And now my long overdue defense of Jacques Tati's films being silent films.
I promised this two weeks ago and events got the better of me. I spent time rewatching three of my nominations and devoted the better part of a Sunday afternoon constructing my argument. I apologize for the delay.
Right off the bat the films of Jacques Tati are ineligible because they are sync sound films. But before we dismiss them on that technicality let's evaluate them on their merits because they certainly qualify for honorary placement under the "silent movie in spirit" argument.
When Chaplin and Keaton are compared I've heard the argument that Chaplin’s Tramp is a maniac causing mischief in a rational world while Keaton's Milquetoast is a rational man surviving in a world gone mad. Tati's creation of M. Hulot is clearly exists in a world like Keaton’s, where the simple act of opening a door only has only two outcomes: either the door will stick or the knob will come off in your hand. Either way the world exists to impede and frustrate the simplest of goals. The door never simply just opens for you.
Jacques Tati was a master of physical comedy who crafted humor not from slapstick pratfalls but from the mistimed actions of one out of sync with his surroundings. Hulot (played by Tati himself) is perpetually trying to analyze his environment to formulate an appropriate course of action. His physical manner is abrupt and graceless but not clumsy. There is a disjointed lack of flow in his movements. When set in motion he lurches forward, continuously tipped forward like a tray of precariously stacked dishes threatening to topple. In a word he is an anti-Frenchman. His trademark attire: raincoat (or sport coat), umbrella, pipe and hat, pants just a shade too short. He is perpetually polite: bow courteously, doff the hat, remove the pipe, extend the hand.
The comedy in each of Tati's films is dense. Gags come in a rapid fire, blink-and-you'll-miss-it, onto-the-next-one style. Great care is taken to setup and execute each joke in succession, like a fireworks display. French dignity is repeatedly, relentlessly, hilariously punctured.
Tati's Hulot films are ensemble films. Hulot weaves in and out of the action as the populace goes about their daily activities (and almost always failing at them). When you pay careful attention on repeated viewings you can map out the individual trajectories of dozens of minor characters. The ensemble allows us to see this is a world of dysfunction containing multiple inhabitants and not a normal world containing dysfunctional inhabitants. The ensemble also wisely allowed Tati to regularly remove the focus from himself as lead actor so he could shoulder his full duty as director.
Once of the great things about Tati's films is he loves to present a static frame and let the action pass through it without cutting away. We can appreciate the coordination, the craftsmanship it takes to orchestrate a shot and let it play out, gag after gag in front of us. An office of cubicles becomes a rat's maze and we watch and watch as Hulot and company scurry around trying to find each other. Or a vacation crowd oscillates between train platforms (in foreground and background), repeatedly missing the train on the opposite side. Or maybe he'll make his characters (and you) humorously wait and wait as another character takes a full minute or more to cross from distant background to foreground before the action is allowed to continue.
OK, so why argue that Tati's sound films are silent? My practical rule of thumb: If you can mute the movie and the entire story (or very close to it) plays (meaning "is comprehended"), then, regardless of soundtrack, it's a silent film in spirit. Traditional silent films do this by focusing mainly on clear coordinated action to visually communicate the story (using sparse intertitle cards to relay critical exposition or dialogue as necessary). In this manner, when a silent film is firing on all artistic cylinders the power of the visual language overcomes the limitation of silence and the audience is pulled in.
So let's address the sound aspects of Tati’s films: dialogue and sound effects.
Dialogue in a Tati film is nothing more than the murmur of life. In Hulot's world individuals constantly collide with expectation, environment and each other. When a mishap or interaction occurs it is a natural reaction to complain, joke, commiserate. That is what a civilized society does. But the key in Tati’s films is he only needs to show that a reaction has occurred. The worded pleasantries exchanged are irrelevant (and never plot critical). In short, all talk is small talk in a Tati film, disposable and worthy of your disregard.
The Hulot films are full of sound effects and, more importantly, gags centered on sound effects. Whistling wind blows hats and newspapers and moustaches. Cars honk and bicycle bells ring. Modern machinery dings and buzzes and whirs.
Don't the gags fail to play if the film is muted? Typically sounds enhance the gag, they aren’t the essence of the gag. Tati is wise to ensure the action visually flows visual and you can follow it. There is no doubt the sound effects are certainly used to great success in selling the humor. And while I wouldn’t dream of watching a Tati film with the sound off I think if it were playing muted on a public monitor (say in a video store) viewers would not be confused.
But this “sound film as silent film” concept is really hard to explain. Once you’ve seen a Tati film (or perhaps if you’ve seen Rowan Atkinson play Mr. Bean) you immediately get it.
I’ll follow up on the individual films in separate posts.
