Chaplin Conference This Summer
constance...@ttu.edu
THE CHARLES
CHAPLIN
CONFERENCE
21 - 24 July 2005
The British Film Institute, in association with the University of
Southampton and the London College of Communication, announces a major
conference on the work and worldwide cultural influence of Charles
Chaplin. This will coincide with the establishment of the bfi's Charles
Chaplin Research Programme, which is designed to foster innovative
research in relation to Chaplin and his contemporaries. The emphasis
will be on dialogue and the bringing together of archivists,
researchers and scholars from a range of disciplines for screenings,
the presentation of papers and symposia to reassess Chaplin's British
music hall roots and his impact and influence on film, the arts and
modern culture.
To be held at the London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle in
the heart of Chaplin's London.
Chaplin's image has been an enduring symbol for the twentieth century,
it is an image that simultaneously stands for the celebration and the
condemnation of the modern world. Chaplin's life, art and influence
offer a thought-provoking site of convergence for film history, theatre
history, literary modernism, and the social and cultural history of
everyday life in the twentieth century. Through screenings of newly
restored material, events, talks and discussion the conference will
offer a number of perspectives on Chaplin's work.
Full details and booking form
Events and highlights
Keynote speakers: Tom Gunning, Jennifer Bean, David Trotter, Yuri
Tsivian, Jacky Bratton and David Robinson.
Screening programme of the latest Chaplin Keystone restorations
produced by the bfi National Film and Television Archive, Cineteca di
Bologna and Lobster Films. The archivists will be present to explain
the intricacies of this ambitious restoration project.
Opening night reception will be at Wiltons Music Hall the oldest
surviving music hall in England, built in 1858 in the East End of
London. Scenes for Lord Attenborough's 1986 film, Chaplin were shot
here. It was in the finals of the BBC series Restoration and the trust
continues to raise funds for the preservation of this unique and
atmospheric building.
Free Open air screening of Shoulder Arms and Chaplin related rarities
in the grounds of the Imperial War Museum, (where Chaplin's mother was
confined when it was still the infamous Bedlam asylum).
Thursday 21 July
10.00 Registration
12.00 Screening: Restored Keystones part 1
2.00 Keynote: David Robinson, Chaplin Foundation Founding Fellow
Chaplin and the Music Hall
3.00 Keynote: Professor Jacky Bratton, Royal Holloway College,
University of London Comic Performance in the Music Hall
4.30 Panel Session: Music Hall Ancestry [Frank Scheide, Bryony Dixon,
Dan Kamin]
6.30 Reception, Wilton's Music Hall, Introduction By Mark Kermode.
Friday 22 July
9.00 Parallel Panel Sessions
1) Political Life of a Film Star
2) Chaplin, His Writing and The Critics
11.00 Keynote: Professor Tom Gunning, University of Chicago Chaplin and
the Modernist/Modern Body
12.00 Keynote: Professor Yuri Tsivian, University of Chicago Chaplin
and the Soviets
12.00 Presentations: (Archivists from Bologna and the NFTVA) The
Restoration of the Chaplin Keystone films
4.00 Keystone Screening part 2
4.50 Panel Discussion: Chaplin, His Critical Reception and the Issue of
Sentiment. Laura Marcus, University of Sussex, Frank Krutnik,
University of Sussex, Ian Christie, Birkbeck College,University of
London, Charles Maland, University of Tennessee Michael Hammond,
University of Southampton (Chair) , Tom Gunning, University of Chicago
6.30 Reception and Conference Dinner at London College of Communication
Saturday 23 July
9.00 Parallel panel sessions
1) Influence and Impact I: Theatre, Dance and Literature
2) Receptions I: US and Germany
11.00 Keystone Screenings, part 3
12.30 Industry History: Chaplin's Directing and Writing Collaborators,
Hooman Mehran
2.00 Archive Presentations - Cecilia Cenciarelli from the Progetto
Chaplin, Cineteca di Bologna, & Beth Werling from the L.A. County
Museum Archive
4.00 Parallel panel sessions
1) Imitators
2) Modernity/Modernism
9.30 Special event - outdoor screening of Chaplin films in the grounds
of the Imperial War Museum.
