Buster Keaton Info?
Robert Kass
I bought "The General" on DVD, because I wanted a nice print of "Cops" which
I had already seen, but I then found myself quickly addicted. I had a lot of
free time this weekend, so I've also watched "Seven Chances", which I taped
from AMC last week and I just finished "Our Hospitality" and was blown away
by the waterfall stunts.
I searched the web and saw several Keaton sites, including Damfinos, which
had biographical information, but I'm most interested in reading more about
the technical aspects of the films, specifically how the stunts were done
and the photography techniques. (I was amazed by multiple exposure scenes in
"The Playhouse", also on my "General" DVD.)
The only book I saw on Amazon that looked like it might be what I'm looking
for was "Keaton's Silent Shorts : Beyond the Laughter" by Gabriella Oldham .
Can anyone comment on this book, or recommend other books or websites?
Thanks!
AChiWriter
Try "Keaton: The Man Who Wouldn't Lie Down" by Tom Dardis or "The Silent
Clowns" by Walter Kerr. There's also a good Keaton bio by Rudy Blesch and
Keaton's autobiography "My Wonderful World of Slapstick."
Michael Gebert
<rk...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> Can anyone comment on this book, or recommend other books or websites?
>
> Thanks!
Tom Dardis's biography (is it The Man Who Wouldn't Lie Down?) and Walter
Kerr's The Silent Clowns both give some details. I imagine the same is
true of some of the more recent (or, for that matter, less recent)
biographies.
R.E. Lee
Robert Knopf which I recently saw in a catalog that looked quite good. I
haven't actually read it but it does say that it "explores the complex
nature of Keaton's comedy, the technical advances he brought to the
medium...and his link to surrealism of the 1920's." Sounds like it might
have something of what you're looking for.
R.E. Lee
el...@lcc.net
Robert Kass <rk...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:Jj974.4300$su3.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net...
Tim
and Cinema of Buster Keaton) and I would strongly recommend getting them before
going with Oldham's "Keaton's Silent Shorts" which is OK, but far from a first
rate book. You should also get a copy of Kevin Brownlow's wonderful
documentary "Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow."
Also check out the article
http://www.silentsaregolden.com/articles/busterwaterarticle.html
Tim Lussier
"Silents Are Golden"
http://www.silentsaregolden.com
Bruce Calvert
news:Jj974.4300$su3.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net...
looking
> for was "Keaton's Silent Shorts : Beyond the Laughter" by Gabriella Oldham
> Can anyone comment on this book, or recommend other books or websites?
Oldham's book is O.K., but I wouldn't recommend reading a chapter on a film
until you have seen the film. There have already been several good
suggestions like Dardis' biography, but my favorite Keaton book is KEATON:
THE SILENT FEATURES CLOSE UP by Daniel Moews. It is 20 years old and out of
print, but you can probably find one at a used book shop. THE COMPLETE
FILMS OF BUSTER KEATON by Jim Kline has a lot of great information on both
the silent and sound shorts and features.
--
Bruce Calvert
Visit the Internet Silent Film Still Archive
http://www.crosswinds.net/dallas/~bcalvert/home.htm
Robert Kass
<<I searched the web and saw several Keaton sites, including Damfinos, which
had biographical information, but I'm most interested in reading more about
the technical aspects of the films, specifically how the stunts were done
and the photography techniques. (I was amazed by multiple exposure scenes in
"The Playhouse", also on my "General" DVD.)>>
Thanks to all of you who answered my question both on the newsgroup and by
e-mail.
I found exactly what I was looking for today, not in a book, but on a video
tape.
I rented the tapes "Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow" and the first tape
in the series showed both the technque for the multiple exposures in "The
Playhouse" and how the waterfall stunt was done in "Our Hospitality".
Unfortunately for my bank account, however, watching this tape is making me
think about all the other Kino DVD's I now "need" to buy.........
damf...@my-deja.com
"Robert Kass" <rk...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> I wrote.......
