Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

cocoqwer t1_j6g203w wrote

Al St. John looks like a time traveling, photo-bombing hipster.

321

onthenerdyside t1_j6gzgy3 wrote

He looks like he's from a mid-2000s stoner comedy.

50

clce t1_j6jtnsn wrote

Exactly. Almost looks like that guy who was the smart intellectual type in dazed and confused. I've seen him in other stuff and he always kind of plays that hipster intellectual

1

L0st_in_the_Stars OP t1_j6g2yen wrote

He does. St. John was a nephew of Arbuckle. He became a versatile comic actor. In his later career, he often played an irascible sidekick in Westerns.

29

ItzNuckinFutz t1_j6g3e3r wrote

In this picture Buster Keaton looks like a ventriloquist dummy.

262

idickbutts t1_j6hdoop wrote

I'm over here thinking "is nobody going to talk about the eyes?"

168

Snorechanter t1_j6hsa4o wrote

Arbuckle looks like he has cat/lizard eyes.

68

ShutUp_Dee t1_j6hw5ut wrote

He’s going for gasps.

37

drtoboggon t1_j6jhr5n wrote

After his third time in court for the same crime, St John said to Arbuckle; “I think the rape trial went really well”.

Arbuckle: “guys I’m here, I’m up here”

4

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i4uly wrote

Guyliner. It's dark/black eye makeup around light eyes in sunlight, which is creating a weird effect. In silent films of this era, it was VERY common to still employ "heavy stage makeup" techniques because the camera/film quality was so low that features and facial expressions were in serious danger of getting lost.

Check out Rudy Valentino's heavy guyliner (for example, "The Shiek," 1921) as an example.

Groucho Marx wore literal greasepaint as a mustache-- granted, it was partly for comic effect, but it's an example of heavy stage makeup making its way into the movies.

45

Axolotlist t1_j6iaepf wrote

Yeah, if I remember correctly, the main reason the movie industry concentrated in California, is because the early camera needed lots of light exposure, so they built their sets outside, with no roofs, to get use of free sunshine. In Hollywood, they could work all year round.

25

bremidon t1_j6ido0q wrote

That and they were *really* far away from a certain Edison who had a stranglehold on the technology.

36

turdferguson3891 t1_j6kzlj3 wrote

It wasn't distance so much as court jurisdiction. The west coast courts weren't as friendly to Edison. But even the studios that were part of Edison's patent trust started shooting in California during the winter pretty early on. Other places were tried like Florida (too tropical) but LA emerged as a go to pretty early on because of climate, varied geography (mountains, desert, ocean) and because LA was in a boom period at the time so it was growing large enough to have the resources to support the industry.

1

bremidon t1_j6lu66g wrote

>It wasn't distance so much as court jurisdiction.

Well yeah, these two things are tightly correlated. The further away from Edison and his influence, the more likely the courts were to not just defer to him.

Once the decision was made to move so far away, then the question was: where? And now all those things you mentioned start to play a role. It should be someplace sunny, with a decent amount of good, stable weather, with some infrastructure already in place.

1

turdferguson3891 t1_j6m6p8h wrote

But, like I said, companies that were part of Edison's patent trust were shooting in California early on and they didn't need to worry about his lawyers. NYC based Biograph joined Edison's trust in 1908. They first started filming in California in 1910. Chicago based Essanay was also in the trust and they opened studios in California in 1912 after a failed attempt shooting in Colorado.

The studios that weren't part of the trust saw some benefit in being in a different court jurisdiction but the fact that studios that were part of the trust also relocated around the same time would indicate that was not the biggest factor.

1

clce t1_j6jtgwk wrote

That makes sense. Of course, also just good weather, cheap land, and as I've heard, not too far from the Mexican border just in case they had to avoid lawsuit process service. That last might be a bit fanciful, but I kind of like it

2

turdferguson3891 t1_j6kwu0c wrote

As far as I've heard the proximity to Mexico thing is mostly a myth. In a 1910s car on 1910s roads I think it would have taken half a day to get to the border, if that were the motivation you'd just put the studio in San Diego.

