Three Eras
Every filmmaking career has to start somewhere and usually in a fight against low budgets, tight timelines and a general lack of resources. At best its where their talent makes itself known, breaking through all barriers the way Kevin Smith’s Clerks turned its single location and limited cast into an asset to focus a laser on his ear for dialogue and Darren Aranofsky proved his visual acuity in Pi. It also shows where limitations lie and whether or not a filmmaker needs more seasoning for their own breakthrough.
Three Eras has the double whammy of attempting to be some sort of spiritual successor to Buster Keaton’s seminal masterpiece, casting his particular brand of comedic genius across three different stories accentuating humanities weaknesses which keep repeating themselves until they don’t. Mark & Jay Meyers are not geniuses; which is not a knock, by definition there aren’t many of them. But, intentional or otherwise, following in the fooststeps of genius invites comparison.
Even if that weren’t the case, Era’s limitations would be obvious immediately from its small cast, handful of locations and reliance on repetition. Each eras’ man has one defining feature repeated ad nauseam just to make sure it sinks in, be it pre-historic real estate developer or western entrepreneur/teacher, and the same handful of townsfolk to stymie them. It takes a film already limited in options and limits it in scope.
This was not a problem for the original version which had its own limit to fight against – a lack of sound – but turned that limit into a strength (the sign of real skill). Without needing to bother with dialogue, Keaton gave up on deep investigation of his theme in lieu of generalization using the conceit to set up his patented physical comedy and a light dusting of gentle humanity.
The Meyers version is much more specifically focused on the ills of capitalism and how greed for wealth and possessions leads men to generally immoral behavior. And not just specifically but overtly focused, cutting periodically to a bearded God figure who explains the immorality of human behavior and what it leads to in case there is any confusion about what is happening. This is not the best setup for lighthearted storytelling but far too short for a heavier dramatic bent. But a its anthology format and brief interludes do not offer the time or focus needed to build a deeper tone or fid the complexity in its tone. It also doesn’t do much for comedy which wouldn’t matter if it wasn’t occasionally trying to be funny.
There are definitely good ideas in Three Eras and there are worse sins in filmmaking than taking inspiration from an old master. But it needs more than inspiration, it needs understanding. These kinds of early films need to hide their weaknesses and accentuate their strengths at a core conceptual level because there is no production razzle dazzle to take up that slack. That’s the kind of thing that can only be learned with experience and it will be interesting to see where the Meyers go from there but right now everything is undercooked.