Buster Keaton Short Films Collection 1917-1923 Blu Ray

[davidkalat]

So, David Shepard is right that the difference between the "authorized" Transit restoration and his version is partly due to different frame rates, but the Transit version does have substantially more than 3 or so minutes worth of footage, almost all of which appears in Part One. The additional material is scattered--sometimes its just a few extra frames here or there, but there are whole extra scenes that appear in it.

As far as the boycott efforts go and where those appeared, you have to remember this was 1999. The Internet was a different beast. I got emails, directly to me, from upset customers. Like I, as a mere audio commentarian on a disc produced by other people, had any control over that. There were some DVD review publications at the time where some of the complaints appeared, but it's been a long time and I don't remember which ones clearly. It might have been DVD Newsletter, but I may be wrong. I remember it because I had some conversations with Perry Martin at Anchor Bay around that time about the self-destructiveness of certain film fans, and he'd had some of the same experience with people complaining about a few missing seconds of footage Italian giallo films he was presenting stateside legally, and in proper widescreen editions, for the first time.

For the record, David Shepard's version is terrific, and I'm proud to have been a part of it.

Also for the record, I have a Super 8mm digest version of Dr. Mabuse (with the glorious Konrad Elfers jazz score that needs to be a standalone soundtrack album). It comes in a spiffy case with an illustrated booklet. I went to great lengths and no small expense to get it. And it runs only 20 minutes. It is "missing" 250 minutes of the film. And I can't imagine complaining about that.

[jacksparrow900]

I noticed some new frames in Hard Luck that were not in 2006 MOC. He tries to hang himself from the tree twice but it's still missing some frames showing him climb up the tree the second time that's why the jump cut is there. The MOC 2006 combined both climbs and made it look like one. You see Buster fall off the branch and he forgot to attach the rope to the tree then it cuts to the Policemen in the zoo and back to Buster on the ground attach to the tree branch. So even with the jump cut we have more frames that had previously been missing from previous editions. The other thing I noticed was the ending frames are still in rough shape but you see Buster and family walk off into the distance. Where in the MOC 2006 Buster and family turn away from the hole and it fades abruptly. So in conclusion this is probably the best Hard Luck will ever look unless some 35mm complete print or negative is discovered. I'm just getting to delve into this set I wanted to watch the problematic titles that I would expect would look rough but even Convict 13 is leaps and bounds from the 2011 blu ray. Scenes that were once dark and murky now are clear and decipherable. Even the quality jump between sources is not as noticeable as say the Chaplin Keystones from what I've seen of the more problematic titles Hard Luck,Convict 13, Daydreams. I plan on in the next few days watching the rest. I'm glad that this 20 year restoration finally came to be. I can retire my MOC 2006 DVDs. I'm excited to see what Cohen does with his feature films.

[Tommie Hicks]

My shipment should arrive tomorrow. I have bought the Bluray and DVD of this title as I intend to rip the DVDs and make my own versions from the various DVD sets to make the most complete versions. I did this with the Chaplin Mutuals from four different sets (as I have that many of the Keaton and Arbuckle shorts). I have copied and pasted on a Word document the various and heated threads on silent comedy DVD completeness from this forum as a guide. It much fun to put together the various scenes and make and replace title cards where necessary and the finished file upconverts nicely through my playback device. I do lose the musical accompaniment though and I have to tack on some period music.

As Mr. G mentioned earlier, 40 years ago it was so much different. IIRC the 16mm print of The Blacksmith in 1975 was $59, that's $290 in today's money.

