WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
Only that it stars Charlie Chaplin.
LET ME EXPLAIN...
This was my first Charlie Chaplin experience, and I was definitely more optimistic than my wife was before it began (I think she feared it'd be too much like a Marx Brothers film). Fortuntely for us, it wasn't like a Marx Brothers. In fact, it was quite funny!
I've always heard Chaplin was a great entertainer, and after seeing this movie, I can understand why.
First of all, there's a fine line in physical comedy between hilarious and corny; it's really easy to emphasize something so much that it's over the top. Also, the silent film era practically required actors to be overly dramatic in order to convey what's going on. Charlie Chaplin (at least in "The Gold Rush") incredibly avoids all of these pitfalls.
His gestures are strong but subtle when necessary. His face is expressive but real. And his comic timing is amazing.
To sum all this up: Charlie Chaplin is rightfully one of the greatest entertainers in film history.
What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
I'm not surprised at all that a Chaplin film is on the AFI List, seeing as how he was one of the greatest entertainers ever in film. I AM surprised, however, that there are three Chaplin films on the list. Because of this, I have to think about why "The Gold Rush" is one of the best movies ever made besides the fact that it's a Chaplin. Doing a little research (and watching the Bonus Features on the DVD), I learned that:
1. This is one of Chaplin's most famous films,
2. "The Gold Rush" is a contradictory film, taking an incredibly sad event like the Alaskan gold rush and turning it into a comedy,
3. There are some very impressive special effects (especially for being made in 1925),
4. The scene with the dinner rolls (included at the bottom of this post) is arguably the most famous Chaplin scene of all time, and
5. Of all the films he made, Chaplin wished to be remembered most for "The Gold Rush".
Complaints?
Actually, this is a praise about the revised version that we watched. Chaplin revised "The Gold Rush" in 1942, adding a great musical score to it, and instead of the silent film word frames, Chaplin himself narrated and dubbed the entire movie, which really made it much easier to enjoy. I definitely recommend watching this version if you can!
LET ME SUM UP...
Within the first ten minutes, my wife and I became Chaplin fans. He's a great physical comic, and "The Gold Rush" includes some rather impressive special effects for being made so long ago. It's a story that's easy to follow with great scenes that include a giant chicken, dinner rolls, and a teetering cabin on the edge of a cliff. I now see why Chaplin is practically immortalized as an entertainer (especially since he also wrote and directed all - or at least most - of the movies he was in). I'm now very much looking forward to watching the other two Chaplin films on the AFI List (Modern Times and City Lights).
MY RATING: 6.5/10
TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 78
2 comments:
Jeesh whats with the silent acting hater comments? I'll give something like Intolerance is too 'flicker-y' for a modern audience to enjoy...but most films past 1920 had as modern acting as any talkie, and in fact late 20s (1925-1930) tend to flow as well as talkies did circa 1939.
Charlie and Gloria are Gods, but I wouldn't write off every other silent film based on some preconceived notion you've picked up somewhere (and in fairness the ones on this list are quite good, so that makes it all the more confusing to me...)
I'm not hating on the silent era at all. I'm just noting, from my albeit limited observations, that silent movies tended to require more dramatic acting and movements.
"Intolerance" was certainly like that, as was "Sunrise", which I absolutely love as a film and was made in the late 1920s. So I don't hate it, I just feel that era brought about more dramatic acting.
And talkies that are about the silent era, like "Sunset Boulevard" and "Singin' in the Rain", certainly convey that notion as well.
Post a Comment