The Recycled Film

With today’s onslaught of unwanted remakes, disappointing sequels, and 3D blockbusters, it seems unfathomable that a silent film could have a shot at winning the Oscar for Best Picture. Nevertheless, Michel Hazanavicius’s The Artist graced numerous top ten of 2011 lists, has a 97% on Rotten Tomatoes (4 bad reviews out of 151 total), and has 6 Golden Globe nominations (the most of any film this year). The black-and-white French film, which is set in the 1920s, is arguably the most successful silent film since the 1920s. But then again, this isn’t your typical silent film.

The Artist is the story of silent film star George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) and talkie newcomer Peppy Miller (Bérénice Bejo) around the time that silent film is transitioning into the sound era. There is initially some romance between the two (despite George being married), until George’s career falls apart and Peppy’s is catapulted into the limelight. George sinks into a pit of depression and poverty, while Peppy becomes America’s sweetheart. The film also features several people who would otherwise never appear in a silent film, such as John Goodman as a big studio boss and James Cromwell as George’s friend and chauffeur.

If you’re the kind of person who’s like, “a silent film?! As in, like… no talking? That sounds stupid and boring!” then you’re exactly the kind of person who needs to check it out. This isn’t some little, experimental arthouse thing that only film snobs and hipsters can appreciate. The Artist is both poignant and exciting and after the first 15 or 20 minutes you’re likely to become so engrossed that you’ll forget it’s silent. At the same time though, the film is hyper-aware of the fact that it’s silent and, in the words of Roger Ebert, occasionally “kids you about it.”

For me, the acting is what made the film so phenomenal and unique. I point this out also because I know that the artificiality of the acting found in many silent films is a point of contention for many who tend to dislike them. It’s not exactly the sort of bombastic acting that you’d expect from a traditional silent film, nor would I compare it to something like Doubt, Hugo, or Take Shelter. It has authenticity and yet is executed in a way that compensates for the inherent limitations of a silent film. The actors use facial expressions and body language to drive home the intensity of the emotions they’re experiencing, but not to the extent that it appears artificial. Ultimately, when you have an excellent screenplay and extremely talented performers, the acting in a silent film (or any film, for that matter) doesn’t need to be over-the-top in order to drive home the same emotional intensity that you’d expect from a Meryl Streep or Jack Nicholson performance.

Lastly, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the cinematography. The film is shot in 1.33:1 (i.e.: not widescreen), traditionally known as the “academy ratio.” Michel, the director, said he loved this format because it caters better to the actors’ presence on screen in that, “they occupy all the space of the screen.” Also, out of all the big budget black and white movies that have been released in the last 20 years, including Good Night and Good Luck, The Man Who Wasn’t There, and Ed Wood, this film has maybe the most beautiful and dreamlike black and white composition I’ve seen. It’s not overly contrasty like The Good German nor does it try too hard to look retro or whatever.

I definitely intend to see The Artist again as soon as possible. As cool as it will be if it wins some big Oscars, I’m much more excited to know that it will be seen by people who wouldn’t normally see a silent film. Do yourself a favor and start 2012 off with one of the best films you’ll see all year.

Tags: academy awards, acting, berenice bejo, golden globes, james cromwell, jean dujardin, john goodman, michel hazanavicius, oscars, roger ebert, silent film, the artist