The Scarecrow (Buster Keaton, 1920)
What is the film about? How is the story told? Who are the main characters and what happens to them? How is the narrative structured?
The film begins with Keaton and his housemate making dinner with a clever pulley style contraption that lays the table, gets beers out of the fridge and cleans up after them. Both of them are fighting over the same girl- whose farmer father dislikes the pair. To win over her father’s affection the daughter bakes him a cream pie (classic “get my dad to like my two potential husbands” desert) which is accidental left unguarded outside and eaten by a dog. Buster’s character comes into the contact with the dog first, and seeing the pie allover its face assumes it has rabies.
To avoid getting bit by the rabid dog he climbs onto the brick walls of a demolished house, jumps in and out of windows and eventually ends up in a pile of hay and his clothes are removed by the farmer raking it (but he’s still basically fully clothed- this is the 20s after all.) After making a truce with the dog, he goes back to the farmhouse in his underwear and finds the daughter and then is caught by the father. To hide from the angry farmer he poses in the clothes of a scarecrow and begins a fight between the farmer and his roommate- who this whole time has been trying to help Keaton’s character.
He is caught by the two, who chase him back to the farm house. He accidentally proposes to the daughter who to his surprise accepts and the two escape on a horse at first and then a motorbike; followed by the father and the roommate. Picking up a priest on the way, they are pronounced husband and wife in the lake after crashing.
Does the film belong to a particular genre? How does it conform to or deviate from genre conventions? Does the film belong to a notable genre cycle?
The film is another example of the American Populism/Consumerism genre of the 1920s. Another comedy two-reeler by Buster Keaton, it is a definite continuation of his typical style and themes.
Who made the film? Does the film exhibit auteur qualities?
The film was written and directed by Keaton and Edward F. Cline. It is obviously a ‘Keaton’ film, partially because of his reoccurring and unchanging comedy role in all of his films, but also through the realistic themes that are subverted by physical comedy.
What do you think the filmmakers wanted to say? Does the film attempt to convey a message or ideology?
The film conveys a message about femininity and masculinity; possibly subverting these gender expectations at the start with Keatons more typically feminine household role and his roommates more typically masculine. There is definately a theme of Keaton’s films mocking or playing into gender roles.
Do the filmmakers use any interesting techniques to convey information to the audience? Are the key elements of film form innovative or particularly effective? Does the film have a distinct aesthetic?
The most particularly effective visual element in this film was the table setting contraption, showing how even the mise en scene was used to build up the comedy element of the film and how Keaton was willing to do anything for a laugh in his films. The aesthetic is giving American Dream.
Does the film hold a significant place in film history? How does the film reflect the social, cultural, historical, and political context in which it was produced and exhibited? How is the film representative of the institutions and technologies that made it?
The film was distributed by Metro Pictures like many of Keaton’s shorts. It also comedically represents the ideals of the American Dream on the lives of working class Americans at that time.
How does Keaton create humour in the film? Think about situations (plot) as well as techniques (including the key elements of film form and aetheitcs).
Keaton uses a mix of extremely complicated set ups to create humour such as the strings attached to the cieling that set the table and swung beers out of the fridge, but then reverts back to the more slapstick comedy of pretending to be a scarecrow and kicking someone when they’re not looking. These contrasts really add to the unexpectedness of the film, and definitely make it more watchable even to a modern audience.
What was your personal reaction to the film? Do you think your reaction is typical of most spectators? Which sequences were particularly effective or enjoyable?
I really enjoyed this short; more than one week. It was simple and funny and half of the film was Keaton being chased by a rabid dog and accidentally losing his clothing. Classic.