Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

idickbutts t1_j6hdoop wrote

Reply to comment by ItzNuckinFutz in Buster Keaton, Roscoe Arbuckle, and Al St. John, 1918. Once his deadpan persona became established, Keaton avoided smiling in front of a camera. by L0st_in_the_Stars

I'm over here thinking "is nobody going to talk about the eyes?"

168

Snorechanter t1_j6hsa4o wrote

Arbuckle looks like he has cat/lizard eyes.

68

ShutUp_Dee t1_j6hw5ut wrote

He’s going for gasps.

37

drtoboggon t1_j6jhr5n wrote

After his third time in court for the same crime, St John said to Arbuckle; “I think the rape trial went really well”.

Arbuckle: “guys I’m here, I’m up here”

4

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i4uly wrote

Guyliner. It's dark/black eye makeup around light eyes in sunlight, which is creating a weird effect. In silent films of this era, it was VERY common to still employ "heavy stage makeup" techniques because the camera/film quality was so low that features and facial expressions were in serious danger of getting lost.

Check out Rudy Valentino's heavy guyliner (for example, "The Shiek," 1921) as an example.

Groucho Marx wore literal greasepaint as a mustache-- granted, it was partly for comic effect, but it's an example of heavy stage makeup making its way into the movies.

45

Axolotlist t1_j6iaepf wrote

Yeah, if I remember correctly, the main reason the movie industry concentrated in California, is because the early camera needed lots of light exposure, so they built their sets outside, with no roofs, to get use of free sunshine. In Hollywood, they could work all year round.

25

bremidon t1_j6ido0q wrote

That and they were *really* far away from a certain Edison who had a stranglehold on the technology.

36

turdferguson3891 t1_j6kzlj3 wrote

It wasn't distance so much as court jurisdiction. The west coast courts weren't as friendly to Edison. But even the studios that were part of Edison's patent trust started shooting in California during the winter pretty early on. Other places were tried like Florida (too tropical) but LA emerged as a go to pretty early on because of climate, varied geography (mountains, desert, ocean) and because LA was in a boom period at the time so it was growing large enough to have the resources to support the industry.

1

bremidon t1_j6lu66g wrote

>It wasn't distance so much as court jurisdiction.

Well yeah, these two things are tightly correlated. The further away from Edison and his influence, the more likely the courts were to not just defer to him.

Once the decision was made to move so far away, then the question was: where? And now all those things you mentioned start to play a role. It should be someplace sunny, with a decent amount of good, stable weather, with some infrastructure already in place.

1

turdferguson3891 t1_j6m6p8h wrote

But, like I said, companies that were part of Edison's patent trust were shooting in California early on and they didn't need to worry about his lawyers. NYC based Biograph joined Edison's trust in 1908. They first started filming in California in 1910. Chicago based Essanay was also in the trust and they opened studios in California in 1912 after a failed attempt shooting in Colorado.

The studios that weren't part of the trust saw some benefit in being in a different court jurisdiction but the fact that studios that were part of the trust also relocated around the same time would indicate that was not the biggest factor.

1

clce t1_j6jtgwk wrote

That makes sense. Of course, also just good weather, cheap land, and as I've heard, not too far from the Mexican border just in case they had to avoid lawsuit process service. That last might be a bit fanciful, but I kind of like it

2

turdferguson3891 t1_j6kwu0c wrote

As far as I've heard the proximity to Mexico thing is mostly a myth. In a 1910s car on 1910s roads I think it would have taken half a day to get to the border, if that were the motivation you'd just put the studio in San Diego.

1

clce t1_j6kxphs wrote

Yeah, that's probably true. Besides that, I don't think you can just avoid a whole lawsuit by slipping over the border. It's maybe a bit of a romance fantasy, maybe echoing the western trope of someone being pursued by the police and making it across the county line or more significantly across the Rio grande. I find it hard to imagine that back in the wild West, at sheriff posse or military contingent would simply let you go because you crossed the border. Much more likely they would hunt you down, string you up, and return your body and say they caught you just shy of the border. But it makes for a good movie scene

1

clce t1_j6jt8b2 wrote

Exactly right. Especially in silent film where you had to convey meaning, emotion, and humor with just your body, movements and especially facial expressions, you had to make sure that the audience, stage or film could pick up on your expressions

3

bucket_brigade t1_j6ia5uw wrote

The eyes? They all look like they are wearing someone elses face

14

Tiny-Lock9652 t1_j6l2ars wrote

It’s pancake makeup. Early film technology had a difficult time with facial details so makeup was applied very heavy to accentuate facial features. They look almost plastic.

2