Jean Dujardin and Berenice Bejo in "The Artist".
At some point in my Southern California teen years, a guy on a field trip told my class what the term “silver screen” meant. In the early days of motion pictures, he said, the screens onto which films were projected were often literally silver: a reflective (often aluminum) coating helped fabric screens catch the low-power images of the day.
That term stuck, obviously. And never mind that the reflective screen is in heavy modern use as an optimal surface for 3D: the words “silver screen” still mean, to many, the kind of breathtaking shared experience that only a very good movie can deliver.
The Artist is that movie, in every respect. A French-made homage to the early days of film, The Artist doesn’t just refer to that era: it literally takes us there. The film (by director Michel Hazanavicius) is almost entirely silent, shot in black and white, with a direct and lovely plot that recalls movies we love (Singin’ In The Rain, A Star Is Born) without ever seeming boring or hackneyed in its affection. And there’s plenty of affection to go around.
George Valentin (an expansive Jean Dujardin, in an obvious nod to Valentino) begins the film on top of the new world of cinema. He and his dog are the stars of “big” silent pictures like A Russian Affair, which screen to delighted viewers in the presence of live orchestra. At the premiere of his latest film, young fan Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo) breaks through a line of admirers and enjoys a few light moments with George. These moments capture the attention of the press, and all that attention gives Peppy a great idea.
The arrival of the young actress in “Hollywoodland” (no detail goes missing here) coincides with the birth of “talkies”. George’s boss Al Zimmer, played to the hearty hilt by John Goodman, is out in front of this change. His star isn’t as enthusiastic.
But George knows it’s coming. In the film’s first dose of real magic, we realize that the world has changed at the same time he does. It’s an arresting moment.
In the meantime, Peppy’s star is rising. Still, The Artist is a film that reminds you that people are not types; if you think you know where this story is headed, you’ll be surprised. The story stays both simple and true to its sweet nature — yet it manages to deliver surprises to the end.
Along the way, you’ll meet Uggie the dog, who should be the first animal nominated in a Best Supporting Actor role; George’s driver and friend, Clifton (James Cromwell); Penelope Ann Miller as Doris, George’s practical wife; and you’ll even see the familiar face of our friend Joel Murray (Fred Rumsen on Mad Men), who has a key role in a pivotal scene. And Bejo is incandescent as Peppy. She brings a breezy, winsome chemistry to Peppy’s scenes with George; but she has chemistry with everyone in the audience, so this is hardly a stretch.
I notice a lot of Oscar buzz around The Artist, for good reason. This is the kind of thing Hollywood loves: a good story that just happens to be about itself. The surprise is in how accessible that story is, and how infectious The Artist’s devotion to the “silver screen”. Here is one labor of love that never seems labored at all.
I want to see this so bad! But I bet it won’t be at our local commercial theaters –It will probably be at our little indie theater — too bad because it should be everywhere!
I loved this movie. John Goodman was excellent, he would’ve made a great silent film star. I saw Joel Murray’s name in the credits and kept waiting and waiting for him to appear. He was perfect for his role. In fact I think this movie was perfectly cast, not a miss anywhere.
It’s an outstanding film that magnificently demonstrates that the old silent storytelling techniques still work beautifully, and it will surprise (or remind) audiences that there was potent magic in silence, b&w, and the old closer-to-square-picture aspect ratio.
As a longtime student and collector of silent films (I even made a b&w silent two-reel comedy on Super 8 myself back in the seventies), I expected to find a lot of cheap shots and vague, generic “silent movie” techniques to complain about… but The Artist gets nearly everything perfectly right. And not just how silent films looked and played in general, it even gets the differences between how things looked in 1927 and 1931 right. And it reminds us that movie star charisma and storytelling sophistication predated talking pictures. (Both leads are terrific, and in particular, Berenice Bejo exhibits amazing star power: I agree with Anne that “incandescent” is the proper description!)
