Charlie Chaplin: C/D

i've never seen a fatty arbuckle flick, though - which ones are worth checking out?

keaton (but its still really, in a lot of ways, about pure phsicality (sp) and hes so sad too)
mabel normand (the funniest of the sennet workers, and she directed too)
harold lloyd
laurel and hardy
arbuckle (though i still dont find fattie jokes funny)

i find myself more easily moved to tears by chaplin then laughter)

i think the ending of 'city lights' is still pretty moving. i knew what it was before i saw it and i still kinda cried!

They never show Chaplin shorts on television anymore but I used to love him when I was a nipper

If his films don't work on you, fine, but I get irritated when people evaluate him on the same plane as other comics/filmmakers. HE ORIGINATED STUFF.

The reason the earlier Mack Sennett stuff tends to play better to modern audiences is that he hadn't developed the pathetic elements so much in the early stuff. When he stumbled onto that formula, it was like he'd struck oil. His audience lapped it up and begged for more. We don't.

i don't really fully understand the reverance that several generations of critics and filmmakers for chaplin, though. he was like a god to them, from renoir to bresson to (name famous filmmaker here). i mean, yeah, i've read what they had to say about chaplin so i appreciate the influence intellectually, but still his role as "*the* genius of the cinema" (a role he occupied until the 1960s or so?) is somewhat mystifying to me.

arbuckle was a fucking genius and most of his jokes aren't really fat jokes (there are a lot of dumb jokes too! and the fat jokes are usually pretty funny!)

And it's not really a matter of which "movies" you like, remember. All Chaplin movies are of a piece, just as all WC Fields movies are of a piece (always hating the kids, always drunk, ya know), and the Marx Borthers (always bilking the rich woman out of her fortune, always with the music numbers, ya know), etc. His physical comedy seems a little too WHOOPS! for me -- maybe it's that fast speed he liked because it made things "funnier" -- it's not funnier. It's more precious, that's all.

Precious! OMG that's the word. Chaplin is so fuckin' precious. Put him next to Groucho, and he'd be blown out of the room like a leaf in the breeze by the first snide barb.

kenan have you seen "the immigrant"? you should.

i thought it was the unfunny load of arse when i was 17

this is the second time youve attacked me though, Amatuer(ist) and i am not sure its warranted...and one of the times i wasnt even on the fucking thread--you and a few others just decided to take swings, i didnt know what i did to deserve it, kind of hurtz

can we talk more about mabel normand

>All Chaplin movies are of a piece, just as all WC Fields movies are of a piece ...and the Marx Borthers<

There's a big diff between Easy Street and Limelight, Duck Soup and The Big Store. Less variance in Fields' work, maybe cuz the prime of his film career was in his fifties and youthful exuberance was never part of his persona. Still, It's a Gift kicks Never Give a Sucker an Even Break's ass.

>[Chaplin's] physical comedy seems a little too WHOOPS! for me -- maybe it's that fast speed he liked because it made things "funnier" -- it's not funnier.<

SMS, you have likely seen prints or videos that were mastered at the wrong speed. (ie, makers of silent comedies didn't use beat-up film stock either)

Or maybe people just walked faster in the old days because they weren'
t used to the new technology like the automobile and the motion picture camera and they thought they had to walk faster to keep up with it.

I wonder how many of the Chaplin-bashing tossers have seen each waste of celluloid by Saturday Night Live alumni?

As far as Chaplin is concerned, it seems to me that it became received wisdom in the past few decades that the stoic lover of mature women Buster Keaton is vastly preferable to the schmaltzy cradle-robber Charlie Chaplin, so maybe it is time to redress the balance.

contemporary films are projected at 24fps. silent film speeds varied, but most chaplins should be projected around 16fps. of course for video it's a different issue--there are various ways of making a film appear to be run at the right speed in a video transfer (i think ntsc video is 25fps or something like that, i forget).

Was it mostly Europeans, tho? That would make sense -- his sensibility seems more European than any of his Hollywood contemporaries'. The whole sad-clown/trickster thing maybe resonates more with French and Italian ideas of commedia dell'arte than with broader and/or more deadpan American comedy (which could be why American viewers prefer the very American pacing and mayhem of the Sennett shorts). The most obvious Chaplin descendants I can think of are mostly European (Giulietta Masina, Jacques Tati).

There's hope for the world...my 12 year old loved City Lights and The Kid. He was blown away by Coogan too.

I've heard that Chaplin's book is extremely creative re provable facts.

yes, whatever the deal with Coogan (who Chaplin himself seems to have treated very well as far as I know), CC himself would have multiple reasons to get cancelled today - however this is an era which has DW Griffith doing his inexcusable thing and extras and stuntmen being regularly killed, Chaplin's films are definitely at the "less problematic" end of the scale.

One thing I love about The Kid is that it's an hour long, which is the seldom-used but correct length for a comedy film.

I wanted to do a poll: "Chaplin: Funny? Moving?" I found this thread instead, which was all the conversation I would have hoped for. (My answer is "neither", but I respect his work.)

The short films are funny. Morbz not around to agree with me :(

misogynist dickhead

He hated the police though! (See above)

these celebrity leftists always have a few good takes, that's how they get you

Why don't you fuck off and stop bringing everybody down, you miserable puritanical cunt?

in conclusion, Charlie Chaplin was a land of contrasts.

Mr. Fucking Predictable.

how come the most heated responses I provoke on here are consistently when I talk shit about abusers

You're like a bot or something.

thereotically if someone who wasn't me wanted to take shots at chaplin and other great men for their abuse would there be a place for them to do so here at all or is it just too much of a fucking buzzkill every time

That would be perfectly acceptable because I don't think anyone else here goes around inspecting threads for purity of thought like a beetle-browed John Knox clone.

I don't know Left, posting "misogynist dickhead" in ref to a man born in 1889 doesn't really scan as a concern with abuse/abusers, it's more like stating the absolutely obvious

*theoretically bc I remember this kind of thing is what soured my relationship with elements of the forum in the first place, of course I pushed back and was less inclined to be friendly on other subjects after that. my posts are a lot milder than they could be here but mods ban me again if you want idc xps

if it's so obvious why is it so enraging for someone to take issue with and why are we still worshipping great men

I wonder if he's the most problematic person born in 1889?

Yes, none of us had ever heard about Chaplin's life until you showed up in the thread to school us, thank you for that. But still we worship him, cargo cult style, oh noes.

look you could (have) just continue(d) discussing his work and just ignore(d) my comments

charlie craplin

I'm happy to leave it at "The short films are funny" tbh.

look you could (have) just continue(d) discussing his work and just ignore(d) my comments

you didn't write your comments for others to ignore, so coming from you this comment is totally disingenuous. you wanted to be noticed, deservedly got called miserable puritanical cunt, and you pretend it's none of your doing. fuck off with that noise.

eat shit

fuck men

eating shit may not be for everyone, i'll ask my doctor about it

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/simone-weil-slavery-capitalism-revolution-christ

"When Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times was released in 1936, Weil not only recognized its formidable artistic vision and philosophical import, but found herself, whole, in the story: the Little Tramp was her. The film, she realized, uncannily captured the experience of the modern factory worker who, instead of using the machines, was being used and abused by them—to the point of being eaten alive. The poor worker became a tool at the mercy of alien forces: the assembly line, the factory, the whole capitalist system. Weil loved the film, even though watching it brought her no comfort; what she saw on screen was a replay of her own anguish. Just like Chaplin’s Little Tramp, the factory turned her into a thing."

Dana Carvey shared this on FB (public post): https://fb.watch/nu2nxwahL6/?mibextid=NnVzG8

This is one of my favorite #SNL short films. The brilliant Robert Smigel ( Triumph the Insult Comic Dog ) wrote it - and recruited me to play #Chaplin. I thought its premise was inspired. And I never turn down an opportunity to play Chaplin. Unfortunately it never made it to air.
It played at dress rehearsal to crickets, live crickets, and we still maintain that a human audience might have liked it. Here now, for the first time, watch ‘Chaplin’ and, for the trazillionth time, enjoy the magic of #PhilHartman, #JonLovitz, and I.

The philistines didn't get the final joke!

Hilariously, it also reminds me of a story about Paul Simon on the set of One-Trick Pony. I've never seen the movie so I have no idea which scene this refers to, but when they shot the first take, Simon talks with a supporting player who has a line that draws an enormous laugh from everyone after they yell cut. Simon picks up on this, privately talks to the director who then goes over to the other actor and says, "we're going to do another take but this time we're giving your lines to Paul."

Anyone who's seen One-Trick Pony* probably couldn't tell you what scene that was.

*I've seen it twice and own the Warner Archive DVD-R.

eat shit

― Left, Saturday, 24 April 2021 bookmarkflaglink

fuck men

― Left, Saturday, 24 April 2021 bookmarkflaglink

Does this apply to Lennon and McCartney?

It's kind of wild to think SNL has been on long enough to go from that Chaplin sketch bombing in dress to that January Jones Rear Window sketch making the cut and airing in the first 1/3 of an ep 20 or so years later.

The original SNL did a whole parody of Fellini's La Dolce Vita - it's pretty crazy what kind of arthouse film references they've packed into the show over the years. They were rarely funny, but then again SNL was always a very uneven show - it's perfect for clip shows for that reason.

Love Chaplin. Still the greatest comic actor in cinema IMHO.

who has a line that draws an enormous laugh from everyone after they yell cut

there's a similar story about Rodney Dangerfield on the set of Caddyshack... after he does some bit and nobody on the set laughs, he tells Bill Murray "I'm bombing out there, I'm just bombing" and Bill has to remind him that they're shooting a film, and that crew members are not supposed to laugh because it would ruin the take. Dangerfield only knew the standup world at that point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T95GvS3u4mg

Odenkirk on that Chaplin sketch.

^^Includes the whole sketh for those who don't do the Facebook thing.

I think it would have appeared in either Geena Davis or Dolly Parton's shows from 1989 (the two closest to Chaplin's centennial).

This is one of those sketches that just plays better to creatives (all of whom have probably experienced others stealing their ideas) than it does everyone else

a dana carvey sketch and no one laughed? say it ain’t so

he’s so bad at telegraphing what he’s thinking, instead of just showing off his imitation skills - IN A SILENT SKETCH - that it takes a little while to even understand what the joke is supposed to be

I feel like that's an unfortunate byproduct of modern-day film (and television) comedy in general, and probably a big reason why I've exponentially grown to love Chaplin, Keaton, Lloyd, early Laurel & Hardy, Charley Chase and other silent masters - that era was really the only time where all of a comedy was perfectly geared towards a visual medium for obvious reasons. Meanwhile, so much of a comedy in the modern era is based around sketch comedy and stand-up routines, becoming much more dependent on verbal cues.

*all of comedy

Darn these Talkies have ruined everything

https://img.nbc.com/sites/nbcunbc/files/images/2015/5/04/140208_2723724_Weekend_Update_Segment___Grumpy_Old_Man_anvver_1.jpg

In my day, we didn't have "DIALOGUE"!

That's an extremely clever sketch (idea) that somehow never actually reaches "funny".

I kind of like the few "famous stories about great artists" sketches I can remember from that era - it seems like a concept they really enjoyed doing, partly so they can go to town with depicting gross mischaracterizations. For example, the one where Ringo goes from "I'm just happy to be here!" to being really opinionated about the direction the Beatles should take during their formidable years, and also when Picasso is a loud-mouthed cheap buffoon who pays everything by scribbling a doodle. (Not even that - at one point he sneezes some snot into a tissue and says "why it's another masterpiece from Picasso!" and proceeds to sign it and toss it on to the ground, prompting all the waiters to dive for it.)

Showed my class the boxing match from City Lights; they laughed

Watching "City Lights" right now and the boxing match is so brilliantly choreographed - and funny. I feel like see dozens of "comical" boxing scenes in movies but this is the best by a million miles.

... I feel like I've seen, that is.

It really is, down to the split-second--especially the way Chaplin keeps disappearing behind the referee.