User Reviews (30)

Add a Review

  • I'd have to rate this as slightly above-average Keaton fare. It shows Buster trying to romance the girl away from Wallace Beery, and what would have transpired if the story had taken place in (1) the Stone Age; (2) The Roman Age, and (3) The Modern Age.

    I liked them in that order, too, with more laughs with the older periods of time, although I laughed at the hardest at a couple of segments in the Roman Age. My favorite was the chariot race held in the sand. That had a number of clever things in the segment. The brief bit with the lion was funny, too, sort of a parody of the Biblical story of Daniel in the lion's den.

    They were smart only going five minutes or so with each age and then going back with the story each time. Each "age" had four or five segments in total.

    Nothing hilarious but definitely worth your time if you are checking out silent film comedies
  • Spondonman29 April 2006
    First time of seeing Buster Keaton's first feature film and I have to admit I liked it a lot and only wish I'd stumbled across it years ago. The Rohauer blurb at the start warns that the Three Ages single nitrate print was rediscovered and salvaged in 1954 just in time before combustion, and many frames that seemed hopelessly glued together were separated. So, it's rocky viewing in places, but I've seen and survived much worse.

    It would have been OK as the 3 short films but as a take on Intolerance it's inventive and funny from the start to the finish: In the Stone Age with baddie Wallace Beery riding an elephant and goodie Buster riding a pet brontosaurus; In the Roman Age Buster riding a chariot with wheel locks and adapted for sledging, No Parking signs in Latin; In this technological Age of Speed Need and Greed his car beautifully falls to bits at the first hump. Both him and Beery are after the Girl through the ages, a never ending tussle. Favourite bit: As the caveman he gets knocked backward over a cliff edge but still blows a kiss to the camera - an amazing second or two!

    Great stuff, reaffirming my love of silent film comedy.
  • Buster presents love stories from three periods in history - the Stone Age, the Roman Age, and the Modern Age. In each, he vies for the affection of a young woman with another man, thus illustrating that emotions like love and jealousy have been constant for time immemorial, a contrast to what D. W. Griffith was trying to highlight in Intolerance, which Buster was parodying.

    While the three stories are interleaved together, it's notable that at a 63 minute runtime, this is essentially three two-reel shorts put together. As Keaton put it, "Cut the film apart and then splice up the three periods, each one separately, and you will have three complete two-reel films."

    The Stone Age story has lots of gags that The Flintstones would later borrow, such as prehistoric golfing, taking dictation by chiseling into a stone, and presenting a business card comprised of a small slab of rock with a crude likeness drawn on it. Buster standing atop a dinosaur, despite the bad science and primitive stop-motion effects, made me smile. The best moment, however, was when he tries to arouse jealousy in his beloved by attempting to grab another woman by the hair and take charge of her, only to find she's at least a foot taller than him. She knocks him off the rock and we get that marvelous shot of him look up into the camera on the way down to a pond below, kissing his fingers before spreading his arms wide.

    The Roman Age story has a lot of the same types of visual gags, like a wristwatch made with a sundial, Buster playing an impromptu game of craps with dice with Roman numerals on the sides, and him pulling his chariot up to a "No parking" sign in Latin (naturally, mistranslating Non Postum Exit). The best gag was when he engages in a chariot race in the hippodrome using one pulled by dogs. When one starts slowing down, he replaces it like a spare tire with another that's stashed in his trunk, which was hilarious.

    The Modern Age of "speed, need, and greed" features some amusing moments on the gridiron, like Buster being propped up by an opponent so he can be knocked down each play, and handing the ball off when he's about to be creamed on a punt return. There's also a clever getaway shot from above where he goes through one taxi to another faced in the opposite direction, and when the two cabs drive off, his pursuers think he's in the first. Nothing tops that extraordinary leap from one building to another, however, where Buster missed the jump in real life. While there was a safety net 35 feet below him, he hit it hard and awkwardly enough that he injured his knees, hips, and elbows, and had to stay in bed for several days afterwards. How he then improvised the awnings and slid into the fire department was brilliant, and "the biggest laughing sequence in the picture...because I missed it in the original trick," as he put it.

