War.)

In my eyes, the best comedy can be found in the form of a reaction shot. With a number of silent films (particularly comedies), such shots are usually over-the-top. Thanks to Keaton being, well, himself, these shots are just gold. All it took was a very subtle change in his stoic expression to get a laugh.

Anyway, The General is proof on how to make a great comedy. (I was also very impressed by his stunt work throughout.) This just convinced me I need to see more of Keaton's work. (And I think I'm taking a shine to him more than Chaplin.)

My Rating: *****

Pandora's Box

G.W. Pabst's Pandora's Box provides a portrait of a woman whose life is layered with good luck and hard times. She's fully aware of the distinction between the two, but they blend from time to time so she can't be too sure.

The woman in question is Lulu, a role immortalized by Louise Brooks. She plays Lulu as someone who is fully aware of her sexual prowess and its impact on men. It's just she finds out about it too late most of the time. Brooks makes this role her own. (And to think there was an uproar over her casting.)

The interesting thing is that Pabst doesn't depict Lulu as either a man-eater or a martyr. He depicts her as an innocent girl who acts naughty at times. What happens to her in the end could be up for debate. Was what happened to Lulu unjust or deserved?

There have been a number of films focusing on the tumultuous sexual lifestyles some people lead (only a small handful daring to delve into sex addiction) since the release of Pandora's Box. But it was Pabst's film that started them all. Bear in mind this was a film from the late 20s and it was quite ahead of its time. (One of the supporting characters is a lesbian.) And it still resonates to this day.

Pandora's Box is a truly fascinating film to watch. It's a stunning portrait of the dangers within human nature and the consequences that follow. Honestly one of the boldest films from the early years of cinema.

My Rating: *****

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans

Silent films are a major blind spot for me. It's not that I don't like them; it's just I get more caught up with films from the 1930s onward.

I opted to watch perhaps the most famous silent film ever made: F.W. Murnau's Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans. What Murnau offers is a story that just radiates on screen. You have to love a film that's eighty-five years old and it still resonates to whomever watches it.

With this being a silent film, naturally there is no dialogue. It requires actors of great skill to say so much without saying anything at all. Murnau enlisted George O'Brien and Janet Gaynor to do such a task and boy, does it pay off. (Gaynor won an Oscar for her work; O'Brien should have at least earned a nomination.)

Like all great films, it's the technical aspects that are on full display alongside the actors. In this case, it's Charles Rosher and Karl Struss' cinematography and Hugo Riesenfeld's score. Both are haunting, beautiful and will echo in your mind. Ah, older films always have those.

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans is a gorgeous film that which breaks your in every other scene. It's very possible this inspired many other films in the years to come, but who knows? Maybe no one dared to rival the beauty Murnau captured.

My Rating: *****

The Gold Rush

I had seen two Charlie Chaplin films prior to The Gold Rush. Both were essentially social commentaries (Modern Times, The Great Dictator), but The Gold Rush provides pure entertainment.

What's best about The Gold Rush is that the simplest of gags can still be funny even after almost ninety years. Not many films can boast a feat like that.

Such gags include Chaplin eating his shoe, the cabin on the edge of the mountain an d my personal favorite, the dinner roll dance. Just watching those gags makes it clear as to why they're so iconic.

What The Gold Rush also captures is heart. Bear in mind this was made several years before City Lights, a film I am in dire need of revisiting. Still, Chaplin was and always will be one of the few names that could have comedy and tragedy in one film, and make it work.

The Gold Rush is one of those films that will always stand the test of time, as with many of Chaplin's other films. If you haven't seen it, you are most definitely in for a treat.

My Rating: *****