Soitenly
Moronika
The community forum of ThreeStooges.net

The Gold Ghost (1934) - Buster Keaton

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline metaldams



      Before I get to the actual short, a little background for the next 16 Buster shorts we'll be discussing.  Buster himself at this point just left MGM and is going through a rough phase with alcohol and a rocky second marriage during this time.  I've never been clear the exact moment Buster gave up alcohol, probably during or shortly after his Educational run, but needless to say this is a low point in his personal life.  The films themselves have their strong and weak points, as we'll be discussing.

      Educational Pictures was around going back to the silent era.  Initially they did attempt to make actual educational related films, but very quickly went into the silent comedy two reel genre, making shorts for Lloyd Hamilton, later Larry Semon, and into the talkie era, a handful of Harry Langdon shorts before he went to Columbia.  In the silent era, a regular director for Educational was Jack "Preston Black" White, brother of Jules. By the time Buster got to Educational, the studio had a few more years left before folding and their shorts were distributed by Fox the same way Hal Roach was distributed by MGM.  A regular director during Buster's time at Educational, and the director of most of these shorts, including this week's is Charles Lamont, he of RESTLESS KNIGHTS and PLAYING THE PONIES fame.

      As for THE GOLD GHOST, it's a good start to the series, if not perfect.  What stands out about this short are the moments where Buster is basically making a silent comedy.  Buster always said his ideal talkies would be minimal dialogue that just advances the plot and extended moments of silence where he can do gags to move things forward.  The first reel of THE GOLD GHOST accomplishes this.  Buster is able to move around an abandoned ghost town and do simple gags, punctuated but his still body language and reactions.  Buster is always fun to watch when pulling off this kind of thing, and it's proof elaborate gags are are not needed for him to be funny....though they definitely do make a nice icing on the cake.  Yeah, that's the only thing that's different, no elaborate gags.  You know darn well if Keaton had a few weeks instead of a few days to make this thing there'd be a brilliant mechanical gag or two, but what we have I find entertaining.  Buster falling on a breakaway table or chair, reprising the gun gag from THE HIGH SIGN where he aims at one object on the screen and hits another, Buster putting his fingers in his mouth reacting in disgust after he runs his hands on a cobwebbed table....all a great opportunity to watch a master do pantomime with simple props. 

      (Spoiler gag) The best part of the film is Buster using the camera to his advantage like he did in several great silent gags.  There is a part where a shirtless Buster is washing his clothes in a trough, the trough covering his hip and groin area, legs and feet exposed below where it looks like he could be naked.  He's facing the screen, so there is plenty of space behind him.  Sure enough, he uses that space to have a large group of cars and people suddenly occupy it, leaving the impression they are seeing him naked.  Of course, as he runs away from the trough, we can see his previously covered groin area are actually covered by boxer shorts.  Great gag.

      The rest of the film is less entertaining.  By the end, the mix up about stealing The Marietta Mine leads into a big confusing fight which may work with Stooge style humor, but just seems too noisy and lacking any wit for Buster.  The rest of the cast isn't exactly great in this one, but they don't take over too much, fortunately.  We get a lot of Buster, and while THE GOLD GHOST isn't among his best work, we at least have moments to relish.  Good start to the series.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Big Chief Apumtagribonitz

Nothing wrong with this one.  Having heard the Educationals dissed  forever,  I've now seen this one and Grand Slam Opera, and I think they're both just fine.  Either one is ten times funnier than Parlor, Bedroom, and Bath, or any of the "big" MGM's of that vintage.  Buster seems energetic, engaged, and up to the physical comedy.  Since we're now working our way backwards, so to speak, from the Columbias to these, it's becoming apparent that Buster never did develop a way with a joke.  It takes him an eye bulge, two nods and a swallow to grind out even a mediocre punch-line like "maybe it's Sunday".  This is 1934, and he's no better in the '41 Columbias.  Oh, well, his pantomime makes up for practically anything, and whoever dubbed him The Great Stone Face was dead wrong.  The only thing he doesn't do is smile - his face and body register every other emotion.  Watching him put on a brave front for his girl is magical.


Offline metaldams

Nothing wrong with this one.  Having heard the Educationals dissed  forever,  I've now seen this one and Grand Slam Opera, and I think they're both just fine.  Either one is ten times funnier than Parlor, Bedroom, and Bath, or any of the "big" MGM's of that vintage.  Buster seems energetic, engaged, and up to the physical comedy.  Since we're now working our way backwards, so to speak, from the Columbias to these, it's becoming apparent that Buster never did develop a way with a joke.  It takes him an eye bulge, two nods and a swallow to grind out even a mediocre punch-line like "maybe it's Sunday".  This is 1934, and he's no better in the '41 Columbias.  Oh, well, his pantomime makes up for practically anything, and whoever dubbed him The Great Stone Face was dead wrong.  The only thing he doesn't do is smile - his face and body register every other emotion.  Watching him put on a brave front for his girl is magical.