The film works so well by playing it absolutely straight, with only a slight bit of tongue-in-cheek around the edges, and a few callbacks beyond the silent era (A Star is Born, Singin’ in the Rain, Citizen Kane, Vertigo). And – extremely unusually for our time – it contains absolutely no implied irony about how “dumb” things were in Hollywood’s heyday. Movies and life may have been simpler back then, but they weren’t primitive: the characters are fully developed, recognizable folks and we really care about them.
My only (minor) complaint is that there’s really nothing to the film beyond lovingly recreating the experience of seeing a silent melodrama. There’s no implied now vs. then subtext, or commentary on how we watch(ed) movies or the changes in storytelling in the last 70 years. (There’s nothing like Mad Men’s familiar method of making us aghast at what was considered usual and normal back then.) In this instance, the medium really is the message…
But that’s okay: when today’s jaded audiences discover that they can still be so caught up in a story told in such an antique style, that will be quite sufficient to ensure The Artist’s worth and instant-classic status.
Be sure to see it old-school – in a theater with an audience – if it plays anywhere near where you live…
Could not agree more. The film even used its intertitles well. I found myself kind of jarred by the modern world, when we walked back out into it. The experience The Artist creates is that total.
It’s just a lovely work, start to finish.
I loved it. I loved that it respected the audience enough to go full-bore silent movie, without compromising the silent movie experience for modern audiences. I loved the cast, too. I was a little distracted by the way John Goodman was undressing me with his eyes, but he always does that.
Therese, I saw it at an AMC multiplex on Christmas, and it’s still playing.
That gives me hope, Deb! We do get things more slowly around here. Last year we didn’t get the newest Jane Eyre at the multiplexes even though it was advertised there. (got it from Netflix) Let’s hope The Artist starts a good trend!
I second the nomination for Uggie. Bet Joel Murray would, too.
Saw it today. Ate it up with a spoon. It had it all, cinematography, score, costuming, goood acting (within the confines of the acting style of the period) and dog. And a lot of character actors that I love in small parts . And Joel Murray. C’mon. If you listen closely during the lulls in the music, the sound you hear is Woody Allen hitting himself in the forehead with his loafer.
I got to see it yesterday! Brought my nearly 92 year old Mom and she loved it! It’s just beautiful, effervescent, tear-jerking, and funny. Everything that a lot of movies are lacking today. I think uninitiated modern audiences may feel a bit uncomfortable at first, but within minutes they’ll be embraced by it’s beaufiful simplicity. ( was also amazed at how well I could ‘read lips’ just by watching the situation. That’s the magic of the Silents. I want to see it again! There’s a teeny cameo by Malcolm MacDowell too! I can’t wait to take it all in again! And Uggie is the best doggie on film since Lassie!
[...] Picture Nominees: “The Artist” Thomas Langmann, Producer “The Descendants” Jim Burke, Alexander Payne and Jim [...]
[...] bleeds into this film too much, to the point where it feels like a polemic. It’s like, The Artist says “We love the movies,” while Hugo says, “We love the movies, and you should [...]
[...] The Artist: To me, this is the picture of the year; daring, joyful, life-affirming, and exquisitely made. Here’s Anne’s review. [...]
I liked The Artist too, but the buzz is heavily generated by Weinstein spending. He is a movie mogul of the old school — and he gets what he wants.
“And then there were the relentless Oscar campaigns that Weinstein keenly recognized as a marketing bonanza for his films, most famously in 1998 when his lightweight romance, “Shakespeare in Love” claimed the best picture trophy instead of heavy favourite “Saving Private Ryan.”
Love him or hate him, Weinstein transformed Hollywood in a way few people have, says Avrich.
“This is a man who is a brand and has also effected the most monumental change in independent cinema ever,” says the Toronto-based filmmaker, who notes he maintained a cordial relationship with Weinstein throughout filming, exchanging about a dozen emails.”
Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Entertainment/20110217/weinstein-doc-hbo-110217/#ixzz1nVsHpmM7