The Silent Movie Theatre held a screening of one of Griffith's many masterpieces, "Broken Blossoms" the other day. A bunch of high schoolers were forced to attend and proceeded to ruin the event for everyone by believing they could talk, call, and text through a silent film. During the Chaplin short they discussed what was going on, and by the time the feature started they had moved on to more important topics such as if they should go on a date with this girl who is calling or not. I am a BIG fan of exposing youngins to Silents, but finally I had to ask them to be quiet. Via their other ramblings it turns out they had been forced to attend, and didn't even know what the film was about. I blame their teacher as well...its hard to muster up enthusiasm if a film is treated like a museum piece that's a bit like broccoli: good for you but bleh.A looooong time ago I thought about making a guide to Silent Films for no0bs (newbies for the older crowd). However I figured most people reading here were familiar with silent film. But I think the guide is still needed especially judging by certain google queries that lead here. So for the no0bs and curious here ya go:
Silent Film (and film in general) for Beginners
*The first films were created in the 1880s. Whether America or France won the honor is in debate (especially since so many are lost) but the earliest surviving film is Roundhay Garden Scene from 1888.
*Silent films weren't all jerky and silly. They got this reputation from being projected at the wrong speed when sound came along. Unlike sound film silents had no standard projection speed, thus causing the problem.
*There were 3 eras of silent film, leading to a major misconception about quality. The first era was the flickers, which lasted from 1900-1915. These were one reel (10 mins or so) films that had simple plots and began very crudely but evolved with the years especially thanks to D.W. Griffith. During this time actors were thought disposable and plot as an afterthought. 1915-1923 ushered in the feature (which had existed for a few years but was really brought into its own by Birth of a Nation) which began more experimenting and longer but still slightly clunky films (mind you they were inventing this new medium at that time!) By 1923 films began to become more refined and until the majority of silent films ended in 1928 these were some of the finest films ever made. It would take talkies several decades to reach the same greatness as these films. These films are much like watching a modern film, there is no talking but they are so refined they are easy to enjoy.
*Silent films were never ''silent''. This is a HUGE misconception. When flickers first came into vogue they were silent for a few months, but eventually nickelodeons began adding either phonograph music or a live accompanist. By the time features came around films began to send out their own scores (Griffith started this one too). From then on they were accompanied by a live pianist or organ player, and sometimes a full orchestra! You never just sat in pure silence watching a silent film. Random side note: in addition to a score most silents had a theme song, which also started with Birth. These were very popular and were sold as sheet music. The first soundtracks!
*And on that note quite obviously just because a silent film has no talking doesn't mean you should talk. Its like any other movie, SHUSH. This includes commentary. The same rules that apply at a talkie theatre apply at a silent one.
*There is a huge misconception about color and sound. Color and sound for film were both invented soon after film itself (both in 1895). However both were expensive and complicated, and the audience seemed happy enough with this new fangled moving picture thing anyways. Tinting was used, such as to imply indoor and outdoor scenes. The first feature length color film was 1922's Toll of the Sea which starred Anna May Wong. And yes it still exists. When talkies came about most of the early ones were in color. However once the Great Depression set in this was ruled too expensive and they reverted back to black and white for a few decades.
*The first sound films began in 1895 and various shorts and experiments were made well up to 1920. The first mainstream feature to make an attempt at sound was Dream Street in 1921 by D.W. Griffith. However only the premiere theatre installed the photokinema system, and all other theatres presented it as silent. Interestingly enough Griffith was also one of the first people on TV as well (in 1929!). Sound was considered silly except for in cases of adding music. In fact that's what the earliest uses were for (and thus making the first music videos!) Contrary to popular belief The Jazz Singer wasn't the first talkie. It was just the first majorly successful and adapted one. And by today's standards its really not a talkie...Jolson sings a few songs and ad libs to his Mommy, but most of it is silent with title cards.
