"They stand out because they are not servants, slaves, or savages. How did that happen in 1924?"
"Because it was a Buster Keaton film. (Compare his films to Chaplin or Lloyd, to use comedian comparisons, and one realises how lily-white the other two are.) Not only did Keaton frequently hire black actors, he paid them the same as white actors, definitely not something others were doing in Hollywood at the time!"
**
One thing I would point out about Chaplin's work, like that of his contemporary and fellow-Briton Stan Laurel, is that he rarely resorted to racial humor. As a result, this aspect of his work feels much less dated than either Keaton or Lloyd.
Certainly none of these comics had bad intentions or intended to come across as mean-spirited in any of their films (well, okay, with the exception of Chaplin toward Hitler in THE GREAT DICTATOR ;)
You're absolutely correct that these comics, and early Hollywood filmmakers in general, provided a lot of work to people who people who wouldn't have otherwise had the chance. Ashame today's filmmakers won't do the same, and instead everything seems to revolve around the same dozen or so Hollywood "royal families".
____
View my films at: www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
reply
share