The Buster Keaton Story

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.

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!

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.

Donald O'Connor plays Buster Keaton in this flick. It follows him mostly from his arriving in Hollywood, becoming a star, hitting doldrums in his career as well as alcohol problems...especially alcohol problems.

"The Buster Keaton Story" is a bio-pic which represents the worst sort of thing that Hollywood could do. Why? Well, despite Keaton being a real person, so much of the film is completely wrong and the writers didn't even consult with Buster to make sure they got his life story right...presumably because they just didn't care. Too often bio-pics do this...and I wonder why...especially because Keaton DID have an interesting life and while he did have troubles with alcohol, it was way overblown for the movie. My advice is to read up on the man...you'll likely enjoy learning about him...much more than you'd learn in the film.

If you want to learn the facts about Marion Davies, you don't watch "Citizen Kane." If you want to learn the facts of the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, you don't watch "Some Like it Hot." Similarly, don't watch "the Buster Keaton Story," if you want to learn the facts of Keaton's amazing life. This is what Keaton and some other people thought would be entertaining for a 1957 audience to know about Buster Keaton. It emphasizes three points 1. Keaton was a vaudeville child performer and became a big star in Hollywood Silent films in the 20s, 2. When sound came in some mean people in Hollywood forced him to talk in ways he didn't like and this caused his films to bomb and he became an alcoholic, and 3. Later Keaton with the help of a good woman who loved him, found appreciation again when he returned to live audiences.

The bad part is that there are no other real historical characters besides Keaton and his parents (for four minutes) in the film. Not only names but also characters have been changed and generalized into types , probably to avoid lawsuits. Even the clothes are not of the historical period.

The good part is that it is still an interesting story with very good acting, especially by. Donald O'Connor, Ann Blyth, Rhonda Fleming, Peter Lorre and Larry Keating.

The best part is that we know that Buster Keaton as the technical advisor on the film recreated about 15 of his great bits and gags from his early films. One of the funniest was a brief recreation of a great scene with Thelma Todd from the movie "Speak Easily," where he tries to put a drunk woman on a bed.

Take the movie for what it is: a fictional biography by and about Buster Keaton, and you will enjoy it. Take it for what it is not: a true biography of Keaton, and you will be disappointed.