Never Weaken (Lloyd 1921)

My new favourite Harold Lloyd film. Three reels and perhaps the most impressive thing about it is that for a long stretch Lloyd is carrying it on his own. Well, him and a stuntman I guess. But it's his charisma that carries the film through.
Believing he's lost his girl to another man (though the Other Man is her brother, and a vicar to boot), Harold sets about trying to do away with himself. And as is the nature of things, learns how precious life is as a result (though it is never expressed in such a corny fashion on the sreen).
The big scene is Harold clambering atop a partly built skyscraper, a set-piece that presumably isnpired Laurel and Hardy's 'Liberty!', though they added some twists there of their own. I certainly don't see that as being derivative after watching this. What is remarkable though is how genuinely exciting this stuff is- if you've got any sympathy with the character or with the film at all then it's real heart-in-the-mouth stuff. I think the stuntwork in Harold Lloyd films can be taken for granted: that's what he does isn't he? He's the silent comedian with the Big Stunts. But the ten minutes or so of dizzying action here is hugely impressive.
Lloyd is the All-American go-getter, the optimist, the believer in the dream, and that is the character we get early on here as he does everything in his power to keep his girl in a job. And even after he mistakes her intentions and sets his mind on suicide, his heart isn't really in it. His is a character built for Life, and at his best there's no-one like him. Particularly great bits in a film top-heavy with them: the street acrobat scam, the slippery street, the poisoning attempt. Not going to into details- no spoilers needed for stuff I'm sure to watch again. 

The Play House (Keaton 1921)

Now here again Keaton is playing against convention and against expectation, but the gulf between this and 'The Frozen North' is immense. I would happily have sat down and started this again the minute it ended if only I had someone to watch it with. The 7 year old isn't seeing the appeal of Keaton. She preferred drawing comic strips on the living room floor and looking up every few minutes to ask me questions about what was happening. 'Is that the same man again?' Fair play to her, but she missed a treat. I'll sneak this back into her pre-bed programme a month or two down the line.
So- was the opening five minutes of utter magnificence (Buster playing all the parts- the actors in a play, the audience, the backstage staff, the orchestra members) a swipe at Chaplin's cravings towards omnipotence (or at least the frequent repettion of his name on film credits)? Probably not, but when the programme notes flashed up on the screen, Keaton's name repeated on every line, that was my initial impression.
It's beautifully done this opening section- extraordinarily clever but also very well observed, and a good showreel for Keaton as a character player. Just as much as Chaplin (and I guess the vast majority of the superior silent comedians) Keaton was very much associated with one character, and he seems to be revelling in this opportunity to show off. The temptation with 'The Play House' I think is to knock what comes after this initial extended dream sequence, and I think that's unfair. The film as a whole is perhaps a little disjointed, but I think if you view it as a miracle rather than a two reel comedy you're not likely to be disappointed. Those are the terms you need to be appreciating this on. Okay, overstating it a tad perhaps, but really this is a remarkable film.
After his dream of theatrical domination Keaton wakes up on the stage a mere theatre hand, a mere prop mover, in love with one of a pair of twin sisters (though he's never sure which one) and harrassed by the theatre owner. This could have been a feature you know- there are certainly enough brilliant ideas in 'The Play House' to fill out the careers of a dozen lesser comedians.

The Kid (Chaplin 1921)

No question that Chaplin was blessed by the presence of Jackie Coogan here- 'The Kid' is unthinkable without him, and that much-abused word 'chemistry' is evident in every scene they share together. 'The Kid' is a blend of slapstick and sentiment as we all know, but it's important to note I think just how affecting the sentiment can be. My wee seven year old companion was snuffling beside me. The two lead perforamnces seem so modern as well- so fresh and full of vigour. And I think that rather shows up Edna Purviance I'm afraid, who is Dramatic Silent Actress here and no more. Granted, that's all Chaplin really asked of her, but watching the film 90 years on there's no question who's been left behind.
It's a long, long time since I've watched a Chaplin film and I don't recall 'The Kid' being a particular favourite back in the day, but I enjoyed it, and the scenes that worked the best- the fantastic streetfight scene in particular- are absolute showstopers. The dream scene towards the end though? You can keep that. There's self-indulgence writ large for you. Charles Reisner plays Chaplin's striking fight opponent.

I Do (Lloyd 1921)

Harold and Mildred learn something of the perils of parenthood. Married for a year, they are given the task of babysitting a couple of unpleasant little 'uns for a night- tie this in with rumours of a burglar in the neighbourhood and a fun night is on the cards. It's enjoyable and has quite a dark side- the elder of the children isn't just cheeky, he's downright malevolent- but all the way through I was thinking: well, you know, it could be better.
I didn't laugh much, I know that.
And some of the gags I didn't even get. I can kinda fit pieces together now and surmise that most of the early stuff in the film like the young lovers pushing around some kind of cask in a pram, and a whole procession of young men coming out of the same house pushing prams- well I'm guessing that this is about prohibition or something, yeah? Ah, silent comedy. A medium that was specicifically aimed at, let's be frank here, the widest popular culture audience imagineable, ultimately pretty much a lowest common denominator kind of thing, but separate yourself from the source by a few long decades and you may as well be tying to modernize Chaucer. Well, you get my drift. What was dumb fun then can take a little brainpower now.
There's a curious, very brief, animated episode in here- the wedding service of Harold and Mildred, and so unexpected is it that it may just be the highpoint of the film. It isn't funny, but it's quirky and sometimes that's enough. A lot of the business with the children, especially the baby's milk- hell, it's ok, it's just a litlle pedestrian, a little uninspired. You see Harold Lloyd on the screen, that great iconic figure, and pedestrian and uninspired just isn't enough.

The Haunted House (Keaton 1921)

The last two or three Keaton shorts I've seen have been in the company of my 7 year old daughter, and I don't know whether it's the absence of her big grinning face for this one or the quality of the film itself that has left me a bit underwhelmed. And let's say from the off here that the concept of being 'underwhelmed' is a relative one- this is still Keaton and by no means is this just Keaton going through the motions. I think ultimately the problem with 'The Haunted House' is that it is basically two scenarios crammed into one film, and alas one of the scenarios is far more successful than the other. It's called 'The Haunted House' and not 'Glue in the Bank' for a reason.
Buster then is a bank cashier- one of his fellow cashiers is planning a heist and Buster gets framed for it. He ends up in a house that may or not be haunted alongside the gang of bankjob criminals and an opera troupe on the run. Okayyyy... Now the bank stuff is fine, it really is. There's some good inventive business with Buster opening up the bank and the payoff to the glue sequence- the 'hands up' bit- is sheer genius. But by golly the glue scene itself is a tirseome one. The idea is that Buster- bank cashier remember- gets glue all over his hands as he's handing out banknotes. (D'oh! How did dat happen?!) Frustration and hilarity ensue. Except that there's a whole lot more frustration than hilarity- it's a neat enough idea I guess, but it just doesn't play too well.
Fortunately once the haunted house shenanigans begin we move to a whole different level entirely. Buster and Eddie really do cram in every spooky gag they can think of here- and most of them work too. The level of constant invention is so impressive- the sequence by the staircase with the 'ghost' and the opera singer swapping places is a particular favourite.
So can we not just snip out the first reel or so completely? It's not as if it provides much of a set-up for the haunted house escapades anyway...