>
> <<I searched the web and saw several Keaton sites, including Damfinos, which had biographical information, but I'm most interested in reading more about the technical aspects of the films, specifically how the stunts were done and the photography techniques. (I was amazed by multiple exposure scenes in "The Playhouse", also on my "General" DVD.)>>
>
>
>
>
Since you're a newcomer to Keaton, I'd actually caution you against
Oldham's book at this point. It amounts to an awfully cumbersome,
scholarly disertation on the "meaning" being each of the 19 short
subjects. There's no real technical insight offered. This newsgroup
probably embodies the best available knowledge on the films, and many of
the participants will be enthusiastic to tell you what they know about
how Buster did what he did.
To date, the definitive book on Keaton's filmmaking has yet to be
written. Similarly, all the well known biographies either have
weaknesses, noteworthy inaccuracies, or in some cases, curious agendas.
So far, probably the best document on Keaton is the documentary "A Hard
Act to Follow." Enjoy it. And do buy those DVDs!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
fred
> Thanks to all of you who answered my question both on the newsgroup and by
> e-mail.
> I found exactly what I was looking for today, not in a book, but on a video
> tape.
My girlfriend got me "The Railrodder" for Christmas, but doesn't know that
I know. I want to rip off the covering and look- the tape, not my girlfriend.
FThomp1065
>My girlfriend got me "The Railrodder" for Christmas, but doesn't know that
>I know. I want to rip off the covering and look- the tape, not my girlfriend.
Well then, your priorities have gone tragically awry.
FT
RPalmer151
>THE SILENT FEATURES CLOSE UP by Daniel Moews.
I disagree with your choice. Of all the Keaton books I've read, this is
probably the worst. (With the exception of "The Look of Buster Keaton", which
is partially redeemed by the photographs.) The Moews book is an eggheaded,
over- intellectualized piece of tripe. Buster himself would probably laugh at
many of the absurdities presented in this book. It's heavy on theory but thin
on Keaton's actual working methods, which I believe is what the original
message writer's interests were.
I hope this isn't too unpopular an opinion (nothing personal Bruce!), and,
to Mr. Moews....Sorry!!
-Roger Pee.
Glamour Studios
Archie Waugh
fred
>>>I know. I want to rip off the covering and look- the tape, not my girlfriend.
>> Well then, your priorities have gone tragically awry.
> Nonsense; women come and go, great movies (properly preserved) are forever!
Ha,ha! There was a theater in NYC called the Elgen(sp?) where they had
a B.K. film series. This was about 1975. It was two weeks long, and they
did a great job, showing just about all of his films and shorts up to
MGM stuff (they did have "The Cameraman" though.)
Anyway, the first BK film I saw was "Seven Chances." The place was packed
(about 600 people.) A title card comes up that says "..presented by
Raymond Rohauer.." and everyone booed and hissed.
The first title card of the actual film come up; it's in French. But it's
fairly short, so you can hear everyone in the audience trying to read
it with whatever is left of their high school French. People are just
about keeping up when by the 4th card, it has two big paragraphs.
There's a loud groan, as everyone realizes the they will never get
through it in time. But then everyone laughs. As it turns out,
the second paragraph is in English, as is the rest of the film,
so it's OK.
I thought; It's only the first minute, and there's already total
audience participation.
Years later, I became a projectionist, and a few years after that,
the guy that ran the Elgen came to work with us in the office. He told me
a few stories about Raymond Rohauer, so I understood why
some people didn't like him.
Toshiba User
own book Silent Echoes explains how Keaton performed a motorcycle stunt over
a broken bridge, and with an oncoming train, in Sherlock Jr., as well as
where and how the aterfall sequence from Our Hospitality was filmed. It
contains over 900 photos, including two dozen images from The Playhouse.
Also, did you know that the Hollywood alleys from COPS still exist? Or that
Keaton's studio appears in the background of several of his films? Or that
a sham oil derrick, constructed by a con man who
bilked the residents of Cottage Grove, Oregon, appears in the background of
THE GENERAL? I think you will enjoy the book's many surprises.
It's available at Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ts/book-similarities/189166106X/qid=931558
313/103-0568267-7083820
and
Barnes& Noble (bn.com). My book also has a website. The URL is
www.busterkeaton.com/Silent_Echoes/sehome.htm
Thank you for your time, John Bengtson
"Robert Kass" <rk...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:Jj974.4300$su3.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net...
> I just started watching Buster Keaton films and I'm absolutely amazed!