1

clce t1_j6kxphs wrote

Yeah, that's probably true. Besides that, I don't think you can just avoid a whole lawsuit by slipping over the border. It's maybe a bit of a romance fantasy, maybe echoing the western trope of someone being pursued by the police and making it across the county line or more significantly across the Rio grande. I find it hard to imagine that back in the wild West, at sheriff posse or military contingent would simply let you go because you crossed the border. Much more likely they would hunt you down, string you up, and return your body and say they caught you just shy of the border. But it makes for a good movie scene

1

clce t1_j6jt8b2 wrote

Exactly right. Especially in silent film where you had to convey meaning, emotion, and humor with just your body, movements and especially facial expressions, you had to make sure that the audience, stage or film could pick up on your expressions

3

bucket_brigade t1_j6ia5uw wrote

The eyes? They all look like they are wearing someone elses face

14

Tiny-Lock9652 t1_j6l2ars wrote

It’s pancake makeup. Early film technology had a difficult time with facial details so makeup was applied very heavy to accentuate facial features. They look almost plastic.

2

Mohingan t1_j6g8hos wrote

Anyone know why Arbuckle’s eyes look like they’re black?

64

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i4zno wrote

(Copying my comment from another thread)

Guyliner. It's dark/black eye makeup around light eyes in sunlight, which is creating a weird effect. In silent films of this era, it was VERY common to still employ "heavy stage makeup" techniques because the camera/film quality was so low that features and facial expressions were in serious danger of getting lost.

Check out Rudy Valentino's heavy guyliner (for example, "The Shiek," 1921) as an example.

Groucho Marx wore literal greasepaint as a mustache-- granted, it was partly for comic effect, but it's an example of heavy stage makeup making its way into the movies.

18

halfghan24 t1_j6iw9ez wrote

Guyliner, also known as eyeliner

4

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6k53nw wrote

Generally speaking, I try not to ascribe genders to gender-neutral things (being transmasculine). But "guyliner" is just such a fun little expression to put on cis dudes.

2

lebofly t1_j6gjazr wrote

Is this AI generated?

43

sthef2020 t1_j6gn0zk wrote

No, just a casual photo of 3 sleep paralysis demons meeting up at the company picnic.

136

No_Video6728 t1_j6gs6o2 wrote

Give it a few years and Fatty wouldn't have anything to smile about either.

37

Mr_Rambone t1_j6h8gzd wrote

I recall reading that he crushed a women to death while having sex with her.

−12

No_Video6728 t1_j6h8xdn wrote

Actually, poor ol' Fatty was accused of rape and used a wine bottle in the worst way possible. Almost everyone today says he was innocent and he wasn't convicted back in the day. However, in public opinion, he was slaughtered and distorted his reputation. (Fun fact, the details of the rape is exactly the same as what Johnny Depp was accused of and no one believed her either. )

29

Mr_Rambone t1_j6h90bv wrote

Oh wow that is interesting. I had not really looked that much into it. I say it did kill his reputation. But notice with Johnny Depp everybody rallied around him.

2

No_Video6728 t1_j6h9f4m wrote

Yeah. I have a friend who is really into the history of Hollywood and he said the details were nearly the same. However, I don't really know. I should look more into it before parroting things. Apparently, when Fatty was accused of rape it was during a general backlash against the rise of Hollywood in entertainment. So, a lot of people were already talking about the 'sins' of the actors and how they got away with them because of their monied-up lawyers. So, he really didn't stand a chance.

12

Mr_Rambone t1_j6h9mog wrote

Oh wow that is insane. I am guessing that is career never recovered from. I had heard there was a thing about rise of Hollywood. From a article I read.

3

No_Video6728 t1_j6ha9p1 wrote

Yeah, I think he could only get film jobs playing a villainous brute and then faded out. I really should look it up.

2

Mr_Rambone t1_j6hagil wrote

Here a quote from Louise Brooks about his directing

"He made no attempt to direct this picture. He just sat in his director's chair like a dead man. He had been very nice and sweetly dead ever since the scandal that ruined his career. But it was such an amazing thing for me to come in to make this broken-down picture, and to find my director was the great Roscoe Arbuckle. Oh, I thought he was magnificent in films. He was a wonderful dancer—a wonderful ballroom dancer, in his heyday. It was like floating in the arms of a huge doughnut—really delightful."

