** (out of ****)
[Click here to read my updated review written in 2021]
Harry Langdon. Larry Semon. Charley Chase. Billy West. "Fatty" Arbuckle. What do these names have in common? At one time all of these men were popular comedians during the silent era. Today they are forgotten. Only a select few remember them.
Why is that? Why do the names Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Laurel & Hardy, W.C. Fields and Abbott & Costello live on (somewhat) today? What separated their comedy from the others? Was it all a matter of some random person deciding what to preserve and what not to? The Keystone Cops (Kops) were popular back in the day. After a certain period of time, does "funny" really stop being "funny"?
You may think these thoughts as you watch Carl Reiner's "The Comic" (1969) starring Dick Van Dyke as a fictitious silent screen comedian, Billy Bright.
As the movie begins the audience learns Billy Bright has died. Some thought he was already dead. Bright is a forgotten name in the movie business, evident by the lack of attendees at his funeral. While being eulogized, Bright, lying in his casket, narrates his story to us.
Bright was a baggy pants comic on vaudeville with dreams of becoming the new king of comedy on screen. His first job was working for a Mack Sennett like producer named Frank Powers (Cornel Wilde). Given a minor role in his first two-reeler, Bright deliberately ignores his direction and improvises, making himself the star of the comedy.
He suddenly develops an interest in his leading lady, Mary Gibson (Michele Lee, who resembles Mary Tyler Moore). Mostly because she lets him do all the talking and listens to him praising himself. The two get married and start their own production company, on the same day as their wedding. This, according to Bright, is his wedding present to her. They begin to make two or three comedies a week. Bright says they are all masterpieces.
But then his star begins to fade. His wife divorces him. He begins drinking heavily. He refuses to adapt and make sound pictures. And soon he is forgotten.
In Bright's version of events he was too nice of a guy. He was pushed around by people that weren't as smart as him. The movie's humor stems from Bright's narration as the action on the screen tells a different story. We are dealing with an unreliable narrator.
Theoretically "The Comic" should been a loving tribute to the silent era and the great comedians of the past time has forgotten. Or, it could have been a biting satire on the movie business, dishing out gossip on what was going on behind the scenes. It could have even been a combination of both. Instead it is neither.
The first problem is the Billy Bright character. He is not sympathetic. Having an unlikable character as the star takes away from the movie being a tribute to the silent era. It doesn't provide us with an opportunity to bask in nostalgia, as we think of the "good ol' days" when slipping on a banana peel and a great pie fight were all the rage.
We really don't get a sense of how popular Bright was. Was he a beloved public figure? Instead of showing his fame, the movie takes away valuable screen-time showing clips of his comedies. Which, to be honest, I didn't find particularly funny. Wouldn't it have been better if the movie focused on Bright's creative process instead? How did he come up with his gags? It would have shown audiences the work that went into making movies and would have helped flesh the character out a bit more. Some clips could have still been shown, showing the final result of all of his hard work.
The one good thing about showing the clips is we get to see Dick Van Dyke doing a lot of slapstick comedy. Van Dyke was a vocal admirer of Stan Laurel (see him on Gary Moore's show doing an impression) and this provides him with an opportunity to show off his pantomime skills.
As fun as some may find that to watch the movie could have also spent more time establishing the time period. Use some period music, instead of the terrible score by Jack Elliott. The music played over the opening credits sounds like it belongs in a horror movie. Maybe even shoot the entire movie in black & white, not just the silent movie clips. The costumes don't even look appropriate and look a bit modern (by 1969 standards). The make-up isn't very good either as we see Bright and his frequent co-star, "Cockeye" Van Buren (Mickey Rooney, in perhaps a nod to Ben Turpin) in old age.
In fact nearly everything about the movie seems second-rate at best. It has a made-for-television quality to it.
Supposedly the screenplay by Reiner and Aaron Ruben (the two worked together on the Sid Caesar television show "Caesar's Hour" in the 1950s) was based on real comedians. Some have suggested Buster Keaton was the main source of inspiration. However, Billy Bright's attire recalls Harry Langdon and his gestures and facial expressions remind us of Stan Laurel (who was inspired by Langdon).
"The Comic" was Carl Reiner's second movie as a director. This may account for some of the flaws of the movie. Reiner had been in the entertainment business as an actor and writer, working along side Sid Caesar and Mel Brooks, but may have been inexperienced as a director. He agreed to some strange editing choices. I suspect a lot of good material didn't make the final cut.
I wonder how this material would have been handled in the hands of a director like Peter Bogdanovich. Bogdanovich is a great admirer of Hollywood's past, directing several movies that play as homages. While Bogdanovich may not be considered as funny as Carl Reiner, he may have been able to tap into the more dramatic elements of the story. Incidentally, Bogdanovich directed and released a documentary this year on Buster Keaton called "The Great Buster" (2018) which I recommend.
There is no doubt Carl Reiner and Dick Van Dyke had good intentions for "The Comic" but those good intentions don't translate into a screen success. Which is unfortunate.