[Michael Arlt]

I noticed some new frames in Hard Luck that were not in 2006 MOC. He tries to hang himself from the tree twice but it's still missing some frames showing him climb up the tree the second time that's why the jump cut is there. The MOC 2006 combined both climbs and made it look like one. You see Buster fall off the branch and he forgot to attach the rope to the tree then it cuts to the Policemen in the zoo and back to Buster on the ground attach to the tree branch. So even with the jump cut we have more frames that had previously been missing from previous editions. The other thing I noticed was the ending frames are still in rough shape but you see Buster and family walk off into the distance. Where in the MOC 2006 Buster and family turn away from the hole and it fades abruptly. So in conclusion this is probably the best Hard Luck will ever look unless some 35mm complete print or negative is discovered. I'm just getting to delve into this set I wanted to watch the problematic titles that I would expect would look rough but even Convict 13 is leaps and bounds from the 2011 blu ray. Scenes that were once dark and murky now are clear and decipherable. Even the quality jump between sources is not as noticeable as say the Chaplin Keystones from what I've seen of the more problematic titles Hard Luck,Convict 13, Daydreams. I plan on in the next few days watching the rest. I'm glad that this 20 year restoration finally came to be. I can retire my MOC 2006 DVDs. I'm excited to see what Cohen does with his feature films.

Cool, those are the titles I was wondering about if new prints/footage has been found.

Does The Boat still show nitrate decomposition where the boat gets christened and sinks in the water?

[Red Bartlett]

Since I already have Kino's prior 2011 set, I decided to pre-order the upcoming Masters of Cinema set, rather than get Kino's new restoration. I figure if I'm gonna double-dip on the Keaton Shorts I'd rather try a different (less expensive and usually more feature packed) version. Kino's been good, but the collections coming out of the UK have frankly been better. And strangely, cheaper.

Speaking of double-dipping, I threw in a copy the Chaplin Mutuals from BFI with my purchase. The sync issues and lack of commentaries on the expensive Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals set, simply required it. The informative notes, commentaries (!!) and extras are my film education -- so I appreciate these extras.

[jacksparrow900]

Cool, those are the titles I was wondering about if new prints/footage has been found.

Does The Boat still show nitrate decomposition where the boat gets christened and sinks in the water?[/quote]


I'm going to watch the rest of them today and I'll let you know if the decomposition is still there.

[Roscoe]

I have not done a comprehensive viewing/comparison of the KinoLobster set vs the Old Kino set, but I did check out ONE WEEK on the KinoLobster set, which looked very over-bright and frankly washed out and overexposed. I then put on the same film from the Old Kino set, which looked far better -- more vibrant blacks and grays, and a lot more visible detail, but with a lot more speckling and general schmutz which has all been cleaned from the KinoLobster set, at least in what I've seen.

We'll see. At least so far, I'm seeing no reason to toss the Old Kino set.

[Mark Zimmer]

Thanks for the response from David Kalat. That makes the issue about the boycott of Mabuse clearer (still was nonsense, but I know about the crazy responses to the Anchor Bay giallos that you reference, which were very publicly visible). The Image/Film Preservation set was a first class release; the only reason I was determined to upgrade it was that I somehow lost one of the two discs. Maybe it was in a player that died and I didn't realize it....

I'll be interested in seeing the comparisons between the UK and the Kino sets of the Keaton short, to get back to the point of the thread. While I will double-dip to get an improvement over time, I'm getting tired of double-dipping for US vs UK sets of things released at the same time and largely based on the same source material, just one side or the other screwing something up. And of course, I inevitably buy the wrong one first.

[jacksparrow900]

No sync issues on any of the disc. The Boat still has the decomposing frames. One delighted surprise was the music for The Boat was what originally was on the VHS The Art Of Buster Keaton but was replaced for the DVD and 2011 blu ray. I was really pleased with the set. Is it worth picking up? absolutely the fact that these were scan in 2K which is higher than the 2011 blu ray collection. This is the collection that should of been released the first time utilizing every frame of footage known in existence.

[Tommie Hicks]

I watched 90% of this set and its by far the best. Some shorts have new material and that material was wonderful to watch in hi-def. Even the bad looking material looks better. Sad to say HARD LUCK and FROZEN NORTH have not had any new materials turn up on these.

The existing materials on HARD LUCK continues to vex me. When the dive footage turned up some years ago, I was shocked to see an animated Buster do the dive when Buster bragged all his life he did it for real and it was talked about by the viewing public years after. Buster did not to my knowledge tell outright lies about his past, especially when Buster knew a print of this film could turn up (it was lost during his old age).