14

manateeshmanatee t1_j6krkpx wrote

I’m sorry, but is that a real quote, or are you fucking with us? “…floating in the arms of a huge doughnut?” Nfw.

0

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i5c78 wrote

Instead of speculating wildly, look it up. ;) He could only direct, and under a pseudonym. After the false accusations (supported by the lies of a totally unreliable, likely bribed witness), his name was box office poison. He died from the stress.

6

No_Video6728 t1_j6ivl49 wrote

Nah. there is always someone on Reddit willing to look up something to prove you wrong. I'll leave the 'research' up to you guys.

0

Mr_Rambone t1_j6hadjd wrote

I searched it up a little bit. They said after everything happen. He was banned for around a year by the motion picture board. Eventually he would direct movies under his father name. Along with owning a restaurant

2

jeninchicago t1_j6ifbvq wrote

There’s a really good episode of the podcast You Must Remember This about Fatty Arbuckle. I’m pretty sure it’s in the Debunking Hollywood Babylon season.

8

Sufficient-Serve6078 t1_j6jxmx0 wrote

There have been several attempts at making a Fatty Arbuckle biopic. Chris Farley was in talks to make one at the time of his death as well as a later attempt by Rob Zombie and Louie Anderson being two that I can think of off the top of my head.

1

FallenFae t1_j6io2ev wrote

Except for the fact that she literally died from it after instead of just faking a bruise or two. I'm very much NOT a "believe all women" person but reading the details given and the aftermath, it seems likely that he did. I definitely think there were some embellishments on the narrative told, but I do think she either had an underlying condition, or she died of the bleeding caused by the rape.

−2

ellefleming t1_j6ieybj wrote

Allegedly used coke bottle to vaginally penetrate a young aspiring actress and it punctured her inner organs and she died from her infection. Ended Fatty's career forever.

1

clce t1_j6juog0 wrote

In regards to the appearance, it was makeup and their clothes also reveal that they were in the middle of filming. I can't say they were necessarily filming something together but Keaton in Arbuckle did work together and it seems they were either doing something together or on set together doing different things maybe. But these were not their normal clothes and this certainly wouldn't be how they would walk around in public. It's just heavy stage makeup. Without words you have to rely on your facial expressions and there weren't a lot of detailed close-ups to be had.. now Keaton was always a little bit odd looking. That's part of his humorous appeal. Especially when he started doing the deadpan no smiling.

Our buckle in normal appearance was actually very handsome and charismatic at least for someone carrying that much weight in their face. But he was quite handsome and charismatic in terms of public perception. The other guy I don't know but I don't imagine he always wore a beard. This was probably some kind of clown tramp makeup. It looks a lot like Emmett Kelly and his famous hobo clown look

9

PeterNippelstein t1_j6hg2f2 wrote

Guy on the right looking like the first man to take a dab

8

TrumpetSC2 t1_j6hgkqv wrote

Guys I’m freaking out. this picture is obviously demon shit and only a few ppl are commenting about it wtf

6

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i5g1c wrote

It's stage makeup for early cameras. Calm down.

7

TrumpetSC2 t1_j6jhdxx wrote

No the makeup is fine its just that (probably the camera is bad and old) the eyes look like those fake eyes from AI images its so weird looking.

3

[deleted] t1_j6jc7nc wrote

[deleted]

2

TrumpetSC2 t1_j6jh630 wrote

No like the eyeliner is fine, its like if u zoom in on the eyes it looks like that ai generated stuff where eyes come out wrong

3

Iggitron90 t1_j6ia7zw wrote

You might have an undiagnosed mental illness.

1

RepostSleuthBot t1_j6g0cbr wrote

Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 2 times.