    Overall the film wasn't helped by being so drawn out as the pace of the jokes probably could have been faster, but there's a lot to like here. Pretty cute ending too.
  • "The Three Ages," Buster Keaton's first feature-length film after a number of comedy shorts, is his parody of Griffith's "Intolerance." Keaton tells three parallel stories about the perils of romance, one set in the Stone Age, one during the Roman Empire, and one during the 20th century.

    In the context of Keaton, I don't see "The Three Ages" given a lot of mention. This is a shame, since while it's not Keaton's finest work, it ranks with his funniest. In one scene, Buster falls into a pit with a lion. Afraid of getting eaten, he pampers the lion and gives it a manicure. What follows is one of the funniest visual gags I've ever seen.
  • MissSimonetta11 December 2012
    Warning: Spoilers
    The Three Ages is not Keaton's funniest or most innovative film. In fact, he plays it rather safe, like a swimmer putting his foot in the water before he makes a dive. Unlike his next film Our Hospitality (1923), this movie feels more like an extension of the collection of two reelers he made in the first three years of the 1920s.

    The film's structure is meant to lampoon that of DW Griffith's mammoth epic Intolerance (1916). The entire movie has three parallel stories showcasing Buster's attempts to win a young lady in three different periods: prehistory, the Roman empire, and the then modern day. In each period he does battle with Wallace Beery over the girl, whose parents always find Beery a worthier mate. In the end, Beery is always revealed as a brute and it's up to Buster to rescue the girl from his evil designs.

    Most of the gags in the prehistoric and Roman ages are anachronistic, such as IDs on stone tablets and a sun dial wristwatch. They're cute, but not terribly funny. There are still some good bits of slapstick though, such as a chariot race, Buster's unplanned fall from a roof, and some funny antics at a restaurant. The sets in the Roman age are marvelous too.

    The leading lady Margaret Leahy is adequate. She was a beauty contest winner originally meant to play a supporting role in Norma Talmadge's Within the Law (1923), however, her lack of acting ability caused Norma to push her onto her brother-in-law Keaton, since it was believed one did not need an acting ability to do well in a comedy. While she's not nearly as charming as someone like Sybil Seely or Kathryn McGuire, Leahy is all right, just a little wooden. She leaves no impression, but then again, the love interest role in most Keaton films is thankless anyway.

    All in all, this film is decent. This is without a doubt one of the lesser BK pictures, but it's still a cute romp.
  • Cineanalyst29 June 2006
    D.W. Griffith could have made any movie he wanted to after the enormous financial success of "The Birth of a Nation"; he chose to make the most technically ambitious film to that date, "Intolerance". He took a risk with such innovations in film montage and form, and the well-known financial train wreck resulted. Buster Keaton doesn't take that kind of a risk with "Three Ages", a parody of "Intolerance". This is Keaton's first feature-length film of his own (he only acted in "The Saphead"). He had the fallback plan of dividing the three episodes in this feature into three separate shorts, which Griffith did do with "Intolerance". Keaton didn't have to. Chaplin had already succeeded with feature-length comedies, so if Keaton was taking a risk here, it was completely calculated.

    Chaplin had already done a parody of another film, too, with "Burlesque on Carmen" (1915). Keaton appears to allude to that parody, as well. The wrestling scene in the Ancient Rome episode references the swordfight that turns into a wrestling match in Chaplin's burlesque. The comical distance from the plot of both scenes is the same, too. Furthermore, Chaplin's film imitated the glossy style of DeMille's "Carmen", and Chaplin's film seemed a tribute to that film. Keaton doesn't attempt the radical editing, narrative structure or monumental nature in his parody, but it seems respectful of "Intolerance" nonetheless. At least, the stories aren't told completely straightforward as in other "Intolerance"-inspired works, such as Dreyer's "Leaves from Satan's Book" (Blade af Satans bog, 1921) and Fritz Lang's "Destiny" (Der Müde Tod, 1921). There is some mild jumping back and forth between episodes.