I am convinced Buster did the actual dive and for some reason the European print has it animated. Why? Did the European film distributors have damaged pre-print material of the dive and went to the expense of animating another one? That would be fairly expensive. Was the European print material subject to a censor beforehand who cut that dive out for anticipated copy-cat attempts by the general public? There are many censor cuts in THE COOK. Some European censors removed all images of people impacting anything.

I think I know how Buster did the dive. Do you notice this diving pool is not very long? A diving pool has to be long so divers have some room to ride out the kinetic energy from the high dive. I think Buster built a faux surface over the end of the pool. He rigged a section of the artifice he was diving into with compressed air dust hoses and maybe some technical guys underneath the phony floor to throw up debris and keep splashing water from showing when Buster hit it to make it look like Buster hit solid ground.

This film was considered lost until I was about 22 years old. When I got out of the Navy I actually was able to get Mr. Rohauer on the phone (I was expecting a secretary) and he kindly informed me that HARD LUCK and CONVICT 13 had finally showed up. I hope I have another 20 years or so to see the intact print of HARD LUCK to show up.

About the racist material in CONEY ISLAND: you see many gags in silent comedy where a white man hits on a black woman he thinks is white from his view. The rejection expressed by these white characters during discovery may not be revulsion to the other race as many people today see it, but the very real fact, even in the North, that it was against the law to be in intimate company of the other race and you could go to jail, even if you are white.

[bigshot]

the fact that these were scan in 2K which is higher than the 2011 blu ray collection.

Video companies are playing fast and loose with the different resolution standards in their press releases. The truth is there is really no difference between 1080p and 2K for Academy Format films. The pixel resolution of 1080p is 1080 x 1920. The pixel resolution of 2K is 1080 x 2048. 2K might make a tiny bit of difference with a widescreen picture, but for the Keatons it probably makes no difference whatsoever.

[SilentEchoes57]

I am convinced Buster did the actual dive and for some reason the European print has it animated. Why? Did the European film distributors have damaged pre-print material of the dive and went to the expense of animating another one? That would be fairly expensive. Was the European print material subject to a censor beforehand who cut that dive out for anticipated copy-cat attempts by the general public? There are many censor cuts in THE COOK. Some European censors removed all images of people impacting anything.

I think I know how Buster did the dive. Do you notice this diving pool is not very long? A diving pool has to be long so divers have some room to ride out the kinetic energy from the high dive. I think Buster built a faux surface over the end of the pool. He rigged a section of the artifice he was diving into with compressed air dust hoses and maybe some technical guys underneath the phony floor to throw up debris and keep splashing water from showing when Buster hit it to make it look like Buster hit solid ground.

As I write in this post, Keaton filmed the high dive at the Brunton Studio "T"-shaped pool, just north of Melrose, with what would be the vertical part of the "T" covered over with something (paper?) made to look like brick. Thus, he could have dived through the paper safely to create the effect. I haven't received my set of this newest release, but in the version I've seen it does seem as if he is animated - the physics of his trajectory seem off.

https://silentlocations.wordpress.com/2 ... ot-plunge/



I was a Kickstarter supporter for this latest release - I wonder when I'm supposed to receive my set, as the release date is now several days ago.

Cheers, John

[Richard Warner]

I was a supporter too, but based in the UK, so I got the Arte DVD set last December. I just noticed on the Kickstarter page that Lobster Films have been in contact with Kino to hurry up the USA Blu Ray deliveries. I think it's shameful that the USA Kickstarter supporters didn't get advance copies.
Regarding Hard Luck, according to the Arte set, this was compiled from multiple prints on 35mm, 24mm and 9.5mm. I wonder how many of these had the dive and whether it's identical on each print? One other possible explanation for the dive might be that the REAL dive looked bad (didn't Keaton injure himself?), so animation was substituted.
For those who do have the new Kino set, I'd appreciate knowing if they have fixed the title cards just before the Police Chief sequence in Day Dreams and the Bottle of Port gag in The Love Nest. In the Arte set, the title cards don't make sense of what follows.

