Director Dissection with Seanc and Rauldc

I will try to get to my rewatch of The General this week, then I will just have King of New York and Steamboat Bill Jr. left.

I will echo much of what Raul said. I really enjoyed how personal this film obviously is. Chaplin is completely sympathetic despite being a bit of a mess in parts. The bits are fun to watch and despite its run time the film is paced very nicely.

I love the theme of your time passing you by but desperately trying to hang on to that. It is so relatable no matter what your occupation or hobbies. It's not a foreign concept in film, but it is very effective and a really great swan song for Chaplin.

I still believe City Lights is my favorite but this is a close second. Great film that I am surprised doesn't get more recognition. Maybe too melodramatic for some. King Of New York and rewatch of The Kid left for me.

__________________
Letterboxd

“Except for markf, you’re all a disgrace to cinema.”

Yeah, that's awesome that you liked it. Did you get the feeling he was trying to echo how tough it was to move on @seanc ?(as in him moving from Silents to the new film era?) I don't know why but that was prevalent for me.

Oh yeah, for sure. His character is even called the clown tramp on all the posters in his apartment. Ironic to me because for me so far Chaplin is pretty great with sound. Of course art evolving from the art of the past is part of the theme too. Film got better with sound but the film makers of today wouldn't be as good without artists like Chaplin and Keaton showing them how to tell stories visually. Good stuff.

The General



Forgot to post about The General which I watched a few days ago. It's really a film that holds up well for its age. It's perhaps Keatons best storyline and therefore, it is my favorite film of his. The stunts are absolutely spectacular. I wish every Keaton film gave off these vibes but I have learned that I'm starting to lean a bit towards being more a fan of Chaplin. This is still Keaton at his most clever, every scene done on the trains is purely great film. The repeatability of watching this film is very high which is something rare in a silent film. It just gives off all the right vibes.

My second watch. I really enjoy it. A very simple story executed well. It may start silly but by the time you get to the emotional punch you can feel the weight. I really don't have much to say. I wish the print was a little better and I don't care for the dream sequence. Besides that, sweet film.



One more for me @rauldc14, what you got left?

Two more, King of New York and Steamboat Bill Jr. I'll get to one of them on Thursday.

Steamboat Bill Jr.



My least favorite Keaton so far, which is a shame because I had always had a feeling that I would like it. To me, the storytelling isn't all that great. Save for a couple stunts, there isn't a whole lot of fun in the movie like there normally is. There also isn't as many laughs. I was pretty disappointed.

A King in New York



Unfortunately for a finale I was very disappointed with this. I think the subject of the film is something that really doesn't interest me too much, so that's probably why I felt as if it dragged on. I didn't care enough about the characters and there was nothing groundbreaking about the filmmaking in itself. This was Chaplins last chance to shine in a film, and unfortunately he didn't. Also missing was the charm and laughs that we are so used to from his other films. Just an overall flat watch.

Ouch, I will be getting to this soon and we can start to finish up.

This thread is so great. One of the best here on the forum...

I need to watch more Chaplin thinking about it.

__________________
/watching movies for mark f/
MovieMeditation's Cinema Reviews // Film Diary 2015 // Letterboxd Profile // MovieMeditation's Top 50 Horror

That's it for Keaton and Chaplin for me. There were a few I didn't enjoy but this certainly helped to broaden my horizons with the two of them. And I found a few new fun ones to watch from them!

Thanks Meds, this is really a lot of fun. Maybe we can get you to join in on one sometime.

For sure.

I just quit my job today so I'll have plenty of time in a month or so.

I liked this just a bit more than Raul, but just a bit. I totally understand where he is coming from with this film. Where Limelight felt like an aging artist working through what that means and how it plays out in his later life. King Of NY feels more like a guy that just got old and is telling the kids to get off his lawn. That comes through most in the jokes. There is a ton of stuff that just doesn't work. The peeping through the keyhole at a women bathing, the band switch at the restaurant, and the movie trailers. There is more, but too many to remember and no sense in piling on.

Where the film does work for me is all in Chaplin's charm. He is just easy to watch, and when he is in the hotel room one on one with another actor, I mostly was happy to be watching one of the greats. Unfortunately not enough of that, and way too much of the other.

So we finish up another round. I'm glad we chose a couple Chaplin's from the sound era because I continue to prove what a poor cinephile I am by saying watching too many silent films in a row is a chore for me. I certainly can enjoy them but I much prefer a few sprinkled throughout my viewing for the year then a bunch all at once. I know it is not necessary to pick a side when it comes to Keaton and Chaplin, but it seems like most film fans fall to one side over the other which was part of the reason I wanted to do them together. I think I can now officially declare myself team Chaplin, but I do enjoy the brevity and charm of what I have seen from Keaton. I knew Keaton had charmed me when he showed up for a very small part in Limelight. I immediately smiled, enjoyed his short time, and was left wishing the two of them had found more to do together. Fun couple of months with these two giants.

