Ssh… Silent Cinema is back!
Sometimes, you just can’t beat curling up on of the sofa under a duvet, with your finger ready on the play button of an old movie. Singin’ in the Rain, It Happened One Night, Casablanca, Gone with the Wind… we’ve all seen them (at least I hope you have) and then we’ve seen them again, and again. And then because they’re so good, probably again. But, we’ve forgotten something haven’t we? What about silent films? The films which nobody really wants to watch because, well, there’s no dialogue, no colour, no CGI, and therefore they’re boring, right?
Well, to be honest, yeah, mostly they are. Although, whilst I’m not arguing for silent films, as I wouldn’t say I’m much of a fan myself except for Charlie Chaplin and the odd Mary Pickford, they are still a part of cinema that shouldn’t be forgotten. Being a film student, well, at least half of one, studying early and silent cinema is a must in order to understand the origins of the medium of film that we know and love (and yes, obsess over) today. Simply put, the silent era is just the beginning of the beautiful evolution of cinema. Without it there would be no films! No need for cinemas! No Union Films! Now really, what would I do with my life?
It can only be described as amazing how far the cinema industry has come since the first films at the end of the 19th century, especially when we look at the (highly debated) technology of 3D and the soar in popularity of genres such as animation and sci-fi which now breeds on CGI. Looking back around 90 years ago, I just love the idea that my great-grandparents, maybe even my great-great-grandparents come to that, would have watched these in the cinema with ushers showing them to their places and no mobile phones going off in the middle of the screening. The simplicity of black and white pictures with a man on his piano at the side of the big screen.
So, it is understandable that recently there has been an influx of films paying homage to this era. Okay, well only two come to mind, The Artist and Hugo, but these happen to be the two films with the most Oscar nominations this year, 10 and 11 respectively. Both films are nominated for the coveted Best Picture Award with the highly nostalgic The Artist being tipped (though of course with no guarantee) as winner. This would make it only the second silent picture to win this coveted Oscar since Wings at the first Academy Awards in 1927, a year that saw not only the introduction of talkie films with The Jazz Singer but also therefore the downfall of silent films.
However, such is life that we have come almost full circle with The Artist as being one of the most talked about films of the year. Silent, black and white, with the best use of the beautifully nostalgic aspect ratio 1.33:1 and the use of a lower shot rate, the film really is one to be admired, if purely from an aesthetic point of view. The actors are brilliant, perhaps thanks to the perfect casting, (Although John Goodman and James Cromwell seem a bit off key as they’re a bit too recognisable to a modern day audience.) However, Bérénice Bejo as Peppy Miller looks simply stunning in black and white and Jean Dujardin, as silent movie actor George Valentin, really evokes real silent movies actors: the crisp suit, the charming expressions, and not forgetting that moustache. Oh and I should probably mention, the dog was pretty good too.
Forgetting the films narrative similarities to Singin’ in the Rain, which I must say bugged me a little, I can’t help but love this film and think it is a definite must-see in 2012. It’s the type of film which helps you realise that films didn’t just start in colour, with dialogue. Although I doubt it will make people want to go see silent films from the early part of the century, I can see The Artist being a ‘classic’ film of the future, as a movie which evokes nostalgic appreciation of a time long gone. Gone but not forgotten, hopefully. Just give me a cuppa and a duvet and I could watch it again and again, with pleasure.
No Comments on "Ssh… Silent Cinema is back!"