The sound era offered some serious problems for the three most famous silent comics. Chaplin dealt with the sound era by slowing down his output but continuing to make silents through the 1930s. Harold Lloyd made a few sound films--most of which are far better than I expected. Of the three, however, Buster Keaton had the most difficulty with sound. Part of it was because his sort of pratfalls were pretty much passé by the 30s and part of it was MGM had absolutely no idea what to do with him and often made the worst possible decisions. The biggest mistake they made was ignoring Keaton's suggestions, even though he was a terrific gag writer and comic. The absolute low point with MGM was their pairing his with Jimmy Durante--a comic pairing that made absolutely no sense, as their styles were complete opposites. Keaton was quiet and visual and Durante was all talk.
While "Sidewalks of New York" is not as bad as his later Durante films, it is not all that good. Mostly because it's not very visual and the studio game him a lot of plot--perhaps too much. Keaton comes off as kind of sweet but the timing of his pratfalls are all off. It just doesn't work very well nor is it all that funny. At least his sidekick, Cliff Edwards, isn't as brash or annoying as Durante.
The film is set in a rough neighborhood in New York. When the landlord of some of these tenements arrives to confront the local thugs for busting up his place--and lands in the middle of a riot. But, his anger disappears when he sees the pretty sister (Anita Page) of one of these little punks. So, to impress her, he tries to befriend the kids and builds them a recreation center. Can Keaton manage to win the girl and reform this little hoodlum? Several gags in this film were not bad ideas but the timing was poor. The courtroom gags seem to be overdone and went on too long and the same can definitely be said about the boxing match. In the old days, Keaton directed himself in scenes like this---and I am sure if MGM had let him do it here, the timing would have been a lot better. There were, however, some nice signs of Keaton's physicality--such as when he's escaping from the gang near the end of the film. Buster himself complained about this loss of control and was afraid this film would damage his career. Unfortunately, the film made a ton of money and convinced MGM they knew what they were doing--which they didn't. In subsequent films, the quality continued to drop at an alarming rate.
Taken as a comedy, the film isn't very good. But, if you don't expect laughs, "The Sidewalks of New York" is pleasant and diverting. Not a complete waste of time but clear indication of where Keaton's career was heading.
While "Sidewalks of New York" is not as bad as his later Durante films, it is not all that good. Mostly because it's not very visual and the studio game him a lot of plot--perhaps too much. Keaton comes off as kind of sweet but the timing of his pratfalls are all off. It just doesn't work very well nor is it all that funny. At least his sidekick, Cliff Edwards, isn't as brash or annoying as Durante.
The film is set in a rough neighborhood in New York. When the landlord of some of these tenements arrives to confront the local thugs for busting up his place--and lands in the middle of a riot. But, his anger disappears when he sees the pretty sister (Anita Page) of one of these little punks. So, to impress her, he tries to befriend the kids and builds them a recreation center. Can Keaton manage to win the girl and reform this little hoodlum? Several gags in this film were not bad ideas but the timing was poor. The courtroom gags seem to be overdone and went on too long and the same can definitely be said about the boxing match. In the old days, Keaton directed himself in scenes like this---and I am sure if MGM had let him do it here, the timing would have been a lot better. There were, however, some nice signs of Keaton's physicality--such as when he's escaping from the gang near the end of the film. Buster himself complained about this loss of control and was afraid this film would damage his career. Unfortunately, the film made a ton of money and convinced MGM they knew what they were doing--which they didn't. In subsequent films, the quality continued to drop at an alarming rate.
Taken as a comedy, the film isn't very good. But, if you don't expect laughs, "The Sidewalks of New York" is pleasant and diverting. Not a complete waste of time but clear indication of where Keaton's career was heading.