The Institutional Context of Buster Keaton Short Films
Questions in the exam could focus specifically on the way that institutional contexts influence the audience's appreciation of Buster Keaton's short films. Answers to questions on institutional contexts are likely to be dominated by discussion of silent film in general and the specific film movement, American silent film comedy. To refresh your memory about the key ideas surrounding these areas, click on the links below.
Remember, questions on institutional context will require you to discuss, in detail, certain scenes from at least two of the short films studied - so make sure you have at least two scenes from two different short films that you can recall in detail. In reality (time permitting) it would be a good idea to also mention another scene from a third short film.
Opening and closing scenes are always useful to know in detail but try to memorise at least one other key scene - and make sure that you are able to make brief passing references to a number of other moments in the short films. To re-familiarise yourself with the Buster Keaton short films, click on the links below.
Much of the information you will need to answer a question on the influence of institutional or production context has already been covered in the posts on silent cinema and American silent film comedy - so it is crucial that you revise these areas carefully and are able to place Keaton's work within these film movements.
The most important institutional context to consider is certainly American silent film comedy. Keaton was an auteur – he wrote, directed, edited and starred in almost twenty short comedy films (known as two-reelers) between 1920-1922. This level of control was unusual at the time and become even more unusual during the subsequent Studio Era of the 1930s and 1940s, where Studios (such as MGM and Warner Brothers) rather than directors, tended to control projects.
Particularly popular during this period (the early 1920s) was the comedy genre, specifically gag-based, slapstick comedy (full of physical action and movement that was particularly important in the Silent Era, where films were made without sound and with limited camera movement). This kind of visual comedy was the perfect genre for the Silent Era because gags could be shown without the need for dialogue and could be understood by all audiences (there was a huge wave of immigration into the US during this period).
The 1920’s was considered the Golden Age of American film comedy and many of the biggest film stars in the industry were silent comedians. Alongside Buster Keaton, famous silent comedians included Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd and Laurel and Hardy.
Silent film comedies tended to include the following film conventions:
All of the above can be clearly seen in Keaton's short films, suggesting that Keaton was directly influenced by the conventions of a very specific film movement. In any essay on institutional context you would need to mention these conventions and give examples of them from at least two of the short films we have studied.
Typical questions related to the influence of institutional context on Keaton's films can be found below. It is important that you attempt them, combining the notes above (and those found in the posts on silent cinema and American silent film comedy) with your own analysis of key scenes. When practicing essays it will help with your revision if you re-watch moments from the films and pick appropriate scenes to analyse.
One important point to remember is that exam questions may use the term production context rather than institutional context - don't worry, it means exactly the same thing!
1. Discuss how far your chosen film or films reflect institutional contexts associated with a particular film movement. Make detailed reference to particular sequences in your answer.
2. How far is the look or style of your chosen film or films influenced by institutional contexts? Refer in detail to particular sequences in your answer.
The most important institutional context to consider is certainly American silent film comedy. Keaton was an auteur – he wrote, directed, edited and starred in almost twenty short comedy films (known as two-reelers) between 1920-1922. This level of control was unusual at the time and become even more unusual during the subsequent Studio Era of the 1930s and 1940s, where Studios (such as MGM and Warner Brothers) rather than directors, tended to control projects.
Particularly popular during this period (the early 1920s) was the comedy genre, specifically gag-based, slapstick comedy (full of physical action and movement that was particularly important in the Silent Era, where films were made without sound and with limited camera movement). This kind of visual comedy was the perfect genre for the Silent Era because gags could be shown without the need for dialogue and could be understood by all audiences (there was a huge wave of immigration into the US during this period).
The 1920’s was considered the Golden Age of American film comedy and many of the biggest film stars in the industry were silent comedians. Alongside Buster Keaton, famous silent comedians included Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd and Laurel and Hardy.
Silent film comedies tended to include the following film conventions:
- falls and chases played for big laughs
- stunts which thrilled audiences
- star comedians with intriguing personalities
- implausible scenarios
- stories told in a clear, simple way
- criticism of American society
All of the above can be clearly seen in Keaton's short films, suggesting that Keaton was directly influenced by the conventions of a very specific film movement. In any essay on institutional context you would need to mention these conventions and give examples of them from at least two of the short films we have studied.
One important point to remember is that exam questions may use the term production context rather than institutional context - don't worry, it means exactly the same thing!
1. Discuss how far your chosen film or films reflect institutional contexts associated with a particular film movement. Make detailed reference to particular sequences in your answer.
OR
OR
3. 'Knowing more about a film's institutional context can enhance your appreciation and understanding of that film.' How far is this true in the film option you have studied? Make reference to key sequences from the film or films you have watched.
OR
4. 'Films are always shaped by their production contexts.' With detailed reference to key sequences, discuss your chosen film option in relation to this statement.
Comments
Post a Comment