    Where Keaton did take risks, however, is in his physical, daredevil comedy. That's Keaton unintentionally failing to jump across buildings in the modern episode. Reportedly, he was convinced to alter the scene rather than attempt the jump again. And, it wasn't just Keaton who took risks; the anachronistic baseball gag, for example, was rather dangerous. Thus, although in a different way, Keaton, like Griffith, took risks with his big film. And, I think they both succeeded.
  • For me, Keaton's decision to make a parody of Griffith's Intolerance so that if the feature (his first) failed he could re-edit and release it as three two-reelers is what diminishes the enjoyment for me. The film jumps back and forth between the three time periods, and so all of them seem to be over before they've really begun, and the film has something of a disjointed feel. Perhaps this is because the film does actually feel as if it is three two-reelers spliced together rather than an actual feature.

    The comedy is unevenly paced, but when it hits the mark it is near-perfect. Highlights include Keaton's drunken encounter with Wallace Beery, other diners, and a crab at a restaurant, and the jaw-dropping leap from one roof to another at what looks like hundreds of feet above the ground (apparently the buildings were short sets placed on a bridge overlooking a view of Los Angeles. Just as well, because Keaton failed to make the leap successfully and fell from the second building, a real-life mishap that remains in the film). Keaton slides through a window, across a room, down a pole (at this point we realise he is in a fire station although he doesn't) and lands on the back of a fire engine that returns him to the police station from which he has just escaped. The whole sequence is both side-splitting and astounding. The look on Keaton's face as he looks quizzically up at the pole he has just descended is priceless. Perhaps because of his status as a comic genius we tend to forget how good an actor Keaton was .

    I liked the modern sequence best, and had it been released as a short I believe it would be considered one of his classics. The caveman sequence is OK, but the Roman era story tends to drag.

    It's been well publicised that this was competition winner Margaret Leahy's only film because she was so untalented as an actress, and it's true she doesn't light any fires while on-screen. But the impact of her ineptitude in front of the camera is cleverly avoided by the likes of Keaton and Beery merely acting around her as if she were just another prop.

    Overall, this isn't one of Keaton's best - although that is probably because this is his first feature. Keaton himself thought it was just OK and, given his instinctive sense for what works, perhaps that should tell us all we need to know...
  • Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The Three Ages was Buster Keaton's first attempt at a full length comedy feature. The only similarities to Intolerance are the opening "book" scene and the fact that similar stories through the ages are edited together into a complete film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't succeed as a feature film, it could be reduced to three two-reelers. Fortunately, The Three Ages succeeds brilliantly as a comedy and contains some of the funniest routines I've seen in any of Keaton's film. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are simple boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the period satires are riotous and set the standard for future works by Mel Brooks and all films of this genre. However, I don't believe that anyone has ever topped this comedy. No one can play the lovable goof like Keaton and the stunts in this film are some of his best. In addition, Wallace Beery's appearance as Keaton's rival adds to this film's appeal. Anyone who thinks that comedy from the 1920's cannot be appreciated by modern audiences needs to see this movie.
  • ionelx15 October 2006
    Although the movie is clearly dated, audiences can still easily identify with the plight of hapless Buster in this timeless and very funny underdog tale. Buster fights against unkindly odds in three different ages: the Stone Age, The Roman Age, and the Moden Age, playing almost the same character with just a change of scenery to help us identify the different "ages". In this movie we see one of the earliest comedic depictions of the "caveman" stereotype, who wins his love not by romance but by brute force, as well as a funny twist on Roman gladiatorial combat, two comedic sketches that long predate such spoofs as Mel Brooks' "History of the World: Part I". The underlying theme of the movie is simple yet convincing: Although the times may have-a-changed, we still face the same struggles even in modern times that we fought in prehistoric times in order to "win the girl" (keep in mind this is the theme of 1923 America, a time when chauvinism was still en vogue). It is interesting to look at this movie over eighty years later, and consider how dramatically things have changed from this movie's "modern times" to now.
  • SnoopyStyle18 March 2021
    Buster Keaton has his misadventures in three time periods; the Stone Age, the Roman Age, and the Modern Age. Love is the constant and so is the competition for it.

