Tweet The Artist (2011) a contemporary silent

And yet I have still heard nothing of an Australian release date!

16th January, 2012 I am led to believe. I don't think this is a general release but a limited art house run.

Well, that's some good news, at least. Sad to say, a limited arthouse release was the most I was expecting.

From http://www.billboard.com/events/exclusive-the-artist-eyes-concert-tour-1005688152.story#/events/exclusive-the-artist-eyes-concert-tour-1005688152.story:

"The Artist," the mostly silent film that has acquired numerous award nominations in recent weeks and is considered an Oscar front-runner, is being positioned as a concert attraction.

William Morris Endeavor, which represents composer Ludovic Bource, and the film's distributor the Weinstein Co. are exploring opportunities to screen the film with a live orchestra accompanying the picture. Performances in New York, Los Angeles, Paris, Brussels, London and Geneva are on the short list of stops; a performance in Australia is also being solicited. The composer says he has passed on three projects while preparing for the potential tour.

"The Artist," directed by Michel Hazanavicius and starring Jean Dujardin, Berenice Bejo and John Goodman, opened in the United States Nov. 25 and is playing in limited release (17 theaters). Having played France, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands, it has a worldwide gross of nearly $15 million, according to figures compiled by boxofficemojo.com.

While featuring French talent, the story is set in Hollywood as the silent movies were giving way to the talkies. Besides three recordings from the '20s, the only sound heard in most of the film is the score from Bource, who also scored Hazanavicius' "OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies" and "OSS 117 - Lost in Rio."

Bource's score, which won a European Film Award, is nominated for a Golden Globe and Broadcast Film Critics Award. New York Film Critics Circle, New York Film Critics Online and the Boston Society of Film Critics have named "The Artist" best picture of the year.

Inspired by F.W. Murnau's "Tabu: A Story of the South Seas" and "Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans," movies by Ernst Lubistch and scores by Alfred Newman, Bource turned to Brahms and an 19th century text for his initial inspiration.

"What was missing," Bource told Billboard.biz through a translator, "was a thread, an emotional throughline in the screenplay. I went looking for a text that expressed the dignity, love and simplicity that (the characters) George and Peppy express. By chance --- by miracle - I found (German poet) Hans von Schmidt's 'Sapphisce Ode,' which was set to music by Brahms. By listening to words, the principal theme emerged. The last words in the text are 'shed the dew of tears.' We used that for a title on a track in the film, 'The Sound of Tears.'"

From my one time viewing of a 30 second commercial there seems to be a scene wherein the heroine plays with the hero's jacket, a la Janet Gaynor in "Seventh Heaven". Are there other scenes, or pieces of business, that are lifted directly from actual silent films?

Still not playing in Seattle, dammit! It's not like I live in the boondocks here. Closest screening is Vancouver, 125 miles away. I would think the picture would do quite well in this arts-friendly town, especially since it's up for some major Golden Globage.

I've seen a more general "opening on Christmas" thing going around, so I'd wait for that day. Then if it's not showing near you, complain away.

Odd that the idea of a live music cinema tour didn't include San Francisco. They do that sort of thing there.

"The Artist," the mostly silent film that has acquired numerous award nominations in recent weeks and is considered an Oscar front-runner, is being positioned as a concert attraction.

William Morris Endeavor, which represents composer Ludovic Bource, and the film's distributor the Weinstein Co. are exploring opportunities to screen the film with a live orchestra accompanying the picture. Performances in New York, Los Angeles, Paris, Brussels, London and Geneva are on the short list of stops; a performance in Australia is also being solicited.

I like the terminology "concert attraction". I wonder how many people going to the pictures in the 1920's would have realised they were going to a 'concert'?

I do wonder though why the idea of an orchestra in the pit was not considered - surely at premiere screenings? The semblance of someone playing live to the sheet is part of the experience.

Of course the presentation of a picture in the halcyon days was quite enthralling.

The orchestra used to come up floodlit on the lift to play the overture and simultaneously the house curtain would fly up. As the orchestra went down to play the picture, the screen tabs would part and the screen would fly down in synchronisation.

Yes, unfortunately, with one or two exceptions here and there - showmanship has gone out of kinematographic exhibition.

The BBC Radio 3 has a nice segment on The Artist,

I'm not sure for how long it will be available:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0180fbd#synopsis

It's opening here in Dallas on Christmas Day.