> I bought "The General" on DVD, because I wanted a nice print of "Cops"
which
> I had already seen, but I then found myself quickly addicted. I had a lot
of
> free time this weekend, so I've also watched "Seven Chances", which I
taped
> from AMC last week and I just finished "Our Hospitality" and was blown
away
> by the waterfall stunts.
>
> I searched the web and saw several Keaton sites, including Damfinos, which
> had biographical information, but I'm most interested in reading more
about
> the technical aspects of the films, specifically how the stunts were done
> and the photography techniques. (I was amazed by multiple exposure scenes
in
> "The Playhouse", also on my "General" DVD.)
>
> The only book I saw on Amazon that looked like it might be what I'm
looking
> for was "Keaton's Silent Shorts : Beyond the Laughter" by Gabriella Oldham
.
> Can anyone comment on this book, or recommend other books or websites?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
Soulpatch6
>Raymond Rohauer.." and everyone booed and hissed.
>the guy that ran the Elgen came to work with us in the office. He told me
>a few stories about Raymond Rohauer, so I understood why
>some people didn't like him.
>
I recognize the name & seem to think he's a private collector.. no?
isn't he the one who had most of the Chaplin Footage that made up "Unknown
Chaplin"?
surely, someone who owns such classic comedy can't be all that unlikable?
i have a video copy of "Putting on the Ritz" (1930) & he assed-up the credits
by putting his name in them with real cheap, amature-ish looking titles.The
color footage was missing too... (alice in wonderland number, i think)
AChiWriter
>Raymond Rohauer.." and everyone booed and hissed. >>
Didn't he provide the prints for Richard J. Anobile's frame blow-up books?
Also, what ever happened to Anobile after his vivisection of Groucho Marx (The
Marx Brothers (S)Crap Book)?
Arnie
fred
> >some people didn't like him.
> >
> I recognize the name & seem to think he's a private collector.. no?
> isn't he the one who had most of the Chaplin Footage that made up "Unknown
> Chaplin"?
> surely, someone who owns such classic comedy can't be all that unlikable?
>
> i have a video copy of "Putting on the Ritz" (1930) & he assed-up the credits
> by putting his name in them with real cheap, amature-ish looking titles.The
> color footage was missing too... (alice in wonderland number, i think)
Some people felt that he was a sort of scavenger, getting whatever money
he could.
Two examples a film teacher told me years ago (in 1975):
Rohauer noticed that no one had renewed the copyright registration for,
"Birth of a Nation." This was in the 50's, I think. So he renewed it
himself, then tried to get back all the prints he could. What pissed off
some people was he tried to prevent anyone from watching "BoaN" without
paying him, while saying he was doing it for the good of the film. But
he never tried to restore the film; he just kept the money. Also,
there was a legal issue: Just because you are the copyright holder
does not mean you are automatically intitled to every print in existence.
Yet, he tried to browbeat people into sending their print to him.
Another example was: (Again in the 50's) Buster Keaton had heard
that Rohauer was interested in silent films. BK didn't know Rohauer
very well. Keaton was cleaning out his garage, and had an almost
complete collection of his pre-MGM prints. He pretty much called up Rohauer
and said; I have these old prints; if you don't want them, I'm gonna
throw them out (which also shows Keaton's state of mind at the time.)
Rohauer took them (and had to have them reprinted; apparently
rather than winding up on the take up reel in an optical printer during
copying, the film came out in broken chunks.) Anyway, Rohauer jealously
guarded Keaton's stuff, to the point of hoarding; charging a high price
to anyone who wanted to see the films and actually holding back sometimes
just to increase the demand, and the money.
I don't know myself how much truth are in these stories. I have to say that
while I hate the idea of pretty much holding classic films at hostage for
money, there is also the fact that no one was very interested in saving
them during the 50's. Rohauer did save them, and helped generate an interest
in saving them.
JOSEPH BARRY
>
> >A title card comes up that says "..presented by
> >Raymond Rohauer.." and everyone booed and hissed.
>
> >some people didn't like him.
> >
> I recognize the name & seem to think he's a private collector.. no?
> isn't he the one who had most of the Chaplin Footage that made up "Unknown
> Chaplin"?
> surely, someone who owns such classic comedy can't be all that unlikable?