[Rick Lanham]

For those contributors who have not been to Kickstarter lately,
Lobster posted this yesterday:

Lobster Films
Dear contributors,
We are extremely sorry for the delay on the Blu-Ray deliveries. We are actually experiencing some logistic and agreement problems with Kino. We are doing our best for you to get delivered as soon as possible.
No worries, they are coming!
We wholeheartedly hope our new restorations will charm you and that you will still appreciate the genius of the man who never smiled in an unequalled quality.
Sincerely yours,
Lobster Films Team

Rick

[JFK]

I object ......

Objection sustained. The jury is advised to ignore JFK's previous comments, if they can find them.

[DShepFilm]

I object to JFK's repeated use of the word "should." I do appreciate that he/she purchased a copy of the set; thank you. Constructive suggestions offered as such are always welcome.Yet his/her didactic instruction is out of place directed to the people who actually find and restore the films, spend the time and money, prepare the music, and do the work! Incidentally, popular tunes (including vocals) were standard practice in silent film accompaniment.

David Shepard

[syd]

"About the racist material in CONEY ISLAND: you see many gags in silent comedy where a white man hits on a black woman he thinks is white from his view. The rejection expressed by these white characters during discovery may not be revulsion to the other race as many people today see it, but the very real fact, even in the North, that it was against the law to be in intimate company of the other race and you could go to jail, even if you are white."

Granted, I'll give you that for Coney Island. What about the scene in Out West where an African-American
boy is subjected to gunshots at his feet by a group of men who laugh at his struggles to get out of the
way of the bullets? The melee is halted by a female missionary and (bizarrely) the boy is the one who
repents.

Then there is the scene in The Butcher Boy (in the complete version) where a black woman
enters a shop and is immediately made an object of derision by Roscoe Arbuckle and a customer.
She orders charcoal, for crying out loud.

[WaverBoy]

I don't agree with the well-intentioned but misguided practice of altering old films due to content perceived to be objectionable by today's standards.

[Scoundrel]

DITTO

[Mitch Farish]

Yes. Altering films for any reason, no matter how well-intentioned, is wrong, and destroys the cultural context of the film, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to what's clearly morally wrong. I don't like how the poor plug of a horse was treated in COPS. I suppose at the time people thought half-starved and overworked nags were a hoot. I can't appreciate the comedy that supposed to be conveyed by that kind of cruelty, but I still watch COPS for the good stuff. It is painful to watch the horse, though.

[bigshot]

Incidentally, popular tunes (including vocals) were standard practice in silent film accompaniment.

Vocals in silent soundtracks almost always pull me out of the film. Even if they were standard practice in the old days, I wish modern people preparing soundtracks wouldn't use them.

[wich2]

>Altering films for any reason, no matter how well-intentioned, is wrong<

>Vocals in silent soundtracks almost always pull me out of the film. Even if they were standard practice in the old days, I wish modern people preparing soundtracks wouldn't use them.<

The Eternal Debate...

[bigshot]

Aside from Alexander Nevsky, which silent films had vintage specifications for songs to be sung other than to give a voice to a character on the screen or follow a specific reference to the song in the film?

[martin arias]

I completely disagree with altering old films in order to adjust them to modern views, even if they contain (and I obviously am aware of it) objectionable material.

The gag of rejecting a black person is obviously horrible to modern eyes (and of course it should have been the same in those days), but I think you don't help a lot by eliminating from a film all that doesn't adjust to our view.

When we're watching a 1917 film, I don't think ANYONE isn't aware of how many things have changed. And if we consider the flms not just as entertainment but as historical objects, supressing stuff we find to be wrong is also attempting to change the past.