*There is a lot of talk about actors who overacted in silent film. Usually when you hear of a really big star (like Valentino or Mary Pickford) the 'they were so natural' thing is used. True there were a few actors who overacted, but these were usually actors brought from the stage to the screen (as this was the stage acting technique of the time). Your actual movie stars rarely suffered this problem. Of course some things like Keystone comedies were never meant to be well acted (though Chaplin, Arbuckle, and Normand all did anyways).
*AHHH THE TALKIE MYTH! There is a HUGE misconception out there that silent stars all faded when talkies came because they either had silly voices, or too heavy accents. A lot of stars had done stints on stage or were American born, thus that is completely ruled out. As for accents how do you explain Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, or Bela Lugosi? People like the talkie myth because it simplifies a change in industry, but in reality the reason most silent stars didn't transition is a lot more complicated and individualized. Many made a few talkies (and later radio appearances) with success. However many were old, had been popular for almost a decade, and had personal problems that began to interfere with their careers. I have asked the silent film community if there was ever a silent star they knew of who had a funny voice that would have ended their career. There was only ONE star with that problem: Raymond Griffith (who's vocal chords had been injured during service in WW1). And get this: he still made talkies (which were moderately successful, he was said to have a cold in the plot to explain his voice) and he found great success behind the scenes. No star failed because of a funny voice, not even John Gilbert or Clara Bow.
*Depending what your viewing yes there might be cringe worthy racism or funny outdated technology. Don't write a film off for those reasons alone though; if we don't learn from the past we're doomed to repeat it. And no watching Birth will not turn you into a racist...unless you were already secretly leaning that way (or have a Klan robe in your closet).
*Silent films are not museum pieces. A lot of people treat it like some odd experience they have no clue how to enjoy. Simple! Just treat it like a talkie! Go! Laugh! Cry! Whatever the film calls for. Contrary to popular belief its not a bunch of 'reading' (and out of question when did reading become so 'tiresome'?) The later silents especially mimic talkies, and are very easy to enjoy as a modern viewer. I can say from personal expierence most silents have less ''reading'' than a subtitled foreign film (I like French films what can I say?). In fact very early films used very minimal title cards (especially Griffith films). Later films used them in a much more...smooth way.
*DVD/VHS warning! A good chunk of silent films are in public domain, and those that are not are very rarely appreciated by the studios who own them. There are some very fantastic DVD releases out there, but there are also a lot of crappy ones. Sometimes they use the worst prints (bad picture quality) and sometimes they use edited prints (Birth of a Nation is a good example). Even WORSE is the music issue...a lot of releases don't bother to use good or appropriate scores and some literally put an inappropriate annoying music loop on it (like the Mary Pickford Signature Collection). There isn't one company or place to avoid, so my suggestion is to read online reviews as they can give you the best idea of if its a good release or not. And if you end up with a badly scored DVD...just mute it and play some modern music!
*How many silent films are lost? We don't know. The usual figure is between 70% and 90%. People like to make up a percentage that sounds shocking. However its kind of impossible to know. Why? Because film archives around the world are underfunded and many silent films sit in tins mislabelled or not labeled at all...just disintegrating away. Lost films can be ''found'' or partially found..."Beyond the Rocks" starring Gloria Swanson and Valentino was a good example of this. It was lost until 2005 when it was found in a private collection. That's another half of it: rich eccentric private collectors buy up rare prints and then refuse to share them because they want to be the only one to have these rarities. This technique is suspected to be behind some lost Theda Bara films.
*And why are the ones that are lost well...lost? Because film was printed on nitrate stock...which was and is extremely flammable. Even when its stored right it can explode just because it feels like it. In fact vault fires are responsible for the loss of Theda Bara, Raoul Walsh, and Miriam Cooper films amongst others. Also once the talkies came silents were seen as interesting as yesterdays newspaper...old and worthless. In fact that's how the Silent Movie Theatre got started: the theatre didn't have a sound system and the founder could get silents for free from distributors who wanted nothing to do with them in the 1940s. Preservation didn't really kick into till the 1950s and 60s...and even then they managed to botch the hell out of it (Library of Congress hired an idiot who transferred perfectly good 36 MM prints (the ideal size) to 16MM PAPER PRINTS killing the quality!!! AHHH!!!)
