Charlie Chaplin Film by Film Thread

What do you make of the "crash" sequence later on in "Making A Living"? Something there doesn't quite click for me, either.

1. With no set-up, we see a car driving out of control on a road (a drunk driver?)
2. Henry's walking down the road.
3. The car drives up to a barrier, stops short, reverses, then drives off back down the road.
4. Henry watches, points left, then right (not following the path of what we just saw).
5. A shot of a car crashing down a hill (stock footage lifted from another film?).
6. Henry films the crash.
7. Car at bottom of hill, supposedly crashed. However, this is not the same kind of car we just saw veering around the road (not to mention we're supposed to believe the driver could survive that crash, and just be pinned under the car).

Is this just lousy editing? If they had cut when the car drives up to the barrier, I guess it would suggest that the car ran off the cliff, but they show the car drive off safely in the other direction. Not to mention the cliff we see doesn't have the rope barrier we see on the road, and the car that crashes is not the car we see driving around.

 

Yes, this is a pretty awful sequence, even by 1914 standards. Considering his quick arrival at the overturned car, Henry must be at the base of the mountain that the car crashes down. In his location, it would have been impossible for him to see the car swerving, or the car nearing the cliff (before turning around). So his little finger pantomime is highly implausible. In the first shot the car has a mountain to its right, in the second shot there is now a cliff to its right. Rather than render immediate aid, or seek help, good Samaritan Henry starts taking notes and pictures instead - and what explains the business of him looking at the victim's top hat (did people embroider their name into their top hat in 1914?) - what vital information is contained there? And yes, the cars aren't even close to a match - surely footage borrowed from another film.

 

While it is certainly interesting to analyze films at this level of detail, I think it is worth keeping in mind that Keystone was a production factory turning out about 10 films a month with the goal of evoking laughs not plot consistency. The norm was that editing was completed within a week of shooting being started. The intended audience would view these films a single time with no ability to rewind or freeze frames.

So the level of continuity being sought by these lines of inquiry may be inconsistent with what was being done here.

Like, if I were going to do an in depth study the Beatles January 69 sessions, and in doing so noted that some of the instruments were out of tune and some of the lyrics to mis-sung, I might write that off to the circumstances in which the "performances" were made rather than assuming that I could read into these variations some intent by the creators.

(P.S. have you guys ever checked out this thread I ran a few years ago? 43 years later: Semi-Annual Beatles Nagra Tape Replay » )

 

When I finish up the Keystones I will start a new thread devoted to the Essanays so that this one can be used for the more in depth analysis of the Keystones and we don't wind up discussing the mise en scene and go kart construction in Kid Auto Races between comments comparing the two releases of The Gold Rush

 

But a lot of what we're discussing isn't simply non-continuity (though that's the end result). Take the various points brought up during the discussion of "The New Janitor." The swerving vehicle in "Making A Living," for instance, has no set-up - no reason to be swerving, no explanation for the swerving. I don't put this down to Keystone having to quickly churn out films, I think it's more likely that the set-up simply isn't in the film anymore. By picking up on this, we're able to reasonably guess which portions might be missing from the films and at least intellectually reconstruct the complete film that no longer exists.

Good idea about a separate thread for The Essanays (and presumably the other companies).

 

By all means keep on, it is good stuff. But I think things like different cars being shown are just due to circumstances of production, like the noted stock footage theory. And I expect they wanted to use a working car for the driving scenes and a non working car for the wrecked scenes.

Yes, will do separate threads for each company.

 

I think the understanding of the conditions under which the films were made is already implicit in any discussion of them. If anything, I find the consistent use of those caveats gives the film makers far less credit for their efforts than they deserve. Silent films, even some of the crudest of the Keystones, are still loaded with lots of little bits of information that drive the narrative. I think the films are also embedded with little bits of information that simply don't register for us as an audience a hundred years later. Movie-going audiences in 1914, however "unsophisticated" they might have been, were surely more conversant in the language of silent film and pantomime, not to mention contemporary references that we scratch our heads at.

Take the wobbly car in "Making a Living". As Doug said, we have no set-up, other than we know Henry is eager to find some news worth reporting. Does the wobbly car suggest the driver is drunk? Was drunk driving even news in 1914? A little Googling tells me (perhaps unreliably) that drunk driving laws didn't exist until 1910, but that California was the second state to adopt one. Is the driver a celebrity of some sort (hence more newsworthiness to the story)? Does Henry's check of the driver's top hat have anything to do with identifying him? Now there's a bit that is clearly scripted - there's a narrative reason Henry does that - we just don't know what it is (at least I don't) in 2016.