Chaplin: Absolutely magnetic performer with a heart for humanity that comes shining through in his story telling. Like Keaton, he certainly has charm that comes through in his "bits". I don't think I will think of those bits when talking about Chaplin though. I think I will talk about his character and how he interacts with the other characters in his films. The Kid has stood the test of time because of how sweet, endearing, and relatable the story is. City Lights is probably his greatest achievement because it tells the best love story. The Great Dictator might be the greatest political satire put to film.

I say all this about Chaplin only having seen seven of his films. So there is still a ton for me to discover. Good chance Chaplin could land on a future list of my favorite directors.

City Lights
Limelight
The Great Dictator
The Kid
The Gold Rush
Modern Times
A King In NY

Keaton: Totally charming and has it over Chaplin when it comes to set pieces for sure. Unfortunately that is mostly what I find Keaton to be, the original blockbuster film maker. Saying his stories are all the same doesn't do my criticism of him justice because that is a criticism that could be levied on most directors if you put them under a microscope. What matters is that all his films feel the exact same to me, and that just works against him for me. Especially when comparing him to Chaplin. To his credit I love his brevity and think it works very well for someone who is a part of a generation who can easily pick up their phone while watching a movie. Don't dislike Keaton by any means. It's just that in seeing six of his films, I feel like I have seen Buster Keaton's films.

The Cameraman
The General
Sherlock, Jr.
College
Steamboat Bill, Jr.
Three Ages

Good compilation of thoughts there, Seanc. I mostly agree with the basics of what you say here.

To me Chaplin is a master filmmaker. He wrote, directed, acted and composed his own films. And that he had such broad talent and still could also make diverse films easily puts him over Keaton for me. He just had more weight too and more to say and better and tighter stories with themes and meaning. He evolved a lot as an artist too and he dove into the sound era with grand style. Keaton just seemed stuck in the unlucky hero role acting out in simple linear stories about getting the girl, getting the job or saving the day. But indeed he was a master at stuntwork and his set pieces were amazing and the camera trickery and dangerous stunts were mind blowing and still to this day. But except for The General his films are rather "empty" and straight forward and some even forgettable... They just don't stick, story wise, like Chaplin's work does.

I think it's a mistake to ever underrate Keaton as a filmmaker. He's one of the purest artist of the moving image that ever existed. I guess I could find more depth, meaning and enjoyment out of that characteristic of his alone than most MoFos.

It's a bit of a pity, because I'd want you all to enjoy his films as much as I do, but at least I get where you're all coming from.

__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019

I wish I had your perspective of the history of film in my mind while watching a film. I think when I come outside of the actual films and read about a film maker or see what people like you and Mark have to say about them I can totally see where you are coming from. Ultimately that's not why I watch movies though. It may play into why I come here to talk about them, but when I am watching them I care about what I am feeling in that moment. That's ultimately how I rate them. I'm not saying this is what you're doing, but Keaton doesn't need me to have his back and talk about how influential he is. There are plenty of people doing that. I always rate and talk about purely what I feel when watching films.

I would love to hear more about why you think Keaton is great and what makes him so deep and meaningful as well... I'm asking because I'm genuinely interested to hear and understand your strong point of view.

That's the right attitude. I'm exactly like that. You shouldn't always trust it as a good indicator of the potential of a film, though. A second or a third feeling can be just as strong and wise, but I'm sure you know that.

To me, his filmography represents the lost charm of old-fashioned filmmaking. His films are thematically quite simple* and there's no heavy reliance on sound. It's ALL about imagery and how it can creatively be used.

To me, all of these clever filmic techniques that appear throughout his films are more than just tricks. To me they are poetry.

With all this new technology and all these years of film history behind us, it's amazing to me that some of our most purely cinematic moments still come from people like Keaton, Murnau and even Méliès.
A much too large part of the films that get made today don't seem to be as image-oriented anymore as some of those great films of the silent era. For the comedy genre, Keaton is probably the greatest icon that represents the potential of the genre as a purely cinematic form. It's unbelievable how refreshing he still comes across to someone from my era and how much more creatively and effectively he used the essence of the cinematic form than 99% of the filmmakers that are working today..


* Although I'd say The Cameraman, The General, Our Hospitality, Sherlock Jr., The Navigator and some of his other films potentially have more to them than their merely superficial interpretations may imply.