First Seen Here on 2020-07-20 98.44% match. Last Seen Here on 2022-09-14 98.44% match

I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "10op8xu", "meme_template": null}) ]

View Search On repostsleuth.com

Scope: Reddit | Meme Filter: False | Target: 92% | Check Title: False | Max Age: None | Searched Images: 362,174,652 | Search Time: 0.54301s

5

[deleted] t1_j6hxac7 wrote

[removed]

5

Hooray4Metaphors t1_j6i0t1r wrote

Keaton and St. John both died at 70. Keaton was a couple years younger though.

7

[deleted] t1_j6i3i35 wrote

[removed]

5

bobbbb78 t1_j6jkczn wrote

Keaton was born in Kansas while his parents were on a vaudeville circuit. He never lived in Kansas

4

dj_swearengen t1_j6iazd3 wrote

I recently read “Camera Man” a biography about Keaton. It was very good, gave insight into his career and private life.

5

Super_Reference_7065 t1_j6ij5sk wrote

Am I the only one that thinks these fools look creepy af in this pic?

5

TrumpetSC2 t1_j6jje7w wrote

I’m with you, and so many people are saying “its just the makeup!” No its fucking not lol Im sure these guys in makeup is not a creepy sight. The creepy sight is the weird pixelation that happened to this image to make their eyes and mouths look like they are warped in evil ways lol.

1

RadioSupply t1_j6jblld wrote

Thank you for calling him Roscoe. That was his name, and he was a fine actor.

5

Machete_Jr t1_j6jq1th wrote

Guy on the right is plotting to steal Christmas

5

clce t1_j6jssxh wrote

This is great. Looks like a nerdy dress up guy, his popular frat boy brother and their film school cousin. But I love these old timers. Our buckle doesn't really get the recognition he deserves these days. Recently watched a short, about 20 minutes, of him with buster Keaton. Keaton was the waiter and Arbuckle was the cook. My God he was a brilliant physical actor, and the bits and stunts they created was a whole new level of genius. We tend to be very verbal and most appreciate comedians or funny scripts. But to think how a human can watch another human not say a word but tell a story and be so funny is just amazing

3

Laileena t1_j6hujab wrote

What’s wrong with their eyes?

2

TheUmgawa t1_j6hwo3c wrote

Film stock in 1918 wasn’t the most high-quality stuff, compared to the hyperfine grain stuff you get today, and shot selection at the time was still very limited, in that … it wasn’t exactly “Set the camera for a shot and let it roll for a couple of minutes,” like it was a decade and a half before, but we’re still three decades from the first movie that looks and is edited like a modern movie (that’s why Citizen Kane is so important), so most of the movie is done in medium shots, with close-ups used only sparingly.

As a result, you have to use a lot of makeup to make sure an actor’s facial feature don’t disappear into a blur on the film. It’s very similar to why stage actors wear similar makeup, because the person in the nosebleed seats doesn’t need to be able to see what color your eyes are, but he has to be able to see you have eyes.

4

clce t1_j6jvzv2 wrote

And more importantly, see how your eyes and face move. Especially with a silent film. Granted, a lot of it was broad physical comedy because it had to be. Arbuckle was amazingly agile for his bulk and an extremely talented physical actor. But he also relied a lot on his comic facial expressions. Keaton did not, drawing much of his comedy mainly from his having no expressions which is I guess why he is pretty much plain pancake looking like Mark Zuckerberg whereas Arbuckles make up is designed to show all of his expressions .

Arbuckle was quite charismatic looking and had very nice eyes and if I'm remembering right, would be able to draw great comedy out of using his eyes like the female film stars of the era, fluttering and other typically feminine use

2

cwonderful t1_j6jf7o7 wrote

A ventriloquist dummy, a flesh monster, and your friend from college walk into a bar...

2

Patrickfromamboy t1_j6otrfb wrote

The guy on the right looks like he was photoshopped in from the present day.

2

dualsplit t1_j6h2i8p wrote

Oh. My. God. Now I know why my kid’s new ish best friend looked familiar. He looks just like Fatty Arbuckle!!!!