    Buster has some good gag. The funniest sight gag has to be the chariot. The big high-rise fall is darn good. It's a little slow at times. I would rather have each time period be grouped together. This would become 3 twenty minute shorts and the stories would flow easier. This is an interesting Keaton movie and his first 'full length' movie. He has better ones later on.
  • Rodrigo_Amaro27 September 2012
    Don't get me wrong, Buster Keaton fans. Although I do love "The General" considered one of the greatest comedies of all time, I find "Three Ages" far more dynamic, funny, interesting and way better than 1926's classic.

    Keaton's target here is love and its definition in a humored and simple presentation. He takes us through three different eras in history to show the challenges a romantic man (all played by Buster) has to go through while fighting for the woman of his dreams (Margaret Leahy), the one he truly loves. The story of love is presented in a Pre-Historic period, then at the Roman Empire and last in the present day at the time of the movie's release, 1920's. It's the same issue presented again and again, just the problems that vary a little. Love, l'amour, amor: all we need in times of need, greed and speed. It was the goal back at millions of years ago, still is in our current time and always will be in future times.

    I admire "Three Ages" for its intelligence, a movie that directly or indirectly was the source of inspiration of many posterior films, successful or not. This is like Bill Forsyth's "Being Human" but with humor; and just like "History of the World - Part I" but only about love's evolution. Can we say that the famous feud between McFly and Tannen through three different periods are somewhat similar than this film? Yes, I think so. Keaton fights against Wallace Beery in all the historic periods just like Michael J. Fox will deal with Thomas F. Wilson in 1955, 1985 and 2015 in Zemeckis classic.

    Forget all this conjectures; let us focus on the content. It's funny and gets funnier by the minute. Hilarious moments that can be found here are the priceless chariot race where Keaton uses of his geniality to win the race; his "friendship" with a lion that was supposed to eat him; the amazing stunts he pulls in the final moments of the last segment jumping between buildings; his fighting schemes to defeat his cavemen enemies. Everything is so well made that is impossible not feel something with it. And there's a good and amusing discussion of what love really is and how its concept changes just a little with time and evolution (the very last moment explains it all).

    Gotta love this funny and precious gem. 10/10
  • Have always had great admiration for Buster Keaton, one of the funniest, boldest and most important comedy geniuses of his time and to exist. His best work was hilarious, and not only is there very few people in comedy at the time and since as jaw-droppingly daring but he was one of not many, and possibly the best at it, to make deadpan work. There really were few people like him before, during and since, despite loving comedy of all decades and most kinds of styles Keaton was a true original.

    'Three Ages' was his first full length feature film, after making a lot of short films previously. It is worth seeing and certainly not bad for first full length feature, it's amusing and cute. He did though go on to much better things, and even consider many of his short films better, where his comedy became funnier and bolder with crisper timing and the production values were more refined. Inexperience in making full length features did show at times.

    Although this can be said for much of Keaton's work, the story is best forgotten as there is not an awful lot of one. Did think that there was a slight "three short films in one feature film" feel somewhat, though linked together by the same premise, but that's probably just me.

    Margaret Leahy is a pretty inept leading lady in an admittedly thankless role, at this point of his career Keaton seldom had a leading lady this wooden. Most of the gags do work and there are many of them, but some of the prehistoric gags (the accidental backward fall being one of the exceptions) are slightly corny.

    Such a lot works. It looks good, the Roman Age is especially well rendered. As said, most of the humour is very funny indeed and timed well in all the three ages (even if not everything in the prehistoric period works completely). While the modern age is vintage early Keaton, though safer, a few of the best moments are in the Roman Age. The highlight of the film for me also being in that age, that being the chariot race.

    It's not all just funny. 'Three Ages' also struck me as very cute and charming, with Keaton's antics and fighting for love being very endearing as well as entertaining. Keaton wasn't nicknamed "The Great Stone Face" for nothing, deadpan is not an easy way of acting to nail but Keaton was a master of this because he made it amusing and nuanced. Wallace Beery is a suitably boistrous rival and their rivalry is fun to watch.