>
> i have a video copy of "Putting on the Ritz" (1930) & he assed-up the credits
> by putting his name in them with real cheap, amature-ish looking titles.The
> color footage was missing too... (alice in wonderland number, i think)
to the money aspect of the films. Evidently, I read in a Buster Keaton
book, that Rohauer sometimes got access to copyrights by assuring the
former copyright holders that he planned an artistic comeback for their
classic silents, but then would reissue them with his own name scratched
in to the crdits and would get rich by showing the film in any theatre
that would run it. In short, he wasn't always a very pleasant
character-according to the account in the book I read. I don't know if
any of that is justified. What I do know is that Rohauer must be
credited with helping a restore an interest in silent films in the 60s,
especially Keaton's THE GENERAL, which seems to have really only found
its audience when Rohauer re-released it. We should be thankful for
that, at least.
Matt
eric stott
>
> << >A title card comes up that says "..presented by
> >Raymond Rohauer.." and everyone booed and hissed. >>
>
>
> Also, what ever happened to Anobile after his vivisection of Groucho Marx (The
> Marx Brothers (S)Crap Book)?
>
> Arnie
of a "New Marriage" with a woman and another man- all were heterosexual
I should add. He wrote a book about that situation, and that is the last
I know. It certainly sank his credibility in my eyes.
Eric Stott
eric stott
>
> In article <387132...@albany.net>, eric stott <est...@albany.net>
> wrote:
>
> > The last I saw of Anobile was years ago on the Donahue Show. He was part
> > of a "New Marriage" with a woman and another man- all were heterosexual
> > I should add. He wrote a book about that situation, and that is the last
> > I know. It certainly sank his credibility in my eyes.
>
> knowledge or expertise about movie comedy in general, or the Marx Bros.
> in particular?
>
> --
> Paul Penna
I'm sorry of I was glib. How ever, I did see the show- he came off as
shallow and "Hip" in a pretty forced way. The other man seemed decent
but Anobile and the woman kept spouting sociobabble and trying to put a
gloss on what was probably a friendly shack up. What ever it was, it was
a typical Donahue show.
Eric Stott
Michael Gebert
> Rohauer noticed that no one had renewed the copyright registration for,
> "Birth of a Nation." This was in the 50's, I think. So he renewed it
> himself
I don't think this is possible-- otherwise he could also have
recopyrighted the three Keaton films that were PD and he didn't own! What
Rohauer did was what roughly Republic has done with It's a Wonderful Life:
he bought the rights to the novels The Clansman and The Leopard's Spots
from the Thomas Dixon estate, then tried to assert underlying copyright
control, not that it got him very far.
> Another example was: (Again in the 50's) Buster Keaton had heard
> that Rohauer was interested in silent films. BK didn't know Rohauer
> very well. Keaton was cleaning out his garage, and had an almost
> complete collection of his pre-MGM prints. He pretty much called up Rohauer
> and said; I have these old prints; if you don't want them, I'm gonna
> throw them out (which also shows Keaton's state of mind at the time.)
> Rohauer took them (and had to have them reprinted; apparently
> rather than winding up on the take up reel in an optical printer during
> copying, the film came out in broken chunks.) Anyway, Rohauer jealously
> guarded Keaton's stuff, to the point of hoarding; charging a high price
> to anyone who wanted to see the films and actually holding back sometimes
> just to increase the demand, and the money.
It is true that Rohauer charged a ton for Keaton (who was worth it, at the
college film society box office, but also for Harry Langdon, who you
couldn't possibly hope to make your money back on), but I believe it is
not true that he screwed Keaton in any way, indeed, if he had one
redeeming feature it was that he treated Keaton well (perhaps he knew his
cash cow when he saw him) and did a lot to engineer the appreciative
tributes and revival in Keaton's later life. In any case, it wasn't
Keaton who found the prints, it was James Mason who by then owned Keaton's
old mansion.
You can find more about Rohauer at deja.com, he's come up here before;
William K. Everson also wrote an article for a magazine called Grand
Street about him which is worth looking for. He was a brilliantly shady
operator, did a number of services to silent film (such as rescuing
Keaton's films), mucked a nearly equal number of things up (such as many
of the titles to Keaton's films-- if he changed the titles he could
recopyright the print, you see) and, as someone who knew him said, would
steal the mayonnaise off your sandwich.