6 comments:
This book sounds like a terrific idea. When you see some of the silent actors in sound films, their movements are amazing to watch: for example, in "Night of the Hunter," the great Lillian Gish's body movements are almost like a ballet -- the way she moves her hands, walks, etc. I think it is the result of silent film training and is incredible to watch and adds a unique dimension to the film. It's sad that many silent film actors were relegated to smaller insignficant roles after 1927 when they could have added so much to the aesthetics of sound films. Dave in Victoria, B.C.
Thanks for your wonderful website darling,i always liked silents but they finnaly took my heart when i watched The Man Who Laughs at a tinny teather (maybe the only where we can watch silents here,there i saw Foolish Wives and The Fourth Marriage of Dame Margaret).Unluckly i live in the jungle (hehehe,i'm from Brazil,northeast of Brazil)so silents here are harder to find than learn-how-to-dance-salsa-in-five-lessons dvds on a british store :P.Thank you again for your wonderful job,i'll be always reading :D
I just want to point out that the "Mary Pickford Signature Collection," identified above as a prime example of sloppy music choices and (perhaps) low quality video, should NOT be confused with the "Mary Pickford Collection" produced by the Mary Pickford Foundation, and released by Milestone Films. The "Signature Collection" is exactly what is indicated, a super-cheap quickie release. The Milestone releases are different, and we take great care in preparing them for release.
Hala, thanks for answering my questions about Mary and whatnot which I asked the other day. I've got one more, if you don't mind. I thought it'd be better to ask it here since it's a page for noobs.
I was wondering about what actors might be saying in silent films. You know how it happens - an actor starts talking, then titles appears, then the actor reappears, still talking. Sometimes actors are shown just saying something without intertitles. Often it seems like they say something different from what is in titles. It's interesting - did they say something similar to the text in intertitles and also added something from themselves (ad-libbed)? Or were they told exactly what to say? Did you ever wonder about it?
I remember a funny story told by one of Vilma Banky's leading men - that when filming passionate love scenes he was telling her something about playing golf, and she was speaking in Hungarian! I cannot remember who he was, though.
It reminds me of a scene from 'Singin' in the Rain' where Don and Lina were being filmed playing lovebirds while in reality they were saying very mean things to each other. :D
You're welcome!
It depends on the silent really. Different companies, directors, and scenariests (screenwriters) had different ways of acting out a plot.
Some would be told the general idea and make up words as they went (or talked about nothing in particular), some wouldn't even be told the plot...just what the scene was about (Louise Brooks noted she thought 'Love em and Leave em' was a comedy until she seen it again in the 50s).
However it wasnt usually like Singin in the Rain (nothing ever is :p). Some scenarists would write out entire scripts so that would be followed. Gloria Swanson said that was how most of her early 20s films were done (post DeMille pre UA). She also said when working with DeMille they'd be given the plot and make up relevant words, which then would find their way into the titles. That seems believable.
June Mathis supposedly wrote out full scripts, though I have yet to read one so I can't verify that. But stars were aware of 'lip readers' which a lot of fans would become at the time. In Four Horsemen it is said during the French scenes Alice Terry and Rudy are speaking French for authenticity (its believable, but I'm a piss poor lip reader).
Vilma couldn't speak English when she first arrived in the US. I dont believe she was speaking English by the time she made Son of the Sheik and possibly afterwards as well. She did eventually learn though, as she makes her mangled way through "A Lady to Love" (maoul truck hehe).
On "The Wind" Lillian's love interest couldn't speak anything but Swedish. So yeah that did happen sometimes.
Regarding the myth that many silent stars failed to succeed in talkies because their voices were unsuitable: I'm aware that some of these myths are false or exaggerated, especially relating to the likes of Norma Talmadge, Clara Bow and John Gilbert, but nevertheless I prefer to believe that it was her lisp that did in Dolores Costello, if for no other reason than the irony in her modern descendent's lisp being considered "cute" and one of her most endearing features (along with that famous Barrymore side profile!). Of course, she acted in talkies and didn't retire until the early 1930's, I think, but even still, it makes a good story.
Post a Comment