1

clce t1_j6jvdh9 wrote

Wow. That's interesting

1

Sargent_Poopypants t1_j6hwng2 wrote

They're so pasty white they look like blood suckers

gif

1

Big-Pond t1_j6imdyl wrote

Wearing flat white make up for the screen you muppet

0

marklondon66 t1_j6jd3zl wrote

BABYLON PR handlers getting desperate.

1

edWORD27 t1_j6orb4j wrote

Fatty Arbuckle the original goth

1

citznfish t1_j6h2sgi wrote

Amazing how far Snapchat filters have come

0

ppw23 t1_j6mrxi1 wrote

I’ve only known Roscoe as Fatty Arbuckle. Pretty sure he was involved in a huge sexual scandal the studio tried to hide.

0

RebeccaC78 t1_j6gcka8 wrote

Arbuckle always looked creepy

−1

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6i5lho wrote

There is plenty of evidence that he was totally innocent of the charges. He looks "creepy" because he's wearing white pancake stage makeup with heavy eyeliner around light eyes.

4

clce t1_j6jv6k7 wrote

He actually had a rather handsome charismatic baby face. I think he would also be considered charismatic in general, but much of it was his appearance. I don't think he would have been mere as successful without that. But on the other hand, he was a true comic genius both in what he came up with, but also his sense of physical movement and timing. I think he is sadly and criminally underappreciated these days

2

Block_Me_Amadeus t1_j6k5jf7 wrote

I hadn't heard a lot about the actual case until I listened to a two hour deep dive podcast. He was absolutely unfairly accused and it was awful to waste his talent and his health.

0

clce t1_j6k5xik wrote

I read a lengthy article about it. I don't remember the details well enough but the impression I got was that he may well have been innocent. I see nothing else in his history that would make me think he was particularly predatory. But on the other hand, a lot of rich and powerful men back then did feel pretty entitled in regards to women and I can't have or couldn't have. But as I recall, there was one or two elements about his accusers that made it sound pretty suspect.

So all I can say is, if he were innocent, it is a real shame that he lost his career and we lost great entertainer

1

Relaxed_Osmosis t1_j6j1shu wrote

Arbuckle looks like that funny Scottish djent youtuber lad

−1

[deleted] t1_j6g5b21 wrote

[deleted]

−3

L0st_in_the_Stars OP t1_j6g6hsx wrote

You're repeating 100+ year old tabloid lies about him. The jury that found Arbuckle not guilty of manslaughter connected with the death of Virginia Rappe issued the following statement after the verdict:

"Acquittal is not enough for Roscoe Arbuckle. We feel that a great injustice has been done him. We feel also that it was only our plain duty to give him this exoneration, under the evidence, for there was not the slightest proof adduced to connect him in any way with the commission of a crime.

He was manly throughout the case, and told a straightforward story on the witness stand, which we all believed.

The happening at the hotel was an unfortunate affair for which Arbuckle, so the evidence shows, was in no way responsible.

We wish him success.…Roscoe Arbuckle is entirely innocent and free from all blame."

28

hipshotguppy t1_j6gvt8s wrote

He was found not guilty at the third trial where the last witness backed down from telling what Virginia Rappe had told her in the hospital, "Roscoe hurt me." There were originally five of these witnesses in the first trial but they all got paid off/convinced not to testify. Hollywood protected Arbuckle, because of course they had to, but he never worked there again.

−11

Front_Judge_5872 t1_j6gxokt wrote

Did you do some research? Are you sticking with that story? If “Hollywood” was protecting him it would have been during the first trial. If your story were true “Hollywood” would have written him off before a third trial.

10

Jacque_Kock t1_j6g6zeb wrote

He was a POS for beong wrongly accused of rape and the death of someone?

18

titus1531 t1_j6jhe41 wrote

The man in the middle raped a woman who later died because of the injuries she sustained.

−3

HappyHighwayman t1_j6imbg9 wrote

Didn’t fatty Arbuckle kill a woman while raping her?

−6

diggemsmaccks t1_j6ito28 wrote

Arbuckle got in deep trouble with them eyes,,,, that poor young girl bless her soul

−6

LongjumpingCheck2638 t1_j6hs5q7 wrote

All three were notorious douche bags once became popular especially with women.

−8