Sunday 24 July
9.00 Parallel panel sessions
[please note these panel titles have changed]
1) Influence and Impact II: Sound
2) Receptions II: Critical and Popular
11.00 Keynote: Professor Jennifer Bean, University of Washington The
Art of Imitation: The Originality of Charlie Chaplin and Moving Image
Myths.
12.00 Keynote: Professor David Trotter, Cambridge University, Chaplin,
The Circus and Modern Mimesis.
2.00 Plenary Session
4.00 Chaplin Walk (optional visit to Chaplin sites)
Contact information
Alison Kirwan
Tel 00 44 (0)20 7957 4786
Fax 00 44 (0) 20 7580 7503
Email alison...@bfi.org.uk
Smiley
Scenes for Lord Attenborough's 1986 film, Chaplin were shot
here.
---------
Wasn't that 1992?
:)
Constance Kuriyama
Yep. Somebody goofed. I just post 'em.
Connie K.
--
"To hell with the pillow in the background. It's a good scene, and that's
more important." Chaplin, Interview with Richard Meryman, 1966.
WaverBoy
they'll be showing? Ah, I know...Doug should go and, if any bits are
missing that he has in his collection or knows where they exist, he can talk
to the head honchos directly. Actually, I think a presentation by him
should be on the bloody program, so then maybe they'd even pay his airfare.
:)
Constance Kuriyama
I'll be there to report on it, but nobody's paying my airfare except me, and
I'm on the program.
This is the first time they've done this. They should have started much
earlier, and finalized the schedule much earlier, so people could take
advantage of discount airfares. I hope they'll do it again, and
benefit from experience.
Lincoln Spector
called "London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle."
Lincoln
<constance...@ttu.edu> wrote in message
news:1118612535.6...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Neil Midkiff
> Only in England could you find a respectable institution of higher learning
> called "London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle."
>
> Lincoln
>
> <constance...@ttu.edu> wrote :
>
>>
>>THE CHARLES
>>CHAPLIN
>>CONFERENCE
>>
>>
>>
>>21 - 24 July 2005
>>
>>The British Film Institute, in association with the University of
>>Southampton and the London College of Communication, announces a major
>>conference on the work and worldwide cultural influence of Charles
>>Chaplin. ...
>>
>>To be held at the London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle in
>>the heart of Chaplin's London.
"Elephant & Castle" is not part of the name of the institution; it's
rather its location within London. It's also the name of the nearest
Underground (tube/subway) station.
See the World Wide Words website at
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ele1.htm
for an explanation.
-Neil Midkiff
WaverBoy
"Constance Kuriyama" <do...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:d8nmtl$erl$1...@theodyn.ncf.ca...
>
> "WaverBoy" (waverbo...@comcast.net) writes:
> > I'd love to be there for those Keystone screenings...wonder which titles
> > they'll be showing? Ah, I know...Doug should go and, if any bits are
> > missing that he has in his collection or knows where they exist, he can
talk
> > to the head honchos directly. Actually, I think a presentation by him
> > should be on the bloody program, so then maybe they'd even pay his
airfare.
> > :)
>
> I'll be there to report on it, but nobody's paying my airfare except me,
and
> I'm on the program.
>
> This is the first time they've done this. They should have started much
> earlier, and finalized the schedule much earlier, so people could take
> advantage of discount airfares. I hope they'll do it again, and
> benefit from experience.
>
> Connie K.
Wow, so glad you're going...and sorry about your full-price airfare. I
didn't see your name listed on the program as posted...what will you be
doing? I wish I could go...I'm so envious. I hope you have a wonderful
time, and I'm sure I speak for all of us here when I say I can't wait to
hear what you have to tell us when you return!
Constance Kuriyama
Everybody who's reading a paper isn't listed in that flyer--that would make
it impractically long. That is, *most* participants aren't listed.
I'm reading a paper on Chaplin and words, and his various attitudes toward/
uses of them.
I just screened _Scarface_ (the original one) for my film genres class today,
by the way. There's a LONG declamatory speech in there about citizens and
crime control. I recommend it to anyone dissatisfied with Chaplin's dialogue,
which seems quite natural in comparison. And there's also some pretty dippy
stuff at the end: "Speak to me! Speak to me! Speak to me! Oh, he's dead!"
Fortunately, the man went down just mutely shaking his head. Score one
for George Raft.
In most other respects _Scarface_ is a very good film, though. Indeed,
occasionally it's brilliant.
Lincoln Spector
"Neil Midkiff" <nmid...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:fq0se.2112$Pa5...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Lincoln Spector wrote:
>
>> Only in England could you find a respectable institution of higher
>> learning called "London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle."
>>
>> Lincoln
>>
>> <constance...@ttu.edu> wrote :
>>
>>>
>>>THE CHARLES
>>>CHAPLIN
>>>CONFERENCE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>21 - 24 July 2005
>>>
>>>The British Film Institute, in association with the University of
>>>Southampton and the London College of Communication, announces a major
>>>conference on the work and worldwide cultural influence of Charles
>>>Chaplin. ...
>>>
>>>To be held at the London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle in
>>>the heart of Chaplin's London.
>
> "Elephant & Castle" is not part of the name of the institution; it's
> rather its location within London. It's also the name of the nearest
> Underground (tube/subway) station.
Seriously, thanks for the explanation.
Lincoln
George Shelps
>I recommend it to anyone dissatisfied
>with Chaplin's dialogue, which seems
>quite natural in comparison.
I think you ought to consult a successful
professional scriptwriter. Chaplin's
dialogue is clumsy. Even Agee thought
that his writing gift did not match his
other talents.
Here's an example from A COUNTESS
FROM HONG KONG (Brando as "Ogden Mears" referring to the Countess.)
MEARS
I wonder what your fate would have been
had you been in similar circumstances?
Repeating "have/had been" in a short
line is clumsy writing.
Directors who also work on their scripts,
like Hitchcock, for example, have usually
allowed a professional writer to polish
the dialogue. Agee certainly could have
performed this service for CC on LIMELIGHT.
WaverBoy
"George Shelps" <G-H...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:28341-42B...@storefull-3313.bay.webtv.net...
I think MONSIEUR VERDOUX has some pretty good dialogue. It's been decades
since I saw A COUNTESS FROM HONG KONG.
Candace
example of anything Chaplin did. He was 76 years old by then and his
gifts had diminished in all areas, as is normal in anyone who reaches
that age. The dialogue *was* clumsy in the film, but it's more
instructive to examine CC's dialogue in Dictator, Verdoux and
Limelight, when he was still making decent films. It shows clearly that
whatever gifts he had in composing dialogue diminished with each film.
The dialogue in the Hynkel sections of Dictator is fine and frequently
very good. The problems begin with the horrid Jewish barber sequences,
and Goddard's dialogue is particularly grating.
Verdoux becomes more verbose, though there are still many scenes with
believable dialogue that doesn't slop over into excess or pedantry. For
instance, the interior scenes with Martha Raye, her card-playing
friends and the maid, are all great.
Limelight is where you see a dimunition in CC reigning in his
verbosity. Some of the scenes with Terri are painful to watch, but this
might be because Claire Bloom overacts to an embarrassing degree.
I was watching the interview with Georgia Hale in The Unknown Chaplin
and I had to laugh when she said, "Charlie didn't want anyone
overacting, he hated that! He was always preaching about overacting." I
guess he must have forgotten this when he directed Claire Bloom.
George Shelps
>I don't think it's quite fair to use
>Countess from Hong Kong as an
>example of anything Chaplin did. He was
>76 years old by then and his gifts had
>diminished in all areas,
I am not being unfair, I remembered that bit of dialogue because
it struck me as clumsy when I first saw
the movie in 1966.
Even though CC was 76, he wrote the
script in the 1940s for Paulette Goddard and Gary Cooper to star. It
was originally called "The Stowaway." I believe he
"exhumted" it from the trunk to make
COUNTESS.
Dialogue-writing for movies is a different
craftt than for the stage or the novel.
Wiilliam Faulkner worked on many scripts
in Hollywood, but his value was mainly
as a constructionist. Even though he was a Nobel Prize winning author,
his words were not "speakable." (I am currently reading a new Faulkner
bio.)
Chaplin's dialogue probably stems from
his theatrical experience prior to his
entry in films. I think he's attempting
to imitate what he must have heard
during his stage career.
I don't want to over-emphasize this
point. Chaplin's writing is not uniformly
bad. It simply lacks the polish of
an experienced script-writer. Since he
never listened to anyone, he probably
would never have considered collaborating with an established
screenwriter.
Most directors who were
also writers had collaborators. Some
like Hitchcock or Lubitsch never took
screen credit as writers, but they created
their scripts in sessions with an outside
writer, who usually did the dialogue
after the basic action was worked out.
Chaplin might have benefitted from
such a teaming.
Constance Kuriyama
"Candace" (uly...@mscomm.com) writes:
> I don't think it's quite fair to use Countess from Hong Kong as an
> example of anything Chaplin did. He was 76 years old by then and his
> gifts had diminished in all areas, as is normal in anyone who reaches
> that age.
The music's still pretty good, and Cargill is funny, as are some of his
lines. His nervous slips of the tongue is a bit worked as recently as
_Four Weddings and a Funeral_ by Rowen Atkinson.
But you're right--its dialogue for the most part is about as inspired as
its cinematography.
> The dialogue *was* clumsy in the film, but it's more
> instructive to examine CC's dialogue in Dictator, Verdoux and
> Limelight, when he was still making decent films. It shows clearly that
> whatever gifts he had in composing dialogue diminished with each film.
>
> The dialogue in the Hynkel sections of Dictator is fine and frequently
> very good. The problems begin with the horrid Jewish barber sequences,
> and Goddard's dialogue is particularly grating.
>
> Verdoux becomes more verbose, though there are still many scenes with
> believable dialogue that doesn't slop over into excess or pedantry. For
> instance, the interior scenes with Martha Raye, her card-playing
> friends and the maid, are all great.
>
> Limelight is where you see a dimunition in CC reigning in his
> verbosity. Some of the scenes with Terri are painful to watch, but this
> might be because Claire Bloom overacts to an embarrassing degree.
Just imagine the "I'm walking" scene being underplayed, with her *quietly*
discovering that she can walk, and it would make all the difference. The
lines would sseem perfectly natural.
> I was watching the interview with Georgia Hale in The Unknown Chaplin
> and I had to laugh when she said, "Charlie didn't want anyone
> overacting, he hated that! He was always preaching about overacting." I
> guess he must have forgotten this when he directed Claire Bloom.
Other people evidently had this problem with her. She's absolutely awful in
Oliver's _Richard III_. It seems to have been partly a result of inexperience
with film acting, because she improved in later films. _Limelight_ was her
first film role.
WaverBoy
Agreed about Claire Bloom's performance in LIMELIGHT...way too overdone.
With a good-to-great performance in that role, the film would be SO much
better. As it is, well, I do like her on stage in the music hall sketch
scene with Charlie, which is one of the best scenes in the film IMO. (Ya
know, I'm still disappointed by the Keaton-Chaplin teamup scene...but
perhaps I was expecting too much.)
Claire Bloom did indeed improve in her later appearances, such as THE
HAUNTING; she's the best part about the film IMO. Wonderful performance.
David B. Pearson
"WaverBoy" <waverbo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> (Ya
> know, I'm still disappointed by the Keaton-Chaplin teamup scene...but
> perhaps I was expecting too much.)
(shrug)
At that point they are both at least 20 years past their prime, and out of
their element. Keaton looks particularly uncomfortable in the limiting
nature of nearsighted pianist in "Limelight" -- and is much more creative
(and funny) on episodes of his own TV show made the year before.
DBP
Candace
directly from his original 30's script intended for he and Paulette.
The idea and plot was the same but he edited and expanded on the
dialogue. I'm not saying it wouldn't have been clumsy in the mid-30's,
but it was definitely a clunker of a script by 1966 standards.
Candace
Terri in Limelight? Obviously a *huge* improvement over Claire Bloom.
Roman Holiday was made just about the same time, it would have been
Audrey's first big role and we all know how Charlie loved the
inexperienced actresses. She was the right age and physically right for
the part. Possibly too independent for CC's taste, however.
WaverBoy
"Candace" <uly...@mscomm.com> wrote in message
news:1119132788.8...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I totally agree. I would have loved to have seen what Audrey could do with
that part. A shame that we'll never know...
But, I'm still fond of Limelight, even with its many flaws.
Candace
have been?"
I was re-reading Vance's photo book last night and Vance loves
Limelight and thinks it's far and away CC's best talkie.
I usually refrain from blaming Chaplin for some of the excesses in
Limelight, but the opening scene is over-the-top solely because of
Chaplin, in my view. The way he behaves drunk and puts the key in the
lock is completely unbelievable for a 1952 film and looks exactly as if
he's behaving like the Tramp would have done. He was moving and
behaving as if the scene was pantomime circa-1916. A drunk doesn't act
like Charlie acts in this scene; you can see him acting, which is very
unusual for him and disconcerting. It's almost like Foster Brooks
behaving drunk, which is so beneath Charlie it's frightening.
WaverBoy
> I'm fond of it too, I just fall into the trap of thinking, "what might
> have been?"
>
> I was re-reading Vance's photo book last night and Vance loves
> Limelight and thinks it's far and away CC's best talkie.
??? Better than The Great Dictator or Monsieur Verdoux? Crazy...both of
those films have many more good moments than Limelight IMO.
Constance Kuriyama
_Limelight_ isn't a comedy--it's drama of a rather unusual sort, so in a
sense it can't be compared to _Dictator_ and _Verdoux_.
I have to say that I like _Limelight_, which I put in the category of
"old man art." Old age has its perspective, just as childhood, youth, and
maturity have theirs. We don't compare children's art to adult art, but
appreciate it on its own terms. Perhaps we should do the same with work
produced by olderly artists.
About that Chaplin-Keaton routine--what strikes me about it is not that
the performers are, in David's phrase, "20 years past their prime." It
is that the sketch is *about* being past your prime, and still feeling
the urge to perform. The actors themselves, the characters in the
movie, and the characters in the sketch are *all* past their prime, but
determined to soldier on. Everything is dysfunctional. Keaton's character
can't see. His music keeps cascading off the piano. The piano strings break.
The violin is crushed. Chaplin's character's leg keeps shrinking, and he
bows so frantically that he propels himself into the orchestra pit, but
the goal--to defy age and death with a last burst of creative energy--is
accomplished.
This isn't so much funny as wonderful stuff, very much representing an
older person's perspective, and I think Keaton understood exactly what the
sketch was about and what he was doing in it, which was of course not the
sort of thing he did on his own show.
Candace
completely logical to do so. Chaplin was an artist who made 4 talking
pictures, so it's inevitable to compare them and weigh their individual
merits. I prefer Verdoux to the others by a wide margin, though it has
weaknesses.
I like the description of Limelight as "old man art" (ouch!) but I
never think of Charlie as an old man until after Countess. He was still
a vibrant, athletic-looking and graceful man well into his 70's. His
daughter Josephine said that he was a very young looking and acting man
until after Countess, then the crummy reviews aged him rapidly.
I think we all would agree that Dictator, Verdoux and Limelight all
contain individual classic moments. There are several magnificent
scenes in each movie, they just aren't sustained throughout the entire
movie. Maybe this is because CC wasn't as great with dialogue as he was
with pantomime, perhaps he'd run out of clever ideas, maybe his age was
a factor. Of all these possibilities, I don't think age had that much
to do with it. Another possibility is that he was finally content and
happy in his private life so it was harder to become as obsessed with
creative ventures. He shot Verdoux and Limelight in record fast times.
I can't imagine him retaking a scenes 900 times (as he did in City
Lights) once he had Oona. He just wasn't as obsessively involved with
filmmaking after he married her. A happy Charlie didn't equate with
creating high art. He was miserable when he made The Kid and The Gold
Rush and those were both masterpieces.
Constance Kuriyama
"Candace" (uly...@mscomm.com) writes:
> I think Limelight can be compared to Dictator and Verdoux. It's
> completely logical to do so. Chaplin was an artist who made 4 talking
> pictures, so it's inevitable to compare them and weigh their individual
> merits. I prefer Verdoux to the others by a wide margin, though it has
> weaknesses.
But one wouldln't compare the Mutuals to _City Lights_ (at least I wouldn't),
because the Mutuals are full of youthful exuberance, and _City Lights_ is
a mature meditation on life. One could always say _City Lights_ is a
greater film than _The Immigrant_, but why bother? They're not really
comparable.
> I like the description of Limelight as "old man art" (ouch!) but I
> never think of Charlie as an old man until after Countess. He was still
> a vibrant, athletic-looking and graceful man well into his 70's. His
> daughter Josephine said that he was a very young looking and acting man
> until after Countess, then the crummy reviews aged him rapidly.
