From: henry@mprgate.mpr.ca (Ethan Henry)
Subject: Chaplin
Keywords: chaplin movie banana 
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:47:09 GMT

This is being posted for a friend - don't reply to me please.

From: christio@sfu.ca (Christina O'Sullivan)

blake7@herahera.cc.bellcore.com (berardinelli,james) writes:

>CHAPLIN

>     Running Length:  2:24
>     Rated:  PG-13 (Language, brief nudity, mature themes)

>     Starring:  Robert Downey Jr., Paul Rhys, Moira Kelly, Geraldine Chaplin,
>          Dan Aykroyd, Kevin Kline, Kevin Dunn, Diane Lane, Anthony Hopkins,
>          Marisa Tomei, James Woods, Nancy Travis, Milla Jovovich, Penelope
>          Ann Miller, John Thaw
>     Director:  Richard Attenborough
>     Producers:  Mario Kassar and Richard Attenborough
>     Screenplay:  William Goldman, William Boyd, and Bryan Forbes
>     Music:  John Barry
>     Released by TriStar Pictures

>CHAPLIN is Sir Richard Attenborough's recounting of the life and times of film
>great Charlie Chaplin.  The story picks up in 1894, when Charlie is five, and
>lasts until 1972, five years before his death in 1977.  Along the way, 
>Attenborough gives us glimpses of Hollywood in its infancy, the filmmaking
>process, and McCarthyism.  Above all, however, CHAPLIN shows the life, both on
>and off-screen, of one of the pioneers of motion pictures.

>It's easy to pick out the single major flaw of CHAPLIN.  It's too ambitious.
>Attempting to condense seventy-eight years into one-hundred adn forty-four 
>minutes is a Herculean task that not even a director of Richard Attenborough's
>accomplishments is up to.  There's too much material, and because the story is
>so rich, characters and events go whizzing by at dizzying speeds.  CHAPLIN
>becomes a series of scenes and images rather than a cohesive whole.

Actually there's another major flaw.  Three screenwriters share credit for the
screenplay but don't think for a minute they worked together.  The compiling of
three different scripts was done rather awkwardly, and the ploy of having the
editor visit Chaplin was rather convoluted and not as successful in shaping the
biopic as a cohesive unit.

>Robert Downey Jr. does a highly credible Chaplin.  Not only does he look like
>the comic, but he had mastered the physical mannerisms so necessary to the
>role.  Downey said that copying "The Tramp" was his biggest challenge.  It is 
>also his most impressive accomplishment.  In fact, the actor so perfectly 
>captures his character that clips of the actual Chaplin can be used in the 
>movie without ruining the illusion.

>Aside from Chaplin, there is little attempt at character depth.  Douglas 
>Fairbanks (Kevin Kline, most recently of CONSENTING ADULTS), Sydney Chaplin
>(Paul Rhys), and Oona Chaplin (Moira Kelly, of THE CUTTING EDGE) are fleshed 
>out a little, but none of them could be considered three-dimensional.  It
>certainly isn't the actors' faults.  Their characters have such limited screen
>time that it's difficult to do more than introduce them.

Agreed.  No one would know by looking at the film how important Edna Purviance
was as a mainstay of Chaplin's life, she (Penelope Ann Miller) being on for all of two minutes.  I think the line Chaplin says, "If you want to understand me,
watch my films" shouldn't be ignored.  The best scenes in the film were the
film clips.
>Choosing Geraldine Chaplin to play Charlie's mother Hannah is a case of
>inspired casting.  Aside from Downey, she gives the most convincing portrayal,
>and even though her screen time is limited, she has presence in the scenes 
>she's in.

>Attenborough, with a flair for the subtle, cast Moira Kelly in a double role -
>that of Hetty Kelly, Charlie's lost love, and of Oona, with whom he had his 
>only successful marriage.  Kelly has trouble with the early role - or, more
>specifically, with Hetty's accent - but she does a fine job as Oona.  The 
>obvious resemblance between the two characters is never commented upon, so it's
>up to the viewer to make the connection.  Unfortunately, this is another 
>instance where the script fails.  Since Hetty is only briefly introduced, it's
>hard to envision her as one of the forces that drives Chaplin's life, and even
>harder to understand how he is able to set aside her memory through Oona.

>Indeed, emotional moments are few and far between in CHAPLIN.  The 
>only scene of any genuine power comes in the closing moments of the 
>movie.  Aside from that, watching the film is much like perusing a 
>history textbook - informative and interesting, but not memorable or 
>powerful.  Fortunately, CHAPLIN is well-paced and snappily-plotted, so it 
>never becomes dull or tedious.  Early in the film, Mack Sennett (Dan 
>Aykroyd) notes that Chaplin's first film appearance is on the cutting 
>room floor - not a good place to be.  One wonders how much of this 
>picture ended up getting snipped.  My sense is that there was a lot - 
>too much, perhaps - but it's difficult to imagine that any reasonable length 
>could have been enough to do justice to the man's life.  Seeing CHAPLIN 
>has given me a strong desire to read the autobiography upon which the 
>movie is based.

I dunno about the dearth of emotional moments.  I thought Charlie finding out about Hetty's death was heart-tugging to watch, and of course Chaplin's own "The
Kid" excerpt in the film's closing moment which caused both my friends to cry.

Chaplin NEVER wanted a biopic of his life to be made, and now we know why! 
For those who read as well as watch movies, I recommend the two books that were
the main sources for _Chaplin_: Chaplin's _My Autobiography_ (1964), and David Robinson's _Chaplin: His Life and Art_, both of which are fascinating reading.
Also, go rent the Chaplin two-reelers, which are much funnier than the classics for which he is best-known and revered.

>As expected from an Attenborough film, CHAPLIN boasts strong production 
>values.  The editing and camerawork are smooth.  There's a wonderful 
>"life imitates art" scene where Chaplin is being chased by the police, and 
>this couldn't have been better put together.  The aging effects are some 
>of the best I've seen.  When Chaplin is old, he looks like he's being 
>played by an elderly actor, not Robert Downey Jr. under a mountain of 
>makeup.  Veteran composer John Barry's score, while perhaps too 
>reminiscent of his DANCES WITH WOLVES music, is evocative.

The Salt Lake City, Utah scene could have been on the cutting room floor with
no harm done to the film.  I thought it was silly, although Chaplin did have
to run about disguised as women and old ladies while evading the lawyers in
real life, I doubt very much it simulated a Monkees' video like that piece of
dreck in the film did.  Most evocative of John Barry's arrangement were
Chaplin's own scores (Limelight, The Kid, City Lights, Modern Times).

>All-in-all, although CHAPLIN is solid entertainment, it's far from a 
>magnificent film.  As intellectually intriguing and satisfying as it is, 
>the movie fails to touch enough emotional chords to make it of more than 
>passing interest.  

>                      Rating:  7.9 (B, **1/2)

I would recommend it purely on Downey's inspired performance! Especially
Downey's portrayal of Chaplin in his early twenties.  While not a great
film, _Chaplin_ could have been left in worse hands, and is adequate as a
basic introduction to a difficult, fascinating motion picture genius. I have
seen documentaries that are much more entertaining.
when he plays Chaplin in his early twenties'..d
Christina M. O'Sullivan
christio@sfu.ca
cosulliv@sfu.ca
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby BC

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies