The Buster Keaton Story

Donald O'Connor does an amazing job recreating Buster Keaton's style and routines in this otherwise dreadful script, credited to Sidney Sheldon and Robert Smith. Buster was arguably a finer comedian than Chaplin, but fell into alcoholism for a number of reasons. This script has so little to do with his life it should never have been titled as it was. Read a real biography, and watch some of Buster's many wonderful movies, including his last, "The Railrodder". I remember watching "Waterworld (1995)", and thinking how poorly it compared to "Steamboat Bill, Jr. (1928)", not least on value for the money expended on making it. And don't watch another movie until you have seen "The General (1927)". His movies are his biography, not this rotten script.

Having subjected myself to this film again, I found it was possible to find some small enjoyment in it by seeing it all as a big put-on, where the utter falsity of everything presented was itself a joke of sorts (whatever the filmmakers' actual intentions were, which I don't really care to know).

O'Connor was no slouch when it came to physical comedy, so he was a natural choice to play the part and does well in the scenes that recreate authentic Keaton gags, redeeming the film somewhat. Even so, these recreated gags don't always make sense in the context in which they're presented, and in any case, there are not enough of them to make up for all the other nonsense.

While you might not immediately think Donald O'Connor would be the perfect choice to play Buster Keaton, after you watch The Buster Keaton Story, you'll change your mind. Buster was a trained stuntman and Donald was a trained dancer; they each have incredible control over their bodies. After all, if someone's going to portray Buster, it would be sacrilegious for him to use a stunt double, wouldn't it?

There are so many wonderful elements to this movie. If you know and love silent film legend Buster Keaton's stunt sequences, you'll get to relive his glory by watching Donald O'Connor recreate some of his most famous film scenes. Not only is this a treat because this movie was made at a time before audiences could rent or own their favorite films-they hadn't been able to watch these snippets in thirty years-but it's touching to see someone who was in diapers during Buster's heyday give such a tribute to his talent and legacy. Also, if you know anything about Buster Keaton's real life, you'll recognize that this Hollywood recreation is very sugarcoated. If you love Buster, you'll like seeing things turn out better for him, and that he could live out a do-over on the screen. And if you need one more reason to love this movie, here it is: Buster in real life didn't adjust well to talking pictures, and as his career ended, his bank account dwindled. By selling the rights to his life story for this film, Buster was able to live comfortably for the rest of his life. Isn't that heartwarming?

O'Connor is very good here and gets the elements of Buster's comic timing down very well, plus he is very moving as a composite figure of a silent star who, just as he is doing his best work, is overcome by talking film, and just can't come to terms with the fact that at such a young age he's been made a dinosaur overnight. The problem is, other than the alcoholism, the overspending, and the talkies putting a dent in the value of pantomime comedy, this just isn't Buster's life.

In Buster's biography it was stated that Paramount meant to turn Buster's actual three wives into the one screen wife, Gloria Brent (Ann Blythe). Somehow, though, Paramount mixed together eggs, butter, and flour and came up with a steak!. None of Buster's three wives were casting directors at any studio as the screen wife is. And this maudlin melodrama of Keaton matrimony is just plain fiction. The film shows Buster roughing it on vaudeville as a kid and often going hungry, landing a studio contract by sheer force of will as a young adult, and then being a savvy business fellow when dealing with fictitious "Famous Studios" when none of this is true. From the time Buster became part of his family's act as a small child, the act succeeded and the family lived very well, and the doors of Hollywood swung wide for Buster Keaton starting with his very first meeting with Roscoe Arbuckle in 1917. Only the coming of sound hurt Buster because he didn't have the money to go on independently, causing him to sign with MGM and conform to their movie factory standards.

I'd watch this to see Donald O'Connor given a rare chance to really show his versatility and his acting chops, but this is definitely not even close to Buster's life.

A couple of side notes of interest - The screenwriters were in such a hurry to shove something out the door that they got some key facts about the era wrong - The Jazz Singer being an all talking picture and Peter Lorre's character trying to unnerve Keaton by telling him that John Gilbert's contract was canceled after his first unsuccessful talkie are two falsehoods, but they are common enough myths. However, one part of the plot caused by their sloppy research is just plain hilarious if you actually know something about Keaton's life. You may wonder where the Lena Lamont-like star came from that Keaton pants over until she marries a duke (Rhonda Fleming as Peggy Courtney). Fictitious Peggy Courtney was modeled after Mae Murray, who married European royalty in the 1920's before torpedoing her own career. You see, the screenwriters got confused and got Mae Murray mixed up with Mae Busch, a Keystone comic with whom Keaton did in fact have an affair. Keaton and Mae Murray were never involved. Sometimes a good research department can be invaluable!

It's always been the case in Hollywood when "they" go to make a film based upon an actual historical event or do a biopic on an historical figure: they never get it right. The names and dates are usually correct but after that, it's pretty much whatever they think will sell tickets. And this picture is certainly no exception. The shame of it really is that this was made while Buster Keaton was very much alive and still relatively active in show business. But, obviously, he was never contacted concerning the facts about his own life. And that's a real shame. Donald O'Connor is great, for what he's allowed to show of Keaton's genius but the writers and producer were obviously much more interested in portraying Keaton as a base, alcoholic slob without any real feelings. And we who have read the books know that to be totally untrue. I'm surprised Keaton didn't actually sue the production company for defamation of character over this. I sure would have. In any case, despite Mr. O'Connor's valiant efforts to "save" this film, don't bother with it. Watch the documentary "Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow." You'll enjoy that much more.