    Overall, Keaton did much better but this was a nice watch. 7/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Three Ages is Keaton's first feature, showing the same storyline of two men clashing over a woman, repeated across three different ages: Stone Age, Roman Age, and Modern Age (1920's). The SA strongest is equivalent to the RA highest ranking to the MA largest bank account. A club fight becomes a chariot race becomes a football game. The theme is to show that while lifestyle has changed, loves challenges have not. It is also a satire of Griffith's 'Intolerance', which has similar themes and editing style, and is interesting to see how two completely different personalities tackle similar subject matter. In this instance I prefer Keaton's humorous charm to Griffith's pretentious melodrama, though it is far from his best work.

    My favourite parts were the opening set up, the RA chariot race and the MA football game. In the latter he finds the absurdity in physically bruising sports, while in the former he creates absurdity by holding the contest in a snowy arena. Other highlights are the small moments along the way, like his SA 'identity card' being a crude rock drawing, and the leap between two buildings gone wrong. The latter is a strong case for Busters spontaneous improvisation, the suppressing of which by major studios MGM in the 30's would be a large factor in his downfall as an artist. He actually missed his mark on the stunt, but instead of simply re-doing the take, used it as a catalyst for a better sequence. Lowlights are the MA restaurant scene (Chaplin did restaurants far better in 'City Lights' and 'The Immigrant') and the over reliance on silly violence. The general repetitiveness of scenes also tires whenever his humour is at its least inspiring, which is about half of it.

    It pales in comparison to his best work, but has its moments and is worth a look for Keaton fans.
  • This is a pleasant and funny combination of slapstick and satire, period humor and romantic comedy. It does not have quite the number of sustained chase/stunt sequences as in most of Keaton's features, but instead there are a lot of fine subtle gags of all different kinds.

    In each of the "Three Ages", Buster and Wallace Beery vie for the affections of the same woman, with amusing and unpredictable results. The simple romantic triangle theme sets up a lot of good material, on the one hand lending itself to a lot of gags about the unchanging nature of romantic courtship, and on the other hand being used for a lot of deliberate anachronisms that are often extremely funny. Beery makes a nice foil for Keaton, and the girl's parents also have some good moments.

    This one usually gets lost in the crowd among so many brilliant Keaton masterpieces, but it works very well and is definitely worth seeing for any fan of silent comedy.
  • slokes9 August 2013
    A fine collection of silent-comedy gags that never quite coheres, "Three Ages" stands up best today as Buster Keaton's earliest statement of purpose as he ventured into feature-length films, working more here as a parodist than inventive storyteller, but still good for more than a laugh.

    "Love is the unchanging axis on which the World revolves," reads the title card at the beginning of this back-and-forth story of how a dogged dreamer (Keaton) and a bullying opportunist (Wallace Beery) vie for the love of a pretty woman (Margaret Leahy) across three different eras: Stone Age, Roman Age, and the time when the film was made, the Roaring Twenties.

    The story behind the film was that Buster, who produced and co-directed this with his regular collaborator Eddie Cline, was hedging his bets. He made three twenty-minute stories with the idea he could always release them as separate shorts if the feature idea didn't pan out. The problem with this is the high bar set by other Buster shorts, like "The High Sign" and "The Scarecrow." Only the '20s section contains material you'd expect from such a master. The Roman section has a funny scene with a lion which is nevertheless underdeveloped, while the caveman stuff is a subtle as a club in the head.

    Despite the unevenness of the feature, you kind of need the three sections running together for their context. Like how Joe Roberts as the girl's father is the heavy in the first two sections, but a meek servant of his stern wife's will in the modern-day story. Or how a Ben-Hur style chariot race devolves into a football scrimmage when we move along in time.

    The 1920s section is, like I said, the best part here. While the historical-period stuff may be parodying D. W. Griffith's "Intolerance," I get the feeling Buster here is playing off the work of fellow screen clown Harold Lloyd, whose never-say-die gumption Buster mimics to nearly tragic effect. Like Lloyd, Buster just won't quit. One attempted building-leap stunt, which actually went wrong in filming but was kept, works in retrospect because it's the sort of thing you always expected would happen to Lloyd, but never did, at least when the cameras were rolling.