I don't like the "rejecting a black person" gag, and find it horrible everytime I watch it. But it's so overtly present in dozens of silent comedies, that I think it's much better to try to analize it and explain the change in our points of view. It has been taken out from "Coney Island", but the same gag is on "Seven Chances". Also, it was taken out from Harry Langdon's "Lucky Stars". The scene with the black guy in "Out West" is also hard to watch. But comedy in those years was full of common places, and not all of them expressed an "ideology" you can connect with the stars.
Max Davidson's comedies were full of Jewish stereotypes, but people of that time was used to those stereotypes, and not necessarily saw them as racism.

While Afro-Americans,were obviously in an inferior position and mostly with no chance to express their points of view, their mere presence on those films, even as stereotypes or in horrible gags, should be kept there as a testimony, and not excised away in order to protect us from the past. Deniying the past is the best way to repeat the same mistakes...

And also, where to put the limit? I remember that list of forbidden cartoons, most of them taken out of circulation because they contained stereotypes about Afro-americans or (in WWII times) the Japanese. I agree they shouldn't be shown to kids, but also they are historical instruments in their own way. And among them, for instance, were a few cartoons on which celebrated jazz musicians had recorded the soundtrack, and on which they were represented on animated form. I remember many of those participating musicians were later interviewed about that censorship, and they agreed that, while sensibilities had obviously changed, they hadn't consider those cartoons aggresive at the time.

It's a tough matter, I agree. But I don't think we are entitled to change the past.

m.

[DShepFilm]

Bigshot, try the original Movietone score to 7th HEAVEN, THE MAN WHO LAUGHS, or the original Photophone score to THE KING OF KINGS. Of course your question is somewhat off center as, with very, very few exceptions, music for silent films was up to each exhibitor. The excellent recent biography of Roxy by Ross Melnick makes clear that he had staff vocalists as part of his musical staff in theaters he managed from the beginning of his career.

David S

[bigshot]

The staff vocalists weren't used for musical numbers between films?

Singing during silent films is like the Chaplin narration in his own films. Maybe it's authentic/director approved, but I still don't like it.

[wich2]

That's your prerogative. I know people who don't like Tinting, because the Silents they grew up with were straight B & W.

But as Martin writes, Authentic is Authentic.

-Craig

[bigshot]

Tinting is easy to get rid of by turning down the saturation. You can't turn down a vocalist! The thing about musical scores for silents is that they have to be sensitive to presenting the film properly. It can be completely authentic sounding and still be a lousy score. Film restoration is a more mechanical thing where authenticity can be the primary goal, but scores are primarily creative. I'll see how the vocals work when I get my copy of the set from the UK.

[Smari1989]

I realize this is a debate that's been covered before, but for what's it worth: I also disagree with cutting out available parts of old films on the grounds that we now may find them objectionable, distasteful etc. Even though it'd probably, in some cases, make the film in question more pleasant to watch today (believe me, I cringe till it hurts by the final gag of SUPER-HOOPER-DYNE-LIZZIES). First of all, while I watch silents partly to be entertained and have a good time, I also watch them because I'm interested in history. I want to watch a film as close as possible to what initial audiences saw, even though it's not always pleasant. Also, it's part of our history that most people didn't find anything objectionable about racial humor 100 years ago (or less), even though it may be painful to think of today. No censorship we do of the past today can eliminate what was actually done in the past (ridiculously obvious, I know). That doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders and show any "objectionable" film on primetime TV without any challenge whatsoever; I applaud the solution many DVD-producers have come to in recent years, to make the viewer aware through an introductory "warning" that some of the following content may be considered objectionable to modern viewers, and that such content was objectionable then and is objectionable now BUT....etc.

As to the use of vocalists in "song numbers" in silents, I think it can work if done carefully and very rarely, but generally I don't see why it should be necessary, "authentic" or not. It's perfectly clear to me that Edna does a song number in A DOG'S LIFE, for instance, even though Chaplin "only" provides an instrumental score (in that film, anyway). I haven't watched this particular Keaton-set myself, though, so this is just a general thought.

[bigshot]

It's easy enough to do branching and construct a "historical" complete copy of a film, and an edited "non-objectionable" copy using the same files on the disc. It would have been better to do that than to relegate the last gag of a film to the supplements with no choice to see it in context.