Regardless of how physically healthy people are and how youthful their
outlook is in many resepects, when they reach sixty they start thinking about
death, and _Limelight_, unlike _Dictator_ and _Verdoux_, is very much about
coming to terms with death. It starts with death narrowly averted, includes
a ballet about death, and ends with Calvero's death. _Verdoux_ anticipates
this by ending with a visibly aging Verdoux shuffling off to die. Chaplin
would never have made films like that earlier in his career.
> I think we all would agree that Dictator, Verdoux and Limelight all
> contain individual classic moments. There are several magnificent
> scenes in each movie, they just aren't sustained throughout the entire
> movie. Maybe this is because CC wasn't as great with dialogue as he was
> with pantomime, perhaps he'd run out of clever ideas, maybe his age was
> a factor. Of all these possibilities, I don't think age had that much
> to do with it. Another possibility is that he was finally content and
> happy in his private life so it was harder to become as obsessed with
> creative ventures. He shot Verdoux and Limelight in record fast times.
> I can't imagine him retaking a scenes 900 times (as he did in City
> Lights) once he had Oona. He just wasn't as obsessively involved with
> filmmaking after he married her. A happy Charlie didn't equate with
> creating high art. He was miserable when he made The Kid and The Gold
> Rush and those were both masterpieces.
I think there was a corner of Chaplin's soul that was miseable all his
life, and to me _Limelight_ is a masterpiece of a different sort.
_Countess_, alas, is no masterpiece of any sort, though I have seen worse
films.
George Shelps
>but I never think of Charlie as an old
>man until after Countess. He was still a
>vibrant, athletic-looking and graceful
>man well into his 70's.
Yes, the "old man art" description of
Chaplin's work at 62 is preposterous. It
is indeed much more pertinent to COUNTESS.
Candace
of a generalization. Some people obsess about death when they're 10
years old, others can be 75 and scarcely think of it. I would strongly
assume Charlie thought about less about death at 60 than most other
people for the following reasons:
1. He was married to a girl in her 20's
2. He had young children being born every 1.8 years
3. He was more dynamic, lithe and healthy than most people 30 years
younger
4. He was a genius with a creative spark that few other mortals ever
had
5. Through his wealth and fame, he was able to live a very, very good
life with no want or deprivation
Thus he had an abundance of tangible things to live for. The fact that
he lived for nearly 30 years after the age of 60 shows that he had a
fierce desire to experience life.
I think he was depressed in the period 1947-1952 (and beyond) due to
cirumstances beyond his control, and we all know what those
politcally-motivated cirumstances were. Verdoux and Limelight show more
depression and morbid tones than the Essanay, Mutuals or First
Nationals. Is this because of age, or because Chaplin wasn't doing
slapstick anymore, or because he had become a much more mature,
fully-realized human being at 55? Of these possibilities, I think age
is the least likely possibility.
David B. Pearson
1119370143....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Candace"
<uly...@mscomm.com> wrote:
> Is this because of age, or because Chaplin wasn't doing
> slapstick anymore, or because he had become a much more mature,
> fully-realized human being at 55? Of these possibilities, I think age
> is the least likely possibility.
The sad thing is that the other things you list can be attributed to
Charlie's advancing age: a reduction of slapstick, greater maturity, and
moving on with one's life.
DBP
Constance Kuriyama
"Candace" (uly...@mscomm.com) writes:
> I disagree that people at 60 start thinking about death. It's too much
> of a generalization.
Have you ever been sixty? Some people never think about much of anything,
I'll grant, but once you're sixty and over you're approaching retirement,
you start developing at least minor physical problems (if you're lucky),
and you can hear the clock ticking louder. You once had seventy years ahead
of you; now you have ten or so left. It's time to think about what to do
with the time you have left, and how to exit gracefully. Chaplin thought
about it, I'm sure, and it's evident in _Limelight_. It's a perfectly
rational and sensible thing to do.
> Some people obsess about death when they're 10
> years old
About Charlie's age when he told his mother he wanted to die and be with
Jesus. But I didn't say you *had* to be sixty before you could think about
death. Charlie started early. Lots of references to suicide in his films,
even the early ones.
