The Case of the Disjointed (But Still Good) Movie
The last review of 2019 (and the decade): Sherlock Jr.
I hadn’t actually intended to watch Sherlock Jr.-not out of any aversion, but because I had been recommended Our Hospitality and figured I’d see how I felt about it before deciding whether or not to watch any more of Buster Keaton’s work. However, it wound up being bundled with the copy of Our Hospitality I rented, so I figured I might as well give it a look. And overall, I’m glad circumstances conspired to get me to see it.
Despite being a fairly short film (forty-five minutes, to be exact), the movie can basically be divided into three parts with some thin connective tissue. Part One centers around a hapless theater employee (known as “the projectionist” on IMDB and played by Buster Keaton) who’s also studying to be a detective. He wants to buy his sweetheart (Kathryn McGuire) a box of candy but can’t afford the fancy box (despite some slapstick featuring finding some money while sweeping out the garbage). He ultimately buys the cheap box and then uses a pencil to make it look like it cost more than it actually did. Unfortunately for him, he has an equally poor but slicker looking rival (Ward Crane) who steals a watch from the girl’s (she doesn’t get a name, she’s just “the girl”) father, sells it to buy the more expensive candy, then pins the blame on the projectionist. Thanks to the subterfuge with the candy box and his own detective skills, the family believes the rival and banishes the projectionist from the house. Depressed, he returns to his job at the theater to run a movie, and that’s where we get Part Two.
Part Two is probably the shortest of the lot, and should probably be considered more of a transitionary stage. That’s because the projectionist falls asleep, and his dream self not only sees himself asleep, but starts to see the characters in the movie being replaced by the people he knows in real life, in particular his sweetheart and his rival. He jumps into the movie screen to try to break it up, only for the scene to abruptly cut to an entirely different location, and he has to try to adapt to that. We then proceed to spend several minutes with the scene changing from indoors to outdoors, city street to snowy field, etc., before the screenwriter decided to stop and move into Part Three. This is where the title of the movie comes in, as the projectionist now plays out a tale where some valuable pearls have been stolen by a villain (the rival and thus also played by Ward Crane) and the inside man servant (Erwin Connelly) and the great detective Sherlock Jr. (Keaton) comes to solve the case. Eventually, we loop back around to tying up loose ends from Part One, and then the movie ends fairly abruptly. Though despite that stumble at the end, I’d say the movie is overall pretty satisfying.
Granted, some of my liking for the movie has to do with tropes or tricks that I personally enjoy, and therefore might not work as well for others. For example, I was pleasantly surprised by Part Two, not expecting the playing around with film. That, plus the fact that the projectionist tries to interact with his unconscious self, gave the whole thing a meta/fourth-wall breaking feel that I have a soft spot for when done right. This one definitely does it right, but it might not work for everybody, and I’ll be the first to admit it does get stretched a bit thin. Still, it’s very creative, and I applaud whoever came up with the idea.
Moving on from that, there are plenty of other things to like about the movie. The gags are generally smart and, when required, extremely well shot and choreographed. The latter in particular leave you torn between smiling and being impressed at how many moving parts had to come together to make that work. I feel like these are the sorts of scenes that should be shown in film school, so people can appreciate the craft and technical side of movie making, which is probably one of the highest compliments this movie can receive. Leaving that aside, Keaton once again makes for a sympathetic hero, even when he’s acting slightly arrogant or stupid in the “Sherlock Jr.” segment. Even then, I appreciate that he took steps to differentiate between his two roles, which added a little something extra to proceedings. And finally, I couldn’t help but notice once again that some of the gags centered around trains, bridges, and near misses, which also played a famous role in The General. It really makes me wonder if this was a trope that Keaton really liked and kept finding ways to insert into his movies. Not that I can judge; lord knows I’ve had ideas I couldn’t get out of my head and kept putting in my work…
This is definitely worth seeking out for a variety of reasons. It’s a pretty decent movie in its own right, but film buffs can also enjoy it for getting a sense of silent comedy or for appreciating the technical artistry. I feel like this is a movie well known in classic film circles, but I think it deserves to be remembered by a wider audience. It might not appeal to everyone, but it’s got enough going on on the cinematography side that it should be held up as a reminder of what you can do with movies.
CAT ALERT: During the extended gag with the changing locations onscreen, the projectionist winds up in an outdoor spot with two lions (I can’t tell if it’s supposed to be the savannah or the zoo, because it doesn’t look much like either.) While the projectionist seems a bit concerned about his predicament, he actually moves away from them relatively calmly, and they don’t make a move to lunge for him. Either those were some well-trained lions, or they had a really good rear projection.
Note: I’m including this here because I don’t think it can count as a commentary on the movie itself. The version of the movie I saw had an…unusual soundtrack. While some of the music had a more jazzy, 1920’s feel (which is period appropriate), other bits sounded like music you’d hear in a Western, except that it also apparently included an electric guitar. There was even one moment featuring a car chase where the music would have been right at home in a Bond film. It was noticeable enough that I was pulled out of the movie, and makes me wonder who thought this was a good idea to use this score for this movie. Just something to be on the lookout (ear out?) for if you rent the movie from Amazon like I did.