You're correct about "The Great Stone Face" moniker.  Keaton was indeed very expressive and simply didn't smile, I do agree.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Umbrella Sam

  • Toastmaster General
  • Knothead
  • *****
    • Talk About Cinema
It does seem as though more attention was put into making this like a Keaton short than there was at MGM or Columbia. Looking at the credits, I was shocked to see that at least four writers (including occasional Stooges writer Ewart Adamson) worked on the script for this, compared to Columbia’s maximum of two writers. For the most part, their effort shines through, with one exception.

Indeed, much of this feels like it could have been an independent Keaton sound short. Much like in the later PARADISE FOR BUSTER, while it’s clear that Keaton can talk, he simply has no reason to for the majority of it, and this allows us to focus mainly on the visual gags and Keaton delivers with well-timed falls. Even the finale, though somewhat chaotic, does allow for some clever visual gags like Keaton using the barrels as bowling balls or his missed punches as a result of his opponents constantly moving. He does talk more than in PARADISE FOR BUSTER, though that ties into the one major problem: the supporting characters.

The supporting characters are uninteresting and intrusive. They force Keaton to say more dialogue than he needs to and in general they’re just not written very well. The gangster Keaton comes across in particular is kind of annoying in his complaints about the town as well as his betrayal of Keaton...yet he suddenly has a change of heart despite the fact that the two didn’t really seem to get along all that well anyway. Then there’s also the jerk who competes with Keaton for his girlfriend’s attention, though his role isn’t quite as big. They even try making jokes out of some of the supporting characters, particularly at the beginning, which feels very out of place in the otherwise very Keaton-oriented short. Hopefully the later shorts keep the number of supporting players at a minimum, because I feel PARADISE FOR BUSTER showed that Keaton really could carry a short almost by himself.

Pretty good for the most part, and I’m looking forward to seeing what direction the Educational shorts go from here.

8 out of 10
“I’ll take a milkshake...with sour milk!” -Shemp (Punchy Cowpunchers, 1950)

My blog: https://talk-about-cinema.blogspot.com


Offline Paul Pain

  • Moronika's resident meteorologist
  • Moderator
  • Bunionhead
  • ******
  • The heartthrob of millions!
It was an interesting start to the Educational Pictures series for sure.  Some of it was strangely bizarre, like the opening with the two fathers and the girl.  But, for the first 10 minutes we are treated to classic Buster.  I enjoy his pantomiming through the town.  It was all good until the "gold rush."  The second half was sudden and strange and over-suspended disbelief for my liking. 

The characters were all very stiff... unacceptably so given that talkies had been around for almost 6 years.  Buster was great, but the supporting cast was awful.  Overall, this was comparable to the middle-class of his Columbia shorts.

7/10 [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke]
#1 fire kibitzer


Offline metaldams

It was an interesting start to the Educational Pictures series for sure.  Some of it was strangely bizarre, like the opening with the two fathers and the girl.  But, for the first 10 minutes we are treated to classic Buster.  I enjoy his pantomiming through the town.  It was all good until the "gold rush."  The second half was sudden and strange and over-suspended disbelief for my liking. 

The characters were all very stiff... unacceptably so given that talkies had been around for almost 6 years.  Buster was great, but the supporting cast was awful.  Overall, this was comparable to the middle-class of his Columbia shorts.

7/10 [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke] [poke]

With a few exceptions, the supporting casts in a lot of these Educational films leave a lot to be desired.  Very different to Columbia.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Dr. Mabuse

As a whole, the Educational two-reelers are superior to the MGM talkies and a few manage to revive the stoic poetry of Buster Keaton's art. Despite the studio's paltry budgets, Keaton was given a fair amount of creative freedom in making these sound comedies. "The Gold Ghost" places Buster in a Nevada ghost town — allowing him several excellent routines with long stretches of silence that give the short a dreamlike quality. Charles Lamont was credited as director, but there's no doubt Keaton provided a guiding hand to this and subsequent Educational efforts. A definite keeper.

8/10
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 04:21:12 PM by Dr. Mabuse »


Offline Dr. Mabuse

I came across reviews from small-town exhibitors who were glad to see Keaton back on the silver screen; in fact, a few exhibitors believed that "The Gold Ghost" was the type of comedy Buster should have made at MGM. It was heartening to know that Keaton had not lost his audience.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2024, 07:17:04 PM by Dr. Mabuse »