> others can be 75 and scarcely think of it. I would strongly
> assume Charlie thought about less about death at 60 than most other
> people for the following reasons:
>
> 1. He was married to a girl in her 20's
> 2. He had young children being born every 1.8 years
> 3. He was more dynamic, lithe and healthy than most people 30 years
> younger
> 4. He was a genius with a creative spark that few other mortals ever
> had
> 5. Through his wealth and fame, he was able to live a very, very good
> life with no want or deprivation
>
> Thus he had an abundance of tangible things to live for. The fact that
> he lived for nearly 30 years after the age of 60 shows that he had a
> fierce desire to experience life.
Oh sure, he had that too. But you can have that and still think about
death. In fact, the two may reinforce one another.
> I think he was depressed in the period 1947-1952 (and beyond) due to
> cirumstances beyond his control, and we all know what those
> politcally-motivated cirumstances were. Verdoux and Limelight show more
> depression and morbid tones than the Essanay, Mutuals or First
> Nationals. Is this because of age, or because Chaplin wasn't doing
> slapstick anymore, or because he had become a much more mature,
> fully-realized human being at 55? Of these possibilities, I think age
> is the least likely possibility.
Chaplin was subject to extreme emotional highs and lows all his life. The
predisposition was probably genetic.
And unfortunately, maturity and aging go together.
What is it the French say? "If only youth knew; if only age could."
WaverBoy
>
> "WaverBoy" (waverbo...@comcast.net) writes:
> > "Candace" <uly...@mscomm.com> wrote in message
> > news:1119194122.9...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> I'm fond of it too, I just fall into the trap of thinking, "what might
> >> have been?"
> >>
> >> I was re-reading Vance's photo book last night and Vance loves
> >> Limelight and thinks it's far and away CC's best talkie.
> >
> > ??? Better than The Great Dictator or Monsieur Verdoux? Crazy...both
of
> > those films have many more good moments than Limelight IMO.
>
> _Limelight_ isn't a comedy--it's drama of a rather unusual sort, so in a
> sense it can't be compared to _Dictator_ and _Verdoux_.
I was comparing it to those two in response to Vance's pick of Limelight as
Chaplin's best talkie. They're both Chaplin talkies, so here the comparison
would have to be valid, wouldn't it? Vance didn't say he thought Limelight
was CC's best talkie drama or comedy.
> I have to say that I like _Limelight_, which I put in the category of
> "old man art." Old age has its perspective, just as childhood, youth, and
> maturity have theirs. We don't compare children's art to adult art, but
> appreciate it on its own terms. Perhaps we should do the same with work
> produced by olderly artists.
I like Limelight too, as I've already stated. But it simply isn't Verdoux
or Dictator quality.
> About that Chaplin-Keaton routine--what strikes me about it is not that
> the performers are, in David's phrase, "20 years past their prime." It
> is that the sketch is *about* being past your prime, and still feeling
> the urge to perform. The actors themselves, the characters in the
> movie, and the characters in the sketch are *all* past their prime, but
> determined to soldier on. Everything is dysfunctional. Keaton's character
> can't see. His music keeps cascading off the piano. The piano strings
break.
> The violin is crushed. Chaplin's character's leg keeps shrinking, and he
> bows so frantically that he propels himself into the orchestra pit, but
> the goal--to defy age and death with a last burst of creative energy--is
> accomplished.
>
> This isn't so much funny as wonderful stuff, very much representing an
> older person's perspective, and I think Keaton understood exactly what the
> sketch was about and what he was doing in it, which was of course not the
> sort of thing he did on his own show.
>
> Connie K.
As I said, perhaps I was expecting too much. I do enjoy the scene, of
course. But c'mon...Chaplin and Keaton together...oh, what could have been.
WaverBoy
I seem to remember liking Countess when I saw it a couple decades ago on TV
when I was a teen. I distinctly remember Patrick Cargill in particular as
being quite funny. Loved the music too. If this is regarded as one of
Chaplin's worst films (along with A King In New York), well, I've seen far
worse films than this by other highly-regarded filmmakers. Charlie, even
when you ain't firing on all cylinders, you're still OK. I really need to
see the widescreen DVD of Countess...oh, and isn't the US version shorter
than the UK version? What's missing?
Dave Garrett
waverbo...@comcast.net says...
> I really need to
> see the widescreen DVD of Countess
Anyone interested in COUNTESS that hasn't already picked up the DVD
should instead check out the Brando Collection DVD recently released by
Universal - for not too much more than the single disc of COUNTESS, it
includes that film plus three others:
Dave