Close analysis of the films gives us greater insight into the "intent of the creators", which in turns brings us closer to understanding them, IMO.

 

To go off onto the Beatle tangent you suggested for just a moment, it was interesting to hear that Mark Lewisohn read every issue of The Liverpool Echo starting from 1955 as part of his research for "Tune In". He felt the need to "put myself there" in terms of understanding the broader cultural context of the time and place. Similarly, we spent an awful lot of time with January 1969 newspapers and magazines, not just to identify names referenced in "Get Off!" or pin down the TV show George was watching when he was inspired to write "I Me Mine" (as enjoyable as those moments were) but to immerse ourselves in the moment. If one were truly setting out to create the ultimate Keystones book (for the 23 people who would buy it), it would require (IMO) mind-boggling immersion into the 19-teens.

 

I have enough trouble putting myself in 1964... and I was around then!

 

Dough and Dynamite (Film #30)
Shipped September 18, 1914
Released October 26, 1914
Two reels: 28:29
Scenario and Director: Chaplin
Producer: Mack Sennett

This is the hardest write up for me yet. As mentioned above, this film was spun off from a bakery scene planned for Those Love Pangs. Chaplin did lots of retakes and went way over the $1000 budget (he spent $1800 - and as a result was docked the extra $25 he was paid for films he directed), with the result that Sennett decided to expand it from one reel to two (I guess this meant he was able to charge exhibitors more for a longer film). It was a rousing success as a two reeler, bringing in $130,000 (the most any of his films had made) and becoming acclaimed as the greatest comedy of the early silent era.

The film has a lot of great moments. The beginning, where he is working as a waiter, really packs the laughs in pretty densely as Charlie ineptly puts someone else's old food on a diner's plate, tries to take that plate, then tries to remove the old food and leave the plate and, when the diner objects, tasting what remains using his finger to show it is good. When he is about to finally take the plate away, he sees a cute girl he goes to flirt with and winds up flinging a dessert in the diner's eye while flirting, leading to fights breaking out first with the customer, then with co-worker Chester, on whom he lands. All this and more first couple minutes.

His first trip to the basement kitchen is my favorite part of the film where he keeps burning himself on the oven door and giving great reactions to this (I think he burns himself 7x in the film). Another nice bit has him washing dishes with Chester drying, except Chester gets distracted and stops drying so each dish Charlie tries to hand off for drying instead mashes on the floor. He spends time struggling with a giant sack of flour on his sback, reminiscent of the trunk in The Property Man. He veers around under its weight, drops it down the stairs onto Chester, and later sits on the sack before discovering Chester trapped underneath.

At this point, about 1/4 of the way into the film we get to what passes for a plot. The bakers are unhappy about their working conditions and walk out, leading the manager to make his waiters work as bakers and have his wife work as a waitress. This was timely as there actually was a bakers strike in LA around this time. In contrast to Charlie's later sympathetic attitude towards labor (see Modern Times in particular, but it is a regular theme), which went far enough to lead to accusations of Communist sympathizing, here he shows the striking bakers as clear villains. They hatch what is essentially a terrorist plot to blow up the bakery and use a little girl to sneak the dynamite into the bakery inside a bread loaf that is being returned as underdone. This plot really adds nothing to the film, breaks up the flow, and is insufficient as a plot to sustain a film of this length.

There are a bunch more great moments in the film. Some highlights include some great spinning moves he makes while balancing a tray of bread loaves on his head; getting his head stuck in the trap door down to the kitchen (with some great expressions captured in close ups - a technique he had rarely used before, apart from the end of Kid Auto Races - which would not have been his call). He has more struggles with an oven (knocking Chester with the tray handle), and uses it to dry his rear. He chats up some girls, in the process twisting his hands up in dough behind his back, so that he can only get out of it by stepping back through the loop made by the dough and his arms.

Throughout are a bunch more fights with Chester, a recurring theme - and one that gets a bit old for me as there are so many, and they somehow lack the grace and rhythm of his similar interactions with folks like Arbuckle and Swain, and even Sennett and Sterling. It doesn't help that Chaplin and Conklin are such similar physical types, in contrast to the other dynamics.