Harry Langdon. Larry Semon. Charley Chase. Billy West. "Fatty" Arbuckle. What do these names have in common? At one time all of these men were popular comedians during the silent era. Today they are forgotten. Only a select few remember them.
Why is that? Why do the names Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Laurel & Hardy, W.C. Fields and Abbott & Costello live on (somewhat) today? What separated their comedy from the others? Was it all a matter of some random person deciding what to preserve and what not to? The Keystone Cops (Kops) were popular back in the day. After a certain period of time, does "funny" really stop being "funny"?
You may think these thoughts as you watch Carl Reiner's "The Comic" (1969) starring Dick Van Dyke as a fictitious silent screen comedian, Billy Bright.
As the movie begins the audience learns Billy Bright has died. Some thought he was already dead. Bright is a forgotten name in the movie business, evident by the lack of attendees at his funeral. While being eulogized, Bright, lying in his casket, narrates his story to us.
Bright was a baggy pants comic on vaudeville with dreams of becoming the new king of comedy on screen. His first job was working for a Mack Sennett like producer named Frank Powers (Cornel Wilde). Given a minor role in his first two-reeler, Bright deliberately ignores his direction and improvises, making himself the star of the comedy.
He suddenly develops an interest in his leading lady, Mary Gibson (Michele Lee, who resembles Mary Tyler Moore). Mostly because she lets him do all the talking and listens to him praising himself. The two get married and start their own production company, on the same day as their wedding. This, according to Bright, is his wedding present to her. They begin to make two or three comedies a week. Bright says they are all masterpieces.
But then his star begins to fade. His wife divorces him. He begins drinking heavily. He refuses to adapt and make sound pictures. And soon he is forgotten.
In Bright's version of events he was too nice of a guy. He was pushed around by people that weren't as smart as him. The movie's humor stems from Bright's narration as the action on the screen tells a different story. We are dealing with an unreliable narrator.
Theoretically "The Comic" should been a loving tribute to the silent era and the great comedians of the past time has forgotten. Or, it could have been a biting satire on the movie business, dishing out gossip on what was going on behind the scenes. It could have even been a combination of both. Instead it is neither.
The first problem is the Billy Bright character. He is not sympathetic. Having an unlikable character as the star takes away from the movie being a tribute to the silent era. It doesn't provide us with an opportunity to bask in nostalgia, as we think of the "good ol' days" when slipping on a banana peel and a great pie fight were all the rage.
We really don't get a sense of how popular Bright was. Was he a beloved public figure? Instead of showing his fame, the movie takes away valuable screen-time showing clips of his comedies. Which, to be honest, I didn't find particularly funny. Wouldn't it have been better if the movie focused on Bright's creative process instead? How did he come up with his gags? It would have shown audiences the work that went into making movies and would have helped flesh the character out a bit more. Some clips could have still been shown, showing the final result of all of his hard work.
The one good thing about showing the clips is we get to see Dick Van Dyke doing a lot of slapstick comedy. Van Dyke was a vocal admirer of Stan Laurel (see him on Gary Moore's show doing an impression) and this provides him with an opportunity to show off his pantomime skills.
As fun as some may find that to watch the movie could have also spent more time establishing the time period. Use some period music, instead of the terrible score by Jack Elliott. The music played over the opening credits sounds like it belongs in a horror movie. Maybe even shoot the entire movie in black & white, not just the silent movie clips. The costumes don't even look appropriate and look a bit modern (by 1969 standards). The make-up isn't very good either as we see Bright and his frequent co-star, "Cockeye" Van Buren (Mickey Rooney, in perhaps a nod to Ben Turpin) in old age.
In fact nearly everything about the movie seems second-rate at best. It has a made-for-television quality to it.
Supposedly the screenplay by Reiner and Aaron Ruben (the two worked together on the Sid Caesar television show "Caesar's Hour" in the 1950s) was based on real comedians. Some have suggested Buster Keaton was the main source of inspiration. However, Billy Bright's attire recalls Harry Langdon and his gestures and facial expressions remind us of Stan Laurel (who was inspired by Langdon).
"The Comic" was Carl Reiner's second movie as a director. This may account for some of the flaws of the movie. Reiner had been in the entertainment business as an actor and writer, working along side Sid Caesar and Mel Brooks, but may have been inexperienced as a director. He agreed to some strange editing choices. I suspect a lot of good material didn't make the final cut.
I wonder how this material would have been handled in the hands of a director like Peter Bogdanovich. Bogdanovich is a great admirer of Hollywood's past, directing several movies that play as homages. While Bogdanovich may not be considered as funny as Carl Reiner, he may have been able to tap into the more dramatic elements of the story. Incidentally, Bogdanovich directed and released a documentary this year on Buster Keaton called "The Great Buster" (2018) which I recommend.
There is no doubt Carl Reiner and Dick Van Dyke had good intentions for "The Comic" but those good intentions don't translate into a screen success. Which is unfortunate.
Posts
