NitrateVille.com

Is this worth a read? I used to read his work in the Evening Standard many years ago, but never any of his books.

It's been a while since I've read it, but I remember it was interesting. Scott Eyeman's The Speed of Sound covers the same period, but better.

Thanks. I'm looking forward to reading it.

It's probably been about 20 years since I read it, but I recall it being a fascinating portrait of the era and an excellent read, perhaps slightly opinionated at times but not in a bad way. One of these days I should re-read it, having seen by now more of the films he discusses.

I'm very fond of this book, it's very well done, it's on my book shelf. I've kept meaning to read Eyeman's book and have not yet. If it's in your library, check it out and read it, it's a good book.

silentfilm wrote:It's been a while since I've read it, but I remember it was interesting. Scott Eyeman's The Speed of Sound covers the same period, but better.

If you think THE SHATTERED SILENTS covers the same stuff THE SPEED OF SOUND covers, then it has been awhile since you've read it.

To get a completely full picture of the development of talking pictures, you really need three books, Scott Eyman's THE SPEED OF SOUND, Richard Barrios' A SONG IN THE DARK, and Alexander Walker's THE SHATTERED SILENTS. Eymans book is a grand overview, and the best place to start, but you fill in a lot of margins and footnotes with the other two. Barrios tells the Musical side of the story, and Walker examines with much closer detail the part-silent, part-sound period of the hybrid talkies. All three are well-written books, and Walker discusses a number of still-lost or hard to see films, and God Forbid he has an opinion on what he's writing about.


RICHARD M ROBERTS

'The Shattered Silents' is probably my favourite book covering the sound transition, and as Richard says, it has detailed information about a lot of the crucial transitional pictures that are very hard to see for yourself.

Getting away from the factual, Walker makes a suggestion that I've always found intriguing. What if sound had come only a year later than it did? It's entirely possible that the stock market crash could have discouraged studios and theatres from making the leap, and we could have ended up with a silent (or part silent) era stretching well into the 30s. Great food for thought.

Yes, it's a good read. I think that he mentions the myth of John Gilbert's allegedly squeaky voice as fact though. It's a while since I read it.

How about this book? Has anyone read this?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Talkies-Ame ... pd_sim_b_1" target="_blank

It's been a while for me too, but I always meant to re-read this book -- because I recall it being one of the best-written film books I've ever read.

Michael O'Regan wrote:How about this book? Has anyone read this?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Talkies-Ame ... pd_sim_b_1" target="_blank" target="_blank

I have it and most of the series. They're not really books you read through casually, I find them instead to be excellent reference books. A lot of technical information, limited critical opinions, very wide-ranging.

I like Charles Musser's volume, the first in the series, the best.

didi-5 wrote:Yes, it's a good read. I think that he mentions the myth of John Gilbert's allegedly squeaky voice as fact though. It's a while since I read it.

I've just checked my copy and this definitely isn't correct - in fact Walker spends some time exploring and busting that myth. Referring to the reviews of His Glorious Night, and noting that there are no reports of anyone laughing at Gilbert's performance in Hollywood Revue, he concludes that the script, the hastily convened production, and Gilbert's persona were to blame for its poor reception rather than his voice.

Thanks for confirming that. I must be thinking of something else. It is this book that has a chapter on silent stars lending their voices to radio though, isn't it?

It must be another one you're thinking of - this one only really covers the period up to the end of 1929, and doesn't discuss much else other than that specific time.

Well....that's the Walker book and the Barrios book done. Eyman is on it's way to me as we speak.

Since most people agree that silent filmmaking hit its peak right before the sound era, it's a frequent lament at the end-of-the-day pub crawls in Pordenone that if only sound had come in a year or two later, we'd have at least 20-40 more great silent films to watch.

Lokke Heiss wrote:Since most people agree that silent filmmaking hit its peak right before the sound era, it's a frequent lament at the end-of-the-day pub crawls in Pordenone that if only sound had come in a year or two later, we'd have at least 20-40 more great silent films to watch.

Maybe, assuming they all survived to the present; but it's a certainty, in that case, that only the silent version of Marianne would have been made...a catastrophe!

Michael O'Regan wrote:How about this book? Has anyone read this?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Talkies-Ame ... pd_sim_b_1" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

Yes! Superb! Crafton's book is the class of the field. He's got material no one else has, and his insights are top notch. I spoke to him about it once, and he was surprised that someone outside the academic world would have been interested.

The other books discussed here are all fine as well, although I think Walker's book is the most dated. One curious error that always stuck in my mind is his statement that Chaplin was still at First National when it was bought by Warner Bros. I still re-read it from time-to-time, though.

I'll second the recommendation for Crafton's book (as I have in other threads). It gives the best balanced account and places the story squarely within the context of the mass marketing of electronic technology of the 1920s.

So haven't allot of films referenced as being lost in this book since been found?