    I also love Buster's five-minute drunk act in a restaurant, which includes some funny Prohibition humor. A woman sitting next to Buster starts to fix her make-up, so Buster whips out some shaving cream right there and joins her. Buster unknowingly orders crab, then freaks when the boiled crustacean is brought to his table.

    The other segments work just well enough as excuses for gags, even when the gags are somewhat thin in places. Leahy's a bit of a lump as the leading lady; apparently her career after this wasn't much more than Buster's other leading lady Brown Eyes from "Go West" enjoyed. Leahy does sell one good joke, her final scene in the Stone Age sequence. Beery's a bit too heavy for this role; one wishes Roberts had been given the job instead.

    Overall, I like the film; it's funny in an unassuming way, and better than many other history spoofs of more recent vintage. Still, "Three Ages" is best viewed today as a placeholder for much better Buster work to come.
  • Technically, Buster Keaton's first written, directed and acting feature film was his earlier September 1923's "Three Ages." Buster, however, was unsure his idea of spotlighting history's different take on a love story, segmented into The Stone Age, Ancient Rome and the present day, would fly with the public. He and Metro Pictures were prepared to break the three segments into short films if the previews were negative. Judging from audiences reactions, however, the studio decided to keep "Three Ages" as one motion picture, becoming unofficially Keaton's first feature film.

    Throughout the three segments, Keaton attempts to woe the Girl (Margaret Leahy) while his archival, the Villain (Wallace Beery) seems to have the inside track towards her in all three eras. The film's main appeal is to show present day devices used in the past, such as Buster's calling card made out of a thick slab of rock in the Stone Age.

    Although Buster's physicality is subdued in "Three Ages," one stunt captured on film that went wrong was his leap from one building's rooftop to another. His jump from a board fell short, and he smashed into the next building's facade, before falling into the net below. He was out three days recuperating, but he gladly discovered his cameramen took his advice to never stop recording no matter what went wrong. He designed retaining the bumbling footage to add his signature fall by slamming through three awnings before grabbing a downspout, flinging into the upper floor of a firehouse before sliding down the fire pole to conclude the jaw dropping stunt.

    "Three Ages" was also the first to film the just opened Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. Buster used the stadium's east portico as a backdrop when his character courts his girlfriend at her home.
  • The film's plot is simple: it's about a man's love for a woman, and the lengths he would go to in order to win her over.

    'Three Ages' tells the same story in different time periods: The Stone Age. The Roman Age. The Modern Age. These three ages intercut as the heroin, The Boy (Buster Keaton), tries to win the lady's hand. The Modern Age is described as "The age of speed, need and greed". Indeed so; even more true today than 100 years ago!

    The events of the Stone Age are simple and straight forward, while the Roman Age is the most opulent, detailed and exquisite. The Roman Age segments also has the most impressive production design. The Modern Age is a world filled with brick buildings all looking the same, and people having less time for one another, seemingly always in a hurry.

    The chariot race during the Roman Age is absolutely awesome, and had me crying with laughter. The Lion during the Roman Age was one of the funniest things I've seen in a while. It truly is laugh-out-loud funny! The Boy's antics during the Modern Age were also hilarious! There's a fair amount of satire here, if you're able to spot it. Oh, and you gotta love the ending!!!

