|
Speak Easily |  | Director: Edward Sedgwick
Actors: Buster Keaton, Jimmy Durante, Ruth Selwyn, Thelma Todd, Hedda Hopper
Studio: Alpha Video
Category: DVD
List Price: $7.98
Buy New: $2.53
as of 11/21/2009 15:14 CST details
You Save: $5.45 (68%)
New (4) Used (3) from $2.53
Seller: -importcds
Rating:  8 reviews
Format: Black & White, Dolby, DVD, NTSC
Language: English (Original Language)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 82 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: D4433D
UPC: 089218443397
EAN: 0089218443397
Theatrical Release Date: August 13, 1932
Release Date: June 22, 2004
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Studio: Gotham (dba Alpha) Release Date: 06/22/2004
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 8
 Dreary dreck September 9, 2009
Christina E. Dunigan (Incheon, Korea)
Watching "Speak Easily" is painful for fans of Buster Keaton. Seeing such a phenomenal writer, actor, comic, director, and stunt man subjected to this humiliating spectacle is like seeing a Picasso used as a drop cloth, or perhaps more like seeing the finest camembert adulterated with whey solids and processed into Cheez-Whiz.
Keaton is ill-cast as Professor Post, whose overblown vocabulary is the only thing keeping him from saying, "Tell me about the rabbits, George." (Post would have said something like, "Kindly inform me as to the status of the small mammals in the family Leporidae of the order Lagomorpha, kind sir, who I believe is primarily addressed with the epithet 'George'.") When Keaton created his own characters, they might be situationally clueless but they weren't stupid. They were quick studies and became masters of their worlds. Not so with Post, who never stops stumbling and bumbling and who who has no more control of his destiny than a bilge rat had of the Titanic. And while Keaton's
original characters had a charming naivete and innocence, Post comes across as such a profound sexual retardate that if he ever did become physically aroused, he'd put an ice bag on the swelling and seek medical help.
There are a couple of small redeeming moments, such as Keaton's attempts to get rid of the vampish Thema Todd or his suggestion as to appropriate attire for a Greek dance, but it's just not worth enduring the entire film to see them.
If you're a fan of bad movies, get drunk and watch "Speak Easily" with friends, a la "Mystery Science Theater 3000". But other than that, stick with the silents. Let them be 100% of what Buster Keaton is remembered for.
 OK early talkie that didn't really need Keaton as part of its formula August 8, 2007
calvinnme (Fredericksburg, Va)
If you're a Keaton fan your eyeballs will not melt in their sockets if you watch this - it really is not bad. It would be a rather enjoyable early talkie if it were not for the fact that Buster Keaton's talents are being wasted in this film. Since I know that by this time (1932) MGM gave him no creative control and treated him just as a performer, I can only wonder what the film would have been like if someone had listened to his ideas. However, at least there are no moments in which you must look away in embarrassment at what MGM is doing to the man, as there are in Free and Easy.
The good:
a. Unlike Free and Easy (a real embarrassment of a film), Buster does get the girl in the end.
b. Buster shows a real penchant for dialogue and verbal comedy, demonstrating that he was not outside his element in talking pictures.
c. The seduction/morning after scenes with Buster and Thelma Todd. Todd gave the best supporting performance in the cast. What a shame she died so young.
d. The ending where Keaton disrupts the show but scores a hit with the audience. It's not the most clever stuff he ever did, but it is funny.
The bad:
a. Buster being made to play a straight man to Jimmy Durante.
b. Buster's expressive eyes being hidden behind his pince-nez spectacles.
c. Buster bungling into a happy ending. In his years as an independent filmmaker his character would often start out lost and fumbling around, but he figured things out in the end and came up with resourceful and deliberate solutions.
The ugly:
Why did this film need Buster Keaton anyway? Lots of comics less talented than Keaton could have been employed to recite the dialogue that was written for this script and take a few pratfalls. I'm sure in 1943 you could have dressed up Orson Welles in a gorilla suit and he would have been an effective and convincing gorilla in just about any film you put him in - but why on earth would you want to?
