Peppermint Friday Film Review #3 Limelight

The only Chaplin Films I saw were 'Modern Times', 'The Kid' and 'Goldrush'. Didn't really see any of his films as he got abit older and wasn't the 'The Tramp' anymore, but I thought I'd give it ago as it has Chaplin and Keaton in, why not.

The film takes place in London, where you have a washed up comedian who was very successful on the vaudeville circuit, he meets this young Dancer who has just tried to commit suicide, and its just a story of him and her getting to grips with life, careers, and love. 

Its such a lovely story because I love Chaplin's simple character of it as, it wasn't the Tramp it was just a character called Calvero, who was amazingly positive and was abit upset about the fact he didn't have a proper career anymore, but he was abit more adult about it. The other main character is Terry who is a dancer, and is very pessimistic about life, and just a total downer. 

This film is very uplifting, and quite serious and deep. I love the bit where Calvero and Terry are talking and she says something like 'oh whats the point in life' and he goes 'there's always a point, its why a rock does this, and a rose does this'. I particularly love his impersonation of a Japanese Tree. 

The bits where he's performing is always very entertaining, I love the 'Performing Fleas, Phyllis and Henry' because in some ways its still the Tramp, I mean I guess its like a telling of Chaplin because he was this huge comedian and then he didn't do anything.

I love the use of his son Sydney Earl Chaplin as he was the sort of love interest where Terry liked him, but she also liked Calvero dispite the age, and Calvero wanted her to be with him. But he was amazing in that, and you can tell he didn't do it cus he was like 'Oh dad's doing a film I want to be in it' it was more like a professional actor who wanted a part in this film. 

The only strong criticism I have for this film is Claire Boom who plays Terry, I felt her character was okay but I didn't relate to her because she was just abit too winey, there wasn't any thing that was majorly positive with her, as I just felt she had to be down about things for no strong reason. But I did like the dialogue, and I can completely understand why she was the character she was, as it draw parallels to Chaplin, kinda like a see-saw effect. You don't see much of Keaton in this film, as he is in it for one scene. Which is abit of a shame, but I do like him in it.

The music and script was wonderful, and it was refreshing that a story wasn't incorporated around the Tramp or Chaplin, it was a story about life, and had a strong element of music, and theatre behind it. Overall I must say this film is just amazing, the comic timing is truly the best. The music and theatre scenes are amazing. Its also such a sweet film, its a kinda cuddly cosy film. 

Chaplin Vs Keaton

I thought for a change I'd talk about one of the loves in my life, and that is Classic Film Stars & Actors. 

These are 2 very interesting Comics, Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin where they're very similar but complete opposites, we'll start with them at the beginning.

One similarity they both have is that they both started around the same time, and they were amazing writers, directors, actors and comics. 

Chaplin was bought up in East End London, it was just him and his Brother Sydney who then went ton later to become his manager, and his mother who had a mental breakdown and got sent to a mental institute. So for him he felt he had to have money because he had no choice but to be independent for himself and family.
Whereas with Keaton he was pretty much bought up on the Vaudeville Circuit, as his parents were Performers and he was part of his Family Act. So for him he felt that not having wasn't a big issue for him.

For Chaplin in terms of Comedy and a Career he wrote and directed alot of his films, and also he used a character for pretty much most of his films, 'The Tramp'. Which is very clever but also The Tramp was a particular character where he's very silly and doesn't take himself seriously and has a way of doing things, and its an iconic character he created, because he made films around The Tramp until he made 'The Great Dictator' but I mean The Tramp was who he was.

With Keaton he did things a little bit more spontaneous where he didn't really have a set character, but he always had a particular way of playing with Comedy.He always had a very serious, deadpanned face. As he did Physical Comedy with this character persona he had, its very interesting to watch. 

Both of them do Physical Comedy, both do it very well, but also they have such a Diversity in Comedy, where they both have such a vulnerability in there films. Also both are known for the parody they bought to film, Chaplin did 'The Great Dictator' which I wouldn't say is a parody at the time, but it is a parody of Adolf Hitler, however after that film and during that time he was involved in alot of controversy. Keaton did parodies aswell but his were alot less controversial than Chaplin as he just took out of films and other creative things. 

In personal life, they are very much different. As Chaplin had wife after wife, and even then they were very young girls, so young where he had to go to Mexico just to marry them. But even then he had not very goo marriages with them as he just forgot about them, which is very upsetting. Keaton however married the sister in law of his boss, so he was quite lucky I guess, he children with her, then he couldn't see them anymore which really affected him as unlike Chaplin he wanted to have his children around him. I mean Chaplin didn't hate his kids, he just didn't have time for them thus neglecting them and his wives.  Keaton also was known for a heavy drinker, but then again it wasn't that big of a 'Oh my god I can't believe that' because at the time, everyone drank, and also as him and his character it was too shocking where it was more of a sad thing. 

A difference in the 2 but a complete similarity is that both have a massive sense of creativity but in different ways, for Chaplin he did films with a beautiful story, but in some of his films his always had this story that wanted to come across, with 'Modern Times' for instance he wanted a story to come across as he felt for the people in hard times, he really got a feel of what was happening, rather than, being in a fantasy, make believe world, of 'oh lets be funny all the time'. It was funny but sometimes with a sense of realism. Keaton did things abit more creativity and without thinking of the real world issues, but at the same time it can be more creative to do films with real world issues. Because you're breaking the mold and thats what he did. 

Although at the end of this there really isn't a competition as they're both pretty much the same I guess, I mean in terms of success, and you know I'm not a huge fan of the whole 'Who's better than who?' as I feel both of them are equally as amazing. With saying that however I prefer Chaplin as I've just liked him longer, and I've watched hundreds of Chaplin documentarys, whereas for Keaton I've only watch 1 or 2. I guess you could also say that Chaplin is much more commercially known, partly because of the controversy he lead in his life. I mean you can make up your mind of what you want out of it.