I just saw THE ARTIST at the lovely Harvard Exit Theatre here in Seattle. Naysayers be damned; the film was absolutely brilliant on all levels. Best new film I've seen in a loooooooong time. And this old cynic was even moved to tears by the end. I'm going to drag everyone I can to go see it with me.

Saw it this afternoon. I agree with all the good stuff that's been said.

Everything old IS new again... and I always said that talkies were a fad that would blow over. My review of the film:

Hollywood, 1927, and the new swashbuckling action picture The Russian Affair is a smash success, another in a string of box office titans for dashing star George Valentin (Jean Dujardin). For the followup, he befriends a young dancer that he met quite by accident (the delicious Bérénice Bejo) and she's awarded with a small part; over the next three years, her star ascends while his falls off a barstool. Romance ensues.

Dujardin and Bejo are both veterans of films by Michel Hazanavicius (he's her husband, in fact), notably the hilarious OSS 117 French James Bond spoofs that I've raved about on my website, but I wasn't expecting this: a film that's even better than I'd heard, and I'd heard that it's the best film of the year (it's not, Midnight in Paris is, but this one is my favorite). A delightful, warm, affectionate, witty, charming valentine (pun intended) to silent films, but it's aware it's a silent film, and has fun with it, with many gags at our (the audience's) expense, when you expect one thing based on what you're seeing but not hearing, and you get quite another. I loved this movie.

Free bonus for you Nitratians: I watched a pair of silent films last night in prep for my trip to the movies...

Lucky Star (1929): Lovely, lovely film directed by Frank Borzage and starring Janet Gaynor and Charles Ferrell.

A small farm in the U.S.A.; lotsa kids, a widowed mama, and young Janet, who befriends the local linemen, particularly Mr. Ferrell and "Big Boy" Guinn. War's declared (this is 1917, see) and off they men go (the enlist, it seems, to meet French girls). Janet faithfully writes them regularly ("Hope you ain't been shot dead; rite if you're bored and i'll nit socks") and when they return, she becomes quite close to Ferrell, who was paralyzed in the trenches, and to Guinn, who woos her widdered mother but wants to marry Janet. And soon, she turns 18, and friendship ain't the only thing blossoming 'round them parts, brother.

I could look at this film all day; just impeccable set design and cinematography. Movies used to be so beautiful, didn't they? From the Murnau & Borzage at Fox boxed set.

For Heaven's Sake (1926): Harold Lloyd is a frivolous, uber-wealthy young man (as the film opens, he buys a car to match his new pants, wrecks it, strolls into the showroom and buys another, although surprisingly he doesn't buy new pants). Jobyna Ralston and her dad runs a "free coffee" cart for the poor and downtrodden in a slum area ("the kind of spot where the only English used is on billiard balls"). When Lloyd accidentally wrecks their cart, he dashes off a check for $1,000 to replace it, and Jobyna and her dad open a storefront mission. Lloyd, smitten with Miss Ralston, volunteers to help by bringing in lost souls from the pool hall (which he does by kicking a lot of ass, sort of, and causing all of the town's riffraff to chase him through the streets into the mission, Buster Keaton-style). When Lloyd and Ralston try to marry, though, his society buddies decide he's gone mad and try to break up the wedding. Can the drunken riffraff successfully battle the top-hatted swells for the soul of the Lloyd-Ralston romance?

A nice little picture. Hollywood history tells us that it cost a small fortune to produce, Lloyd was unhappy with it, kept making changes, the budget exploded, he nearly just shelved the whole thing. He finally released a short version (less than an hour) that's quite pleasant and amusing, particularly scenes with Noah Young as the head riffraff. Sam Taylor directed. The DVD (part of the Lloyd set) looks great, and as a bonus, you get a brief (20 min. or so) tour of Lloyd's estate, Greenacres, hosted by his granddaughter Suzanne, who grew up there.

Today happens to be my birthday. (Three days after Christmas is crummy timing, but that’s another story.) I waited until today to see The Artist, and it’s the best birthday experience I’ve had in a long, long while. No, it isn’t perfect, but it’s delightful. Perhaps the early, euphoric reviews after Cannes were overstated, and made disappointment inevitable for some viewers. I deliberately didn’t read too much about it beforehand -- in fact, I didn’t read much of this thread until this evening. I tried to keep my expectations for the film fairly low, and was pleasantly surprised.

