10 Misconceptions About Silent Movies
with recommendations
As a proselytizer of great cinema, I have consistently run into one difficulty above all others: getting people to watch a silent movie. I am still continuously shocked by how immovable my friends are about silent cinema. I often get comments like, “I’m not up to that tonight” or “maybe someday when I’m not so tired.” There are some obvious connotations in those excuses, like that silent films are work or that they are boring.
While people are not usually able (or willing?) to put their reservations into words, I have come up with ten commonly believed misconceptions that seem to hold people back from an entire era of filmmaking. Really, people think of silent movies as a genre of film—a belief that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, because there are silent films in every genre.
When considering these points, bear in mind that there are plenty of bad silent films, just as there are bad contemporary films. Some of these beliefs arise from injudicious choices of what to watch. Most people, however, have never actually seen a silent movie. And when I finally get them to watch one I have chosen for them, the reaction is always marked by one sentiment: “I don’t know why I thought I wouldn’t like silent movies, but that was really good!”
Cutting away from the action for all those title cards kills momentum.
Let’s get this straight: every line a character speaks is not written out as an intertitle. You’d be surprised how much of a story you can follow without knowing what is being said. For films made in English-speaking countries, you will find that you can read lips better than you thought you could. Intertitles are used sparingly in most good silent films, but they are distributed evenly to give a sense of rhythm to the work. The key principle here was to pare things down to what was necessary. Extra characters, extra movements, extra lines, extra intertitles, or extra subplots easily ruin a silent movie. The great directors knew this, and they used intertitles to convey lines that were not obvious, held clever wordplay, or stated a main point in the story. Directors today could learn a lot from this practice; half of what we see in mediocre current films is completely unnecessary. It is still true that the most (artistically) successful films cut off the fat.
Films to check out: The Passion of Joan of Arc, The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog
The acting is so over-the-top and artificial.
As with most of these misconceptions, this one often comes from brief clips of silent films in current movies. Almost always, those filmmakers want to show up silent film as something drastically different from the work they’re making. They want to make a sharp contrast with the past and make their own movie look better by comparison. And there are plenty of examples that could be used to prove this belief about silent film acting true. There are also silent films that were revolutionary for their naturalistic acting and economy of gesture. The largest disconnect, though, is one that has to do with style.
Naturally, many silent film stars originally worked on the stage, where everything must be over emphasized because of the vastness of a typical theatre. It took them a little time to realize that the camera picked up their smallest expressions and magnified them on a giant screen. Also, in theatre, there are multiple styles of performance that are used for different material. What we call “natural” is called Representational Performance, and what we call “artificial” is called Presentational Performance. When cinema was a young art form, a greater variety of styles was used in its production. Things have gradually tended toward a Representational style because that is simply what audiences have praised most often. It makes sense—exaggerated gestures can grow to grotesque proportions on a movie screen. In the early days, screens were smaller, and the audience was familiar with the conventions of the stage. You can see vestiges of Presentational Performance even today in certain horror films or movie musicals.
Films to check out: A Woman of Paris, Master of the House
They are less sophisticated in story, theme, and artistry.
The prevailing belief is that early cinema was simple due to its very newness. On the contrary, the novelty of a brand new art form led to a lot of experimentation and pushing of boundaries. Filmmakers were excited to see what this medium was capable of. Consequently, silent films are much more likely to take risks than movies today, which often aim to be as like other films as possible.
It is a truth of artistic methodology that restrictions lead to higher quality art. Form poetry, for instance, must fit very prescribed rhythms, line lengths, and rhyme patterns. This causes the poet to think much more about every word choice. Putting in the extra time and scrutiny usually leads to more creative and expressive poetry. Similarly, the limitation of having to convey everything through image (including images of intertitles) caused filmmakers to come up with unexpected and elegant ways of conveying information or feeling.
As I have said, the plot of a silent film often had to be simplified, but that meant that the filmmakers had to find alternative ways of getting across the qualities of the scenes deemed unnecessary. This led to some very sophisticated use of symbolism. Because the conventions of film were not yet set in stone, early movies often used bold techniques to test the medium’s limits.
Films to check out: The Kid, That Night’s Wife
The humor relies on tired slapstick clichés.