As far as video and audio quality, this film is in very good shape for being a public domain copy of a 75 year old film. There's no hissing in the audio and the video has no scratches in it and is quite clear.
Not the Worst of the MGM's May 8, 2007
Brigalow (Australia)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Keaton made worst movies that this for MGM - Free and Easy is the one that springs to my mind. In saying that this is no masterpiece, far from it.
The storyline leads to what should be a funny movie and parts of this are, for instance the scene with Thelma Todd at the hotel room (BTW love that drinks cabinet) and the morning after. I also like the little bit at the beginning with the train. And I like the Theatre Scenes at the end of the movie.
But like nearly everyone here we all know what was to come after so we know that this is the beginning of the end for Keaton at MGM. Durante and Keaton are not a good mix, Cliff Edwards and Keaton would have been much better combination.
Keaton Comedy "Easy" To Enjoy July 21, 2004
Alex Udvary (chicago, il United States)
11 out of 11 found this review helpful
Boy! Am I in the minority opinion here or what?
I have often heard the complaints that when Buster started making sound pictures and signed with MGM his career was over. And I even believe Buster made remarks to that effect as well. But, I don't know, I don't mind Buster's sound pictures. Granted I have only seen a few of them, I think of them as light diversions. I also don't mind the films Laurel & Hardy made in the 40s.
"Speak Easily" has Buster Keaton playing Professor Post, a lonely man who never gets a chance to go out and lead a social life. He has no friends, no love in his life and only his butler to tell his worries to. One day Buster finds out he has inherited 750,000. He sets off and plans to go out a live life. Do all the things he's always wanted to do.
"Speak Easily" works best in the early moments and then struggles trying to find the correct tone. Maybe this is because Keaton and Durante had such different comedy styles.
But I still don't think of this as a bad movie and wouldn't mind watching it again. It may not be as good as some of Buster's silent films such as "Sherlock, Jr.", "The General", and "Our Hospitality".
The movie was directed by Edward Sedgwick, who directed several of Keaton's later films starting with in order of preference; "The Cameraman", "Spite Marriage", "Doughboys", and "The Passionate Plumber" (Also with Durante), though I prefer "Plumber" over this movie.
But "Speak Easily" has some good slapstick moments, particulary at the end of the film. I also liked a scene between Keaton and Thelma Todd, as an actress trying to get into Buster's good graces. And a gag dealing with a train in the beginning I found funny.
I'm sorry, surprised, and slightly embarrassed to find I'm the only one who likes this movie, but contrary to what you've heard I'd recommend Keaton fans take a look at this one.
Bottom-line: Enjoyable, light Keaton "talkie" that offers laughs but does have its problems. Has enough moments that made me laugh to suggest the movie to fans. Or maybe I'm a pushover for Keaton?
 Buster In Decline February 14, 2002
5 out of 9 found this review helpful
The second half of "Parlor, Bedroom and Bath" picks up a bit with some fine slapstick from Buster involving a slippery marble floor, but the first half is a total waste. Unless, that is, you find some historical interest in the views of the Keaton mansion. But, how stupid could MGM be? THIS stupid: they had here one of the greatest physical comedians of all time, and they kept him flat on his back in bed for almost half the picture! Pathetic... no wonder Buster started drinking."Speak Easily" is even worse. The Keaton/Durante "partnership" was a marriage made in Hell (again, by MGM). There's no chemistry whatsoever between the two, and Buster often looks pained in his role as the professor. His timing is starting to go downhill, too, probably the result of his increasing alcohol problem. Add to that the sloppy direction, the cheesy production (it sounds like MGM spent more money on the snappy theme music than on the rest of the film), the third-rate script, and you've got a real prize turkey. NOT recommended, except to masochists.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 8
|
|
|
CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. Thanks for shopping with us! | |