The two lead players are charming. It appeared to me that they did their homework (i.e. studied movies of the period) but didn’t slavishly copy their models. John Goodman mugged rather excessively at times, but so what? So did Eugene Pallette! Uggie earned all the praise he’s received. (Loved his Christmas card, too!) But I was bewildered by Malcolm MacDowell’s scene. I recognized him right away, and figured his character would turn out to be significant, but we never see him again. Why was he there at all? I guess the only other quibble that occurs to me offhand is that setting fire to wads of nitrate film would result in a catastrophe far worse than the one depicted. But I’m grateful they decided to exercise a little artistic license in that scene.

The music seemed appropriate most of the time, and the passages when it didn’t feel quite right were brief. The dance finale was sweet, and ends the story on a upbeat note.

Will The Artist introduce 21st century newcomers to silent movies? I hope so, and believe so, but it stands as a worthy achievement in its own right. As others have noted it isn’t really a silent movie, more of a pastiche and a tribute using silent film techniques. It’s a Singin’ in the Rain for our times, and God knows we need one.

For Heaven's Sake (1926): Harold Lloyd is a frivolous, uber-wealthy young man (as the film opens, he buys a car to match his new pants, wrecks it, strolls into the showroom and buys another, although surprisingly he doesn't buy new pants). Jobyna Ralston and her dad runs a "free coffee" cart for the poor and downtrodden in a slum area ("the kind of spot where the only English used is on billiard balls"). When Lloyd accidentally wrecks their cart, he dashes off a check for $1,000 to replace it, and Jobyna and her dad open a storefront mission. Lloyd, smitten with Miss Ralston, volunteers to help by bringing in lost souls from the pool hall (which he does by kicking a lot of ass, sort of, and causing all of the town's riffraff to chase him through the streets into the mission, Buster Keaton-style). When Lloyd and Ralston try to marry, though, his society buddies decide he's gone mad and try to break up the wedding. Can the drunken riffraff successfully battle the top-hatted swells for the soul of the Lloyd-Ralston romance?

A nice little picture. Hollywood history tells us that it cost a small fortune to produce, Lloyd was unhappy with it, kept making changes, the budget exploded, he nearly just shelved the whole thing. He finally released a short version (less than an hour) that's quite pleasant and amusing, particularly scenes with Noah Young as the head riffraff. Sam Taylor directed. The DVD (part of the Lloyd set) looks great, and as a bonus, you get a brief (20 min. or so) tour of Lloyd's estate, Greenacres, hosted by his granddaughter Suzanne, who grew up there.

One of my favourite Lloyd numbers this. I agree with all you wrote but why bring Keaton into it?? This was a Lloyd work fair and square.


Re: THE ARTIST - When does this open in the UK?

The Artist is opening on Dec 30th in the UK. That's tomorrow!

Thanks, though something tells me it'll not be showing at my local Odeon here in Southend.

:And yet I have still heard nothing of an Australian release date!

16th January, 2012 I am led to believe. I don't think this is a general release but a limited art house run.

Further checking with 'the powers that be' would indicate that "The Artist" will not now open in Australia (in capital cities) until 2nd February - and then probably only in limited release. Regional centres should expect the film from middle to late March.

We must wait for all good things...

The latest I've read is that there will be a few preview screenings at the Open Air Cinema in Sydney starting on 12th January (all of which appear to be sold out already), with the main season starting on 2nd January as you say. It looks like the Dendy will be carrying it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it goes into wider release if it's successful (as 'Life Is Beautiful', 'Russian Ark', and a few other arthouse films have done in the past, particularly if they feature highly at the Oscars).

Michael Hazanavicius was interviewed in the local media recently (http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/mov ... 1pd86.html) - one interesting tidbit: he said he's been approached by HBO to do a series.

I just came from The Artist, and I was really disappointed. The problem wasn't that it didn't recreate the feel of a vintage film, the problem was that it was a witless, trite and utterly predictable plot with shallow characters.

My other disappointment was that it looked lousy. I believe that I saw it projected on film at the Landmark’s Kendall Cinema in Cambridge. The image was flat and lifeless. There were no rich shadows and gleaming whites. It didn’t look half as good as a nice print of a silent film (like the Douris print of The General for instance).

Did anybody else have the same reaction to the print or was this just a bad projection? I’ve seen hundreds of films at this theater and never had a problem with the projection.

I just came from The Artist, and I was really disappointed. The problem wasn't that it didn't recreate the feel of a vintage film, the problem was that it was a witless, trite and utterly predictable plot with shallow characters.

My other disappointment was that it looked lousy. I believe that I saw it projected on film at the Landmark’s Kendall Cinema in Cambridge. The image was flat and lifeless. There were no rich shadows and gleaming whites. It didn’t look half as good as a nice print of a silent film (like the Douris print of The General for instance).

Did anybody else have the same reaction to the print or was this just a bad projection? I’ve seen hundreds of films at this theater and never had a problem with the projection.

Wow. HAHAHAHA! Hilarious. "didn't recreate the feel of a vintage film". You're kidding me, right?

I just came from The Artist, and I was really disappointed. The problem wasn't that it didn't recreate the feel of a vintage film, the problem was that it was a witless, trite and utterly predictable plot with shallow characters.

My other disappointment was that it looked lousy. I believe that I saw it projected on film at the Landmark’s Kendall Cinema in Cambridge. The image was flat and lifeless. There were no rich shadows and gleaming whites. It didn’t look half as good as a nice print of a silent film (like the Douris print of The General for instance).

Did anybody else have the same reaction to the print or was this just a bad projection? I’ve seen hundreds of films at this theater and never had a problem with the projection.

Looked beautiful the two times I saw it at the Harvard Exit in Seattle. As for wit, I totally disagree with you; I thought there were quite a few clever bits, such as the creative use of sound in both the dream sequence and the final scene, the bit with the coat rack (yeah, I know it was lifted, but so was Charlie's dinner roll dance), the various bits of dog business, the resolution of the climax involving that crucial intertitle, and more. As for the plot, I don't think it's overly predictable, but even so, predictability and character depth are of secondary importance to me in this case; the fun is in seeing these likable, compelling characters get from A to B. As Frederica has stated, it's much like the plot of a vintage bread-and-butter silent, and immensely enjoyable on that level, which appears to be exactly what the filmmakers were going for. Are you going to tell me the lion's share of silent romantic dramedies don't have predictable plots, and are populated by characters who are miracles of depth? At any rate, I took a friend and our kids to see it, and they all loved it, and were riveted throughout. And the end succeeded in moving me to tears for a second time. As far as I'm concerned, this lovely film is cynic-proof.

My only quibble is that Peppy wasn't played by Clara Bow, but that certainly couldn't be helped. :-)

[silentfilm]

I saw it in Dallas at the AMC Northpark, and it was a digital presentation. The cinematography looked wonderful.

My only quibble is that Peppy wasn't played by Clara Bow, but that certainly couldn't be helped.

Speedy,

Oh Man, that one really cracked me up! Priceless comment!

On second thought, I believe that the print I saw must have been digital. I was fooled by the reel change marks (easy enough to fake on a digital production). I looked through the window of the projection booth, but couldn't really see the projector. My wife saw it in L.A. (she's a filmmaker) and said it looked excellent. I guess it was just a badly set up projector.

Obviously, many people disagree with my opinion of the film, but it's clearly not cynic proof. The people I went to see it with all hated it (they are all film professionals). Basically, the film took it's style and plot from the silent films I like the least (7th Heaven for instance). I would have preferred a film that developed on the style of Hitchcock or Eisenstein. When I compare it to Sunset Boulevard (which dealt with somewhat the same time period and themes) The Artist seems silly and shallow. Somehow the character of Poppy just didn't work for me (she's no Clara Bow). And Valentin was no Fairbanks either.

On second thought, I believe that the print I saw must have been digital. I was fooled by the reel change marks (easy enough to fake on a digital production). I looked through the window of the projection booth, but couldn't really see the projector. My wife saw it in L.A. (she's a filmmaker) and said it looked excellent. I guess it was just a badly set up projector.

Obviously, many people disagree with my opinion of the film, but it's clearly not cynic proof. The people I went to see it with all hated it (they are all film professionals). Basically, the film took it's style and plot from the silent films I like the least (7th Heaven for instance). I would have preferred a film that developed on the style of Hitchcock or Eisenstein. When I compare it to Sunset Boulevard (which dealt with somewhat the same time period and themes) The Artist seems silly and shallow. Somehow the character of Poppy just didn't work for me (she's no Clara Bow). And Valentin was no Fairbanks either.

The people you saw it with actually HATED it? Really? I can see someone being disappointed, like you, but I can't see anyone with an appreciation for the classics actually HATING this film. Crazy. At any rate, it IS cynic-proof, because the people who hated it are in a clear minority of the people who have seen it, and the film is up for major awards, film professional haters be damned.

Valentin/Dujardin was no Fairbanks, I agree, and that's a good thing; I liked him better than Fairbanks (let the cries of heresy begin). Of course, in one scene, Fairbanks plays Valentin, at least in long shot.

SOME SPOILERS AHEAD:

I finally got to see it yesterday. I think whether one loves it or hates it (I was more or less on the love side) is whether one views the lifts from other films (the VERTIGO love theme, "Temptation," the SINGIN IN THE RAIN, CITIZEN KANE, SUNSET BOULEVARD riffs, etc.) to be homages or lazy filmmaking.

I definitely walked away with a feeling that these people have a real affection for silent film and that many of the allusions were intended to be inside jokes for folks in the know. I particulalry enjoyed the broad playing style (especially Goodman) in the premiere sequence - and how the acting style became more naturalistic as the film progressed. It was as if the filmmakers gave newbies what they *thought* was silent film acting and then won them over as the film wore on.

And Penelope Ann Miller's .... um ... wordless reaction shot to Dujardin's hamming it up during the premiere sequence was priceless - as in "Look folks! You don't have to speak in order to be fully understood."

That said, I was disappointed by some of the "print the legend" moments. I was particularly annoyed by the "everything was fine and silent until mid-1929 when, overnight, talkies came in." You know these folks know that, while quick, the process was well under way X (insert your time-line of choice here) years before the 1929 crash.

More problematic, although somewhat more understandable, was what appears to have been a complete lack of understanding of prohibition-era America.

But, one unconscionably modern reaction from Bejo when she gets her first break aside, I thought the acting throughout was wonderful ... especially from the dog.

... and I was surprised that Malcolm McDowell was limited to almost a cameo.

All in all, a solid B+ film. Not the home run I wished for, but a great movie movie all the same.

THE ARTIST and HUGO are Producers Guild of America nominees for Best Picture.
http://www.deadline.com/2012/01/pga-awa ... announced/

On second thought, I believe that the print I saw must have been digital. I was fooled by the reel change marks (easy enough to fake on a digital production).

I have never seen a reel change mark ported over to a digital cinema presentation. To re-create that sort of thing for a 2K file would be an inside joke so small I would be surprised if they had done it. In fact, the marks would be the strongest evidence that what you saw was actually film.

A better way to figure out what you saw is by the amount of dirt on-screen. A digital presentation is usually flawlessly clean from start to finish while even the best 35mm will show a small bit of dust here and there by the end of a feature.

I haven't seen The Artist yet but I assume it doesn't have any intentional dirt or scratches built-in to simulate an old film ; the TV spots show an image that's as clean as a whistle.

Saw it. Fantastic film.
Will win Best Picture Oscar.
Did anyone else notice the climactic scene was scored with music from Vertigo? and, if so, what did you think?

I'm coming in late to this discussion, and any points I make have probably been made over and over, so feel free to skip. . .

I saw the film at the Loew's complex in Danvers (MA) three times so far (they've cut the first morning matinee, so I'm presuming the run is coming to an end this week). I have loved it each time. I'm obviously not as well versed in the minutiae of movies as some of you, since I didn't recognize any of the homages / lifts that have been mentioned (except the Vertigo music, but that's listed in the credits and not a 'theft' by the composer, as some reviews have had it). I found George to be a smug, bumptious, but all in all likeable man and cried / laughed at his redemption at the end. I'm not as crazy about Bejo as some, but I thought she did a worthwhile job, and Uggie the dog deserves an Oscar (as an aside, the scene where George is about to kill himself was the one part of the film my wife hated: 'how can he kill himself and leave that poor dog to starve?' she said).

Yes, it's a melodrama - that's what the director admitted. It doesn't matter to me. It's an emotional film and one that takes you out of yourself for an hour or two; isn't that what movies should do? I honestly can't understand complaining that this one film isn't a perfect silent. Isn't the fact that it exists at all something to celebrate?

And look on the bright side - Hollywood's a nest of imitators. If The Artist wins an Oscar or two, perhaps the suits will greenlight some restorations or releases or - imagine! - even some 'new' silents. Something to celebrate, I think.

YMMV, of course. So feel free to flame.

Actually, sorry - I did recognize the whole Sunset Boulevard imitation, but I think that one's hard to avoid when doing a "washed-up star reminds himself he used to be big" scene. So I hardly think that's lazy filmmaking. I did think the 'stairs sequence' of George going down while Peppy was going up to be cliche, but there you are.

Apologies if this has been answered, but which of the houses - George's or Peppy's - was the old Pickford place? And I understand the Kinograph studio gate is still extant on Cahuenga Boulevard. What's there now?