Slapstick was indeed a popular style of humor in silent films because it does not rely on words. It is certainly not the only option that was on offer, however. Observational humor was popular, as it also relies on watching more than listening. Irony was used more often in the 1920s than it is today. Humor was often created by the reversal of convention, such as the wise tramp or the submissive-but-controlling housewife. Even wordplay was consistently used to humorous effect in the intertitles.
Films to check out: City Lights, What Did the Lady Forget?
The poor quality of the image makes it unwatchable.
The film used a hundred years ago was not terribly resilient, and it would be used more repeatedly and in less respectful ways than you might see today. Also, it has been around for a hundred years. If you watch a straight digitization of old film, the quality will indeed be terrible. Thankfully, many people are working very hard these days to restore these old pictures to their original quality. A restored and remastered classic film can reveal breathtakingly clear images. The process is long and tedious, but we live in a time when most of the masterpieces of the silent era have undergone such treatment. Be cognizant of the nature of the print you watch when choosing a silent film. I recently watched a cheap, unrestored copy of Metropolis and wondered what I had liked about it before. I bought a restored version and I suddenly loved the film more than my original viewing in a theatre. Even with a movie you already know, choosing the cheap copy will ruin your enjoyment of the picture.
Films to check out: the restored and remastered versions of Metropolis and Les Vampires
They’re quaint and sanitary.
Ha. In the days of silent film, there was not yet a governing body for censorship or content rating. The Hays Code—a rulebook of what could and could not be shown in movies and a group that approved or rejected every film—was created in 1934 (and lasted until 1968). Before that, film was a frontier medium in which everything went. Most producers and directors had an inherent sense of good taste, so shocking sights are not common in the famous films that have remained popular until today. There is, however, a large body of Pre-Code material that features nudity, violence, gore, and a spectrum of sexual identity. Of these, the last is the most common in classic silent films, but frank sexuality and casual flashes of nudity do pop up. This may not be a real selling point for many of you, but it does put the lie to the common belief that silent films are prudish. Believe it or not, the movies of 1967 were more policed than those of the silent era.
Films to check out: Scarface, Wings
Filmmakers hadn’t yet learned creative techniques of filming and effects.
Untrue. As I stated earlier, the silent era was a time of unfettered experimentation with the medium. Creative effects were developed using a variety of means such as perspective tricks, double exposure, and things I can’t even figure out. There’s not much to say for this one except that it’s the opposite of the reality.
Films to check out: Man with a Movie Camera, The Phantom Carriage
They lack subtlety.
Hopefully, by this point, you can spot that this is untrue, so I won’t waste your time by reiterating everything which I have already said. In terms of subtlety, the films showing in your local multiplex display the same range as the works of the 1920s.
Films to check out: The Immigrant, Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans
Not hearing sound effects or the actors’ voices is disorienting.
This may initially prove to be a problem for you, but it will fade surprisingly quickly. It is akin to watching subtitled films: once your brain adjusts to the practice, you may not even notice the difference. When I remember subtitled or silent films, it is common for my brain to have fused the two elements, so that I can clearly recall the actors saying things that I only read.
Films to check out: This point doesn’t lend itself to examples, since it is a process in your brain, but the effect is explored in the modern-day silent masterpiece, The Artist
They lack the spectacle of modern-day movies.
If it’s spectacle you want, it’s there to find! D. W. Griffith made silent films on a scale that almost no one has tried since. One famous anecdote remembers him asking his assistant to “move those 10,000 men on horseback a couple feet to the left.” Georges Méliès created fantasy and science fiction films with unbelievable sets, costumes, and effects. Buster Keaton films hinge on the rapid execution of seemingly impossible stunts that grow in complexity and spectacle.
Films to check out: Sherlock Jr., A Trip to the Moon
More great silent movies: The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, The Farmer’s Wife, The Gold Rush, The Circus, The General, Steamboat Bill Jr., An Inn in Tokyo, Dragnet Girl, Modern Times, Nosferatu, Walk Cheerfully, Looking for Sally, Mighty Like a Moose, Battleship Potemkin, Intolerance, The Thief of Bagdad, The Paleface, Blackmail, The Manxman, The Ring, Downhill