    Buster Keaton is famous for his incredible stunt work, and he once again does not disappoint. There are stunts that literally made my jaw drop. How on Earth did he accomplish these stunts back in 1923?? I absolutely love Buster Keaton's work. He was a phenomenal entertainer and in my opinion the best actor and stuntman of his time. Some of the stunts in this film has to be seen to be believed!
  • This is a cleaver film featuring love through the ages. The film consists of Keaton seeking out a lady love in the stone age, in ancient Rome and in the present (1920s). In all three cases, he is the usual wimpy Buster and he battles against Wallace Beery for his lady love. Of the three time periods, I think I liked the Roman one best even though I admit it might have also been the cheesiest. I actually liked the scenes with the lion that was obviously a guy in a costume as well as the weird chariot race in the snow--but what I really enjoyed the most was seeing all of Keaton's amazing acrobatics. However, all three time periods were good old fashioned fun and the film, while not his best, is still an exceptional and enjoyable film. Check it out!
  • I don't think you can intellectualize something like Three Ages too strenuously, as you either find it funny or you don't (or maybe to the degree not as much as Steamboat Bill Jr or The General, which is like saying Lou Gherrig's one home run early in his ballplayers time didn't match his other home run from when he was at his peak). Three Ages takes mild inspiration from Intolerance, only instead of showing us stories spanning millennia on how human beings come together and come apart on an epic scale this is more about Buster's frustrations over not getting laid, which is a noble goal for a movie to have. It features him making an entrance on a dinosaur in the Stone Age (hell yes), he is challenged to a chariot race and only manages to get dogs instead of horses, but my lord what he does with that cat (easily my biggest laugh of the movie), and in modern times he plays football and has to make a desperate phone call that leads to one of Buster's most thrilling and dangerous stunts.

    It's largely silly and placing more emphasis than other Buster films I've seen on going for straight slapstick, which is far from a negative thing when its a modern master doing it all, and it features things like the (I'm not kidding) Wizard with a pointy hat in the Roman segment dispensing advice to Buster, and then when our struggling hero finds himself in a prison cell with a lion in place of doing the Pulling a Thorn from the Paw trick (a title card tells us he vaguely remembered it from somewhere and don't we all), he instead gives the lion ah uh manicure and a paw massage (!) There's plenty of fun and funny stuff here, and if it's a little slack when it comes to things like a more original story or characters or more amazing stunts - and clearly this was set up in case he needed three shorts instead of a feature - it manages to be funny on a fairly consistent level.

    As Buster Keaton's first (co-directed) feature as an Independent, it's a silly goose with heart - and a nice ending for all three versions of the hero.
  • This movie is really funny!! The General is Keaton's finest work but there are many of his works that are more hilarious - in this one are multiple sight gags and creative humor. We watch it over and over and it only seems to get funnier!
  • In this silly Buster Keaton comedy, three stories are interwoven with the premise-and title card-that love is eternal and hasn't changed throughout the years. First, in the caveman days, Buster is in love with Margaret Leahy, but rival caveman Wallace Beery tries to win her affections. Next, in Roman gladiator times, Buster falls for Margaret again, and wealthy Roman Wallace tries to best him. And finally, in present day 1923, all three are involved in a similar love triangle. Instead of three separate vignettes, scenes are separated and cut together to show that nothing changes through the centuries. For example, when Wallace challenges Buster to a duel, they first fight with clubs, then by racing chariots, then by playing in a football game.

    This might not be the best movie to watch if you've never seen Buster Keaton or if you've only seen a handful of silent movies, since it's a little silly, but if you're a fan of the leading man it's worth watching. This is the first feature length film he co-directed, -wrote, and -produced! There's lots of attention to detail in this movie, showing that he had a great passion for the film and wanted every moment of it to be entertaining for audiences. Buster was never a lazy director, writer, or performer. In the caveman section, Buster visits a soothsayer to find out if his true love returns his feelings: an old crone holds onto a turtle and lets it crawl to an answer, like a Ouija board. In the Roman section, Buster looks at his watch to check the time; a closeup reveals a miniature sundial strapped to his wrist. If you like tongue-in-cheek humor, you'll find tons of it in Three Ages.
  • tedg8 December 2006
    The more time I spend with old films, the more of a giant I see Keaton to be. I'm beginning to think that we all need to see a lot of him, which is why I wandered into this. It seems to have been made only because they had access to a Roman set.

    The setup is that a courtship story is presented in three eras: a cave-man setup, a Roman context and a modern one. All are based on film notions of those eras of course. Unlike most movie humor of the time, the joke here isn't in embellishing the story with humorous decoration. Its in the difference among the stories.

    Its a clever piece of what I call folding, and you will see at least one scene here that I swear is quoted in "Rashomon."

