In Reply to: Highly recommended: American silent movie DVDs & DVD collections posted by Audiophilander on March 18, 2004 at 15:04:00:
You know, I never really paid attention to silent films until a few years ago, when I saw a Buster Keaton film (sorry, can't remember which one) at the Castro Theater here in San Francisco. The Castro has a Wurlitzer, and the Keaton film was accompanied by a very, very old organist who had played with silent movies back when they were new. Both the film and the organist were amazing. The film was far more modern than I expected it to be. There were tons of chases, and the filmmakers made the limited technology go a very, very long way. Keaton was quite an athlete, performing many daring stunts without assistance.Since the Keaton film was such a great experience, I made sure I saw "It" when I had a chance. That was great, too. Then a few weeks ago I saw "Picadilly" (a British silent) with Anna May Wong, which was also great.
I think silent films are the purest form of cinema. The story is told in pictures. The score helps, as do the title cards, but if you took them away, the story would still be there. Actually, I think you can tell whether or not a film is good cinema by turning the sound off. It's pretty easy to tell what's going on in films by good directors such as Hitchcock and Ozu just by watching the images, edits and camerawork.
Jeffery
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- OMG... - JefferyK 15:22:01 03/18/04 (5)
- Re: Silent films - rico 09:22:14 03/19/04 (4)
- Totally agree! - Audiophilander 09:47:51 03/19/04 (3)
- Re: Greed - rico 11:54:39 03/19/04 (2)
- Brownlow uses the technique he employed in restoring Abel Gance's Napoleon, which is also unavailable... - Audiophilander 15:46:55 03/19/04 (1)
- Re: Brownlow uses the technique he employed in restoring Abel Gance's Napoleon, which is also unavailable... - rico 19:46:37 03/19/04 (0)