I hadn’t actually intended to watch Sherlock Jr.-not out of any aversion, but because I had been recommended Our Hospitality and figured I’d see how I felt about it before deciding whether or not to watch any more of Buster Keaton’s work. However, it wound up being bundled with the copy of Our Hospitality I rented, so I figured I might as well give it a look. And overall, I’m glad circumstances conspired to get me to see it.
Despite being a fairly short film (forty-five minutes, to be exact), the movie can basically be divided into three parts with some thin connective tissue. Part One centers around a hapless theater employee (known as “the projectionist” on IMDB and played by Buster Keaton) who’s also studying to be a detective. He wants to buy his sweetheart (Kathryn McGuire) a box of candy but can’t afford the fancy box (despite some slapstick featuring finding some money while sweeping out the garbage). He ultimately buys the cheap box and then uses a pencil to make it look like it cost more than it actually did. Unfortunately for him, he has an equally poor but slicker looking rival (Ward Crane) who steals a watch from the girl’s (she doesn’t get a name, she’s just “the girl”) father, sells it to buy the more expensive candy, then pins the blame on the projectionist. Thanks to the subterfuge with the candy box and his own detective skills, the family believes the rival and banishes the projectionist from the house. Depressed, he returns to his job at the theater to run a movie, and that’s where we get Part Two.
Part Two is probably the shortest of the lot, and should probably be considered more of a transitionary stage. That’s because the projectionist falls asleep, and his dream self not only sees himself asleep, but starts to see the characters in the movie being replaced by the people he knows in real life, in particular his sweetheart and his rival. He jumps into the movie screen to try to break it up, only for the scene to abruptly cut to an entirely different location, and he has to try to adapt to that. We then proceed to spend several minutes with the scene changing from indoors to outdoors, city street to snowy field, etc., before the screenwriter decided to stop and move into Part Three. This is where the title of the movie comes in, as the projectionist now plays out a tale where some valuable pearls have been stolen by a villain (the rival and thus also played by Ward Crane) and the inside man servant (Erwin Connelly) and the great detective Sherlock Jr. (Keaton) comes to solve the case. Eventually, we loop back around to tying up loose ends from Part One, and then the movie ends fairly abruptly. Though despite that stumble at the end, I’d say the movie is overall pretty satisfying.
Granted, some of my liking for the movie has to do with tropes or tricks that I personally enjoy, and therefore might not work as well for others. For example, I was pleasantly surprised by Part Two, not expecting the playing around with film. That, plus the fact that the projectionist tries to interact with his unconscious self, gave the whole thing a meta/fourth-wall breaking feel that I have a soft spot for when done right. This one definitely does it right, but it might not work for everybody, and I’ll be the first to admit it does get stretched a bit thin. Still, it’s very creative, and I applaud whoever came up with the idea.
Moving on from that, there are plenty of other things to like about the movie. The gags are generally smart and, when required, extremely well shot and choreographed. The latter in particular leave you torn between smiling and being impressed at how many moving parts had to come together to make that work. I feel like these are the sorts of scenes that should be shown in film school, so people can appreciate the craft and technical side of movie making, which is probably one of the highest compliments this movie can receive. Leaving that aside, Keaton once again makes for a sympathetic hero, even when he’s acting slightly arrogant or stupid in the “Sherlock Jr.” segment. Even then, I appreciate that he took steps to differentiate between his two roles, which added a little something extra to proceedings. And finally, I couldn’t help but notice once again that some of the gags centered around trains, bridges, and near misses, which also played a famous role in The General. It really makes me wonder if this was a trope that Keaton really liked and kept finding ways to insert into his movies. Not that I can judge; lord knows I’ve had ideas I couldn’t get out of my head and kept putting in my work…
This is definitely worth seeking out for a variety of reasons. It’s a pretty decent movie in its own right, but film buffs can also enjoy it for getting a sense of silent comedy or for appreciating the technical artistry. I feel like this is a movie well known in classic film circles, but I think it deserves to be remembered by a wider audience. It might not appeal to everyone, but it’s got enough going on on the cinematography side that it should be held up as a reminder of what you can do with movies.
CAT ALERT: During the extended gag with the changing locations onscreen, the projectionist winds up in an outdoor spot with two lions (I can’t tell if it’s supposed to be the savannah or the zoo, because it doesn’t look much like either.) While the projectionist seems a bit concerned about his predicament, he actually moves away from them relatively calmly, and they don’t make a move to lunge for him. Either those were some well-trained lions, or they had a really good rear projection.
Note: I’m including this here because I don’t think it can count as a commentary on the movie itself. The version of the movie I saw had an…unusual soundtrack. While some of the music had a more jazzy, 1920’s feel (which is period appropriate), other bits sounded like music you’d hear in a Western, except that it also apparently included an electric guitar. There was even one moment featuring a car chase where the music would have been right at home in a Bond film. It was noticeable enough that I was pulled out of the movie, and makes me wonder who thought this was a good idea to use this score for this movie. Just something to be on the lookout (ear out?) for if you rent the movie from Amazon like I did.