    So there's the idea of the thing, which is worthwhile, but now I've explained it, you hardly have to see it. The jokes are trite. But there is one scene that I recall over and over. I think Keaton did it elsewhere and several others too, but here it is the best.

    He's driving a car, a rickety one to his girl's house. (This is in the modern setting, obviously.) He hits a bump and the car falls to pieces. And I just don't mean the wheels fall off, the car quite literally disassembles into the parts that went into the factory and there he sits among hundreds of items. I have no idea how he did this. The car really is moving as a car, and then in an instant it is in pieces.

    Wonderful.

    Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
  • As is well-known among long haired youngsters who are incredibly interested in this Herr Graf's silent rants, during summertime aristocrats like to travel to exclusive and distinguished places in order to avoid the heat as well hordes of coarse people taking their ease. Such bizarre travels around the world also happen in "Three Ages", a charming and elegant piece of silent work directed by old hands, namely Herr Buster Keaton and Herr Eddie Cline.

    Obviously this German count liked most the first segment focused on the Stone Age due to the affinity that this aristocrat feels about that ancient time. preferring that to the second segment which takes place during the glory of Rome (It should have included the cause of the fall of the Roman empire, that is to say, Barbarians, or the same thing, Germans). Of course, the third segment takes place during modern times but this Teutonic aristocrat thinks that even 100 years ago should qualify as modern.

    The leitmotiv that moves Herr Keaton and his companions to travel and endure the strange and hilarious happenings during three different ages, is the search for love, a very complicated subject to understand for aristocrats who prefer the search for money and self interest. Every time that "Three Ages" is shown in the Schloss theatre, it is always a pleasure to watch a funny, witty silent film (even for a serious German count), an oeuvre full of gags and gadgets, puns, pratfalls and acrobatics, visual and astounding technical tricks, an absolute silent delicatessen that is perfect to allow one to endure the various and coarse summertime severities.

    And now, if you'll allow me, I must temporarily take my leave because this German Count must flirt with an old Teutonic heiress who doesn't look her age.

    Herr Graf Ferdinand Von Galitzien http://ferdinandvongalitzien.blogspot.com/
  • Buster Keaton was finding his feature length voice in "Three Ages." There are some fine sequences, but it doesn't quite hang together. The "chariot race" in "Three Ages" is hilarious. Included are 2 shorts, one of which, "The Goat," is excellent.
  • There are some things we know well to expect from a Buster Keaton film. 'The three ages,' if distinct from his other pictures in its structure and particulars of content, nonetheless bears the same qualities. The humor is built on sight gags, physical comedy, situational humor, and upended expectations. With the narrative split into tableaus of The Stone Age and the Roman Empire, in addition to "modern" 1920s culture, there are also anachronisms employed to lend to the amusement. Rarely "laugh out loud" funny, the movie is entertaining all the same, as Keaton unfailingly achieved throughout his career.

    The film surprises with some unexpected (if crude) stop motion animation, and instances of sharp camerawork that feels advanced for 1923. Set design and costume design is pretty outstanding - not so much for the Stone Age, perhaps, but certainly for the Modern Era, and above all for the Roman Empire. As 'The three ages' intones in a brief prologue, the feature is a cheeky examination of the constancy of love and courtship across time. As such, while details differ from one tableau to the next, the narrative is largely the same in each, and we get three different variations of the same themes. With that in mind, scenes are written very well, sufficiently distinguishable as to paint over the broad strokes of similarity. Everyone in the cast does a great job of realizing their trio of characters with all due exaggerated body language and facial expression, and earnest communication of emotion.

    Even compared to Keaton's other short films and full-length features, 'The three ages' feels extra silly, and absurd to the point of straining credulity. Yet in all fairness, there is no intent or pretense otherwise, and the movie only ever aims for over the top fun. With a few especially endearing moments along the way, the picture certainly succeeds to that end. It's surely not as strong as many of Keaton's other classics, and arguably less engaging than other titles with a single plotline but worth checking out all the same if one has the opportunity.
An error has occured. Please try again.