Charlie's character surprises (given how incompetent he otherwise seems in the bakery kitchen) by demonstrating and efficient doughnut making procedure, flipping dough deftly into balls and them making the balls into bracelets. Also a bit surprising that he has the expertise to know that a heavy loaf (in this case the one with dynamite in it) needs more cooking This of course eventually detonates the loaf, but not before Charlie has a chance to cop a feel on the Manager's wife and get into a fight with the Manager (yes, Chester joins in).

After the inevitable explosion, Charlie's head slowly emerges as a ball of dough, which he wipes from his eye so you can see it is him.

So there are a lot of gags and fun moments packed into this film, and I only skimmed about half of them above. But for me, by the end, this one is tiring to watch and I think it would have been better as a one reel film with fewer fight scenes and no terror plot. I feel non stop physical comedy can work well for about half a reel to a reel, but a two reel film (particularly one as long as this) requires development of characters and situations that sustain interest. For me that is not here. The music on the Flicker Alley version is also rather plodding compared to many of the scores, which does not help (though on the plus side, the track does use cymbals crashes synced to punctuate on screen blows and pratfalls more than any of the other films so far).

Despite those issues, I do feel this is above average for his shorts and the best two reeler he has been in so far. I'm just not going to agree with those who acclaim it his best film to date as I feel several of his earlier shorter films were better.

Rating:
Content: 7/10
Print: 5/10

 

And yes, you mentioned your Beatles thread to me a while back. I perused it, but it often seems that when I involve myself in online discussions of the period someone will come along

I agree with your assessment that this film really doesn't sustain itself for two reels. It's really not clear to me whether the striking bakers were meant to provide a dramatic aspect to the film or to be more fodder for comedy - they seem in limbo somewhere in between. The scenes where Charlie and Chester get bonked over the head by the strikers don't come across as funny to me (maybe they did 100 years ago). The shot of Charlie's neck stuck in between the two basement doors isn't exactly a laugh riot either. Of course there are plenty of good bits, and we get a glimpse of the incredibly graceful Charlie who can seemingly do anything well (when he is making his dough bracelets).

I would agree that this film falls a tier below "The Masquerader" and "The New Janitor", although it may have been on par if it had been tightened to a single reel.

 

As a preview for my upcoming review of Gentlmen of Nerve, here are some scenes not included on the BFI/Flicker Alley restoration:

 

I'm confused. Those scenes are on my BFI copy.

 

You have the Flicker Alley version or one of the foreign editions? Perhaps they are there, I certainly did not remember all of them. Have not yet re-watched this one, just came across that link.

 

I have both the U.S. and U.K. sets - they're the same. "Gentlemen Of Nerve" and "Dough And Dynamite" are the two films where we don't have to wonder if anything's missing because paper prints were deposited at the Library of Congress, so we have both films, complete.

 

This film could almost be a 3 reeler given its length!

 

Not to mention the length of my write up

 

Thoughts on "Dough and Dynamite."

This seems to be very much a return of the crude Tramp we'd seen in the early Keystones. He puts garbage on a customer's plate, then gets angry when the guy objects. He flirts shamelessly (hard to misread his look at the pretty girl, then the "assorted French tarts" sign), breaks every dish in sight, kicks Chester Conklin in the face (repeatedly) and puts his foot in a pile of uncooked dough. Yuck.

Part of the problem I have with "Dough and Dynamite" is that it's just so shabby looking. None of the sets are remotely convincing, and it feels like they tried to make a two-reeler on a one-reeler budget. I know it was a popular Keystone, but, to me, even Charlie's performance seems uninspired, with few of the clever comic ideas that we'd seen in some of his earlier films. There are minutes at a time where I failed to see any humor at all, and the bunch of thugs who want to blow up the bakery seem shoehorned into the film just to give it some kind of plot.

And what's with Charlie Chase, who just seems to come into the cafeteria to sleep, and the fat guy in the dress? Aren't we supposed to notice?

 

Gentlemen of Nerve (Film #31)
Shipped October 17, 1914
Released October 29, 1914
One reel 14:54
Scenario and Director: Chaplin
Producer: Mack Sennett

Chaplin's fifh trip to a racetrack or public event environment (after Kid Auto Races, Mabel Takes the Wheel, A Busy Day, and Mabel's Busy Day) – a collection of films which tend to be the most improvised (except Takes the Wheel, which also has lots of non-track content).

Chaplin is actually not in first 25% of the film, which focuses on Chester paying more attention to Phyllis than his girl Mabel likes (odd as Mabel seems clearly more attractive and it is difficult to imagine 1914 tastes were that different). Chaplin (Mr. Wow Wow - a name from Karno days) first appears trying to sneak into the track (as Ambrose / Mack Swain has also been doing), including the clever move of trying to walk in backwards.

My favorite sequence in the film, occupying the next 25%, has Charlie and Ambrose trying to get into the track through a space where the fence is missing a plank. After Charlie nearly falls through the gap (but get stuck as he twists), the much larger Ambrose illogically pushes Charlie aside to try to get through first. This does at least have a comedic benefit of letting Charlie try out strategies to force Ambrose through the gap, including using a large club as a lever, trying to kick him through and defying sense by pulling back on Ambrose's jacket to stabilize himself while trying to push him through with his feet. After Charlie gets in (through Ambrose's legs), he tries the same silly approach from the other side, pulling Ambrose with his hands while pushing him with his feet. After further entanglements with a cop and a seltzer bottle, he somehow gets pushed through the slot. This scene was likely shot on a set and more plotted out than the rest. There are no signs of track activity here and no people appearing to be non-actors looking on.

Once Charlie makes it in he engages belligerently with some folks in the stands (more seem engaged by his antics now than in his earlier public event shoots, likely due to his greater celebrity), fighting with Ambrose, and stealing sips from a woman's soda straw. He then turns his attention to flirting with the ignored Mabel. Mabel is more engaging in this film than in most of her earlier interactions with Charlie. She sits on his hat and tries to pass it off to him as ok, but Charlie shows hot it is broken and looks dismayed. Mabel and Charlie then head out to the track to check out the propeller-equipped car, which blows off Charlie's hat (Doug Sulpy was right, all the footage I linked above is in this version. Mea culpa.) Charlie runs after his hat and presumably recovers it as he has it again when he returns to the bleachers with Mabel. As Chester returns, Mabel suddenly gets more affectionate, putting her arm around Charlie, provoking a fight that ultimately gets Chester and Ambrose escorted out of the race by a cop. When Chester is out of the picture, Mabel rebuffs Charlie's attempt at a kiss, though she does flirtatious tweak his nose between her fingers and they share a laugh to close the film.

So basically, this film starts real slow, with no Chaplin, then has a great segment with him and Ambrose, and then moves into run of the mill park-comedy-like romantic triangle (ok quadrangle) antics, though these are more enjoyable than in some films due to the sweetness and apparent affection between Charlie and Mabel. If this film were shortened by 2-3 minutes of what came before Charlies entrance, I would give it a 7 for content, but as is I can’t go higher than:

Rating:
Content 6
Print 4

 

There's another film in this period (I can't bring the particular one to mind) with an audience member at a film or show who is asleep 90% of the time - someone at Keystone apparently thought inappropriate sleeping in public places was comedy gold.

 

The "documentary" footage drags this film down just a touch, but Charlie is in top form (for Keystone anyway) throughout. His interplay with the crowd on the other side of the fence is lots of fun, and as mentioned the fence bit with Mack Swain is the highlight of the film. Charlie and Mabel look strangely, well ... human, when the camera comes in tighter on them near the end of the film. Charlie is halfway out of character it seems and is in high spirits (perhaps pleased with the day's work) - it's just comes across to me as an engaging moment.

 

His Musical Career (Film #32)
Shipped October 17, 1914
Released November 7, 1914
One reel 13:10
Scenario and Director: Chaplin
Producer: Mack Sennett

This film marks where Charlie and Mack “Ambrose” Swain really start acting like a cohesive comedy team and the first film really carried by them as a duo. While the Chaplin-Arbuckle onscreen relationship showed great promise that was largely unfulfilled outside The Rounders, the pairing with Swain comes to full flower in these last few Keystones and again later in Chaplin’s career. The mismatched size comedy team approach laid the ground work for Laurel & Hardy, and this short about them struggling to move a piano was clearly an inspiration for one of their great 3 reel shorts: The Music Box, made in 1932 (and directed by the brother of Charlie Chase, who appears briefly in this film as the piano store manager).

There is a few minute opening sequence in which Charlie applies for a job moving pianos with Mack, tries to impress by flexing scrawny arms, and watches Mack drink varnish. Then we get to the plot: a mix up between one piano getting delivered and another being repossessed, which serves as a skeleton on which to hang Ambrose and Charlie struggling to move the upright pianos (ok, it is actually a pretty fake looking shell of a piano).

This piano moving task is kind of a supersized version of the trunk in The Property Man and the giant flower sack in Dough & Dynamite. These objects provide a nice opportunity for slapstick of a non-violent sort. Though – once again - when Charlie’s partner gets caught under such an object, Charlie makes things worse by adding his weight to it. Other interesting episodes of the Piano moves include Charlie initially letting himself be pulled along my Mack and the piano, then finding he didn’t have enough traction to move it on its own. Once they get it loaded on a 2 wheel donkey pulled cart, they make the mistake of leaning their weight back on the piano, and their weight combined with the piano hoists the donkey into the air. They struggle getting it up stairs, with the piano skidding down once and then Charlie on his own a second time. Inside the home, Charlie has to carry the piano by himself on his shoulders while the residents debate where he should put it. Charlie is then stuck in a hunched over position and Mack puts his weight on him to straighten him out in a prone position. When they later pick up the wrong piano, upsetting his owner who gives mack a kick, the kick sends the two of them and the piano sliding down a giant hill into a lake. The last shot shows Charlie playing the piano as it submerges.

This film marks where Charlie and Mack “Ambrose” Swain really start acting like a cohesive comedy team and the first film really carried by them as a duo. While the Chaplin-Arbuckle onscreen relationship showed great promise that was largely unfulfilled outside The Rounders, the pairing with Swain comes to full flower in these last few Keystones and again later in Chaplin’s career. The comedy team aspect of this was clearly an inspiration for one of the great comedy team shorts: Laurel & Hardy’s The Music Box, which filled 3 reels 18 years later.

There is a few minute opening sequence in which Charlie applies for a job moving pianos with Mack, tries to impress by flexing scrawny arms, and watches Mack drink varnish. Then we get to the plot: a mix up between one piano getting delivered and another being repossessed, which serves as a skeleton on which to hang Ambrose and Charlie struggling to move the upright pianos (ok, it is actually a pretty fake looking shell of a piano).

This piano moving task is kind of a supersized version of the trunk in The Property Man and the giant flower sack in Dough & Dynamite. And yet again, when Charlie’s partner gets caught under it Charlie makes things worse by adding his weight to the object. These objects provide a nice opportunity for slapstick of a non-violent sort. Other interesting episodes of the Piano moves include Charlie initially letting himself be pulled along my Mack and the piano, then finding he didn’t have enough traction to move it on its own. Once they get it loaded on a 2 wheel donkey pulled cart, they make the mistake of leaning their weight back on the piano, and their weight combined with the piano hoists the donkey into the air. They struggle getting it up a flight of stairs, with the piano skidding down once and then Charlie on his own a second time. Inside the home, Charlie has to carry the piano by himself on his shoulders while the residents debate where he should put it. Charlie is then stuck in a hunched over position and Mack puts his weight on him to straighten him out in a prone position. When they later pick up the wrong piano, upsetting his owner who gives Mack a kick, the kick sends the two of them and the piano sliding down a giant hill into a lake. The last shot shows Charlie happily playing the piano as it gradually submerges.

In contrast to many of the two reelers which feel padded out, this film has very little padding and actually feels like it is cut short at the end and could have been extended into a second reel. Heck, Laurel & Hardy made a masterpiece stretching it out to three reels. This film is also refreshing when viewing them in short order, as it is a notable departure from the standard Keystone templates, with the relative lack of fighting and flirting.

Rating:
Content 8/10;
Print 3/10

 

I just wanted to briefly stand up and be counted -- this is such a wonderful thread, so well organized and so well-written (I expect nothing less from Ray). It's extremely informative and enjoyable for a "lapsed Chaplin fan" like me. Thank you, Rfreeman, you're doing a first-rate job.

Please keep this going. Thanks.

 

Nice to have you with us. Welcome and I am glad you are enjoying it too.

 

Not a laugh riot, but a solid, enjoyable film. Mack Swain, for me anyway, is just a likable screen personality, and he gelled well with Charlie, I think, because he didn't overdo the histrionics like many of the other Keystone men (cut to the music lover who is about to have his piano possessed ).

Lots of little funny bits, including Charlie's failed nap on top of the piano keyboard, and his need to carry his cane with him even though he's moving a piano (and make "use" of it in the process).