Unless you're a confirmed Chaplin fan, you might want to give second thoughts to whether you want to see the new restored version. The print looks gorgeous, but the film itself seemed surprisingly dated. The humor, mostly physical, also seemed dated.
I'm extremely disappointed, and I've enjoyed nearly all the Keaton comedies.
If something is "dated" it's you. "Modern times" is a timeless masterpiece - it's message is as fresh as ever. Nothing has changed.
sharemodern times is great, but just to let everyone know, do not get the new dvd box sets, all the movies are cut down from their aspect ratio, all around, you miss sooo much, try and find the first dvd's that came out. find a new copy and and old copy and compare, you'll see.
chaplin is the best!!!
I think the Chaplin Collection is great.
shareread my reply in the rerelease topic, I agree wih karloff zombie.
shareYou ever watched Seinfeld? Notice all the weird physical movements Kramer does (like that odd Chaplin-style shuffle). It's funny isn't it? YES. So don't tell me that physical comedy is dead.
Chaplin can "speak" to you without using words. Go watch the Gold Rush and watch his eyes as he flirts with the beautiful women. He makes you laught & cry in the same movie.
Silent movies are not dead. Today's comics, like Kramer, are still copying their physical routines.
"The humor, mostly physical, also seemed dated." -post from above
Define dated.
Define physical.
watch the movie again closely and tell me if you don't think there are a lot of "non-physical" jokes and humor underneath the overlying slapstick and physical humor.
If this is dated, I wanna be sedated...seriously though it's like some people who will not watch black and white movies because they are not in color...
just because it's dated doesn't mean it isn't valueable, entertaining, and most importantly to me- tells me something about life during those times and the portrayal of them in popular media (i.e. how we saw ourselves).
"Life is divided into the horrible and the miserable." -Woody Allen
[deleted]
I agree with raert, Amen...
shareI agree with the initial poster that this movie is dated, in fact all of Cahplin's work is. I won't argue with you about whether he is funny or not (because comedy is so subjective) but I get tired of hearing how "timeless" and "great" Chaplin is. His character (yeah the one he plays in pretty much all his movies because he couldn't do anything else) is a member of the industrial working class from the late 19th and early 20th century. A character that thousands and thousands of people could see day to day in that time period, but tdoay in 2004, I don't think there are too many people around who identify themselves as a scruffy street tramp with a heart of gold. His quirky mannerisms and slapstick comedy (which mainly consist of him getting hit on the head or getting his clothes stuck in something) don't really speak to me (and I'm sure many more) as the everyman. He is a funny oddity of the lower classes (from that time period) who sticks his thumb in the eye of the aristocratic upper class. Certainly there are still rich and poor today, but it is not the same. There isn't the same large industrial proletariat and the snooty aristicrats. It is a broader middle class who are much more inclined to identify themselves with a character on a network sitcom then the Chaplin. The reason Chaplin seems dated to a lot of people is not because the movies are old, it's because of the character that he plays. Buster Keaton's movies are just as old and hold up much better. Keaton who took on different roles and had better stories was not as popular as Chaplin at the time, but has since been viewed as much more ahead of his time and still funny today. Now you can think Chaplin is funny and it's your right to do so, but don't act shocked and surprised when someone thinks Chaplin is dated...because well, he is.
shareOf course Modern Times is dated, and so is any other film made in the '30s. The cars, the clothes, the details of day-to-day life-- all these things have changed enormously in 70 years. As a film buff with a historical bent, I enjoy period detail in old movies, myself.
What hasn't changed are some of Chaplin's themes beneath the surface: the encroachment of technology in our lives, a sense of alienation from modern life, the search for companionship, the search for home. Not dated one bit.
The previous poster asserted that Chaplin's slapstick comedy mainly consisted of Charlie getting hit on the head or getting his clothes stuck in something, which in my opinion reflects poor (or at least highly selective) observation. Did you miss the scene where Charlie rollerskates blind-folded? How about the feeding machine, or the hilarious double-talk song? How about the dance of the rolls in The Gold Rush, the David and Goliath sermon in The Pilgrim, or the globe dance in The Great Dictator? Chaplin was a uniquely gifted mime, a performer with a special talent that far transcended "getting hit on the head."
I love Buster Keaton's work too, by the way, but have never understood why some people use Keaton to clobber Chaplin and vice versa.
[deleted]
Well you obviously prove that NOT EVERYONE thinks he is "dated" and highly unfunny but I already knew that from the first posters. I was responding to them, and therefore your response to me is redundent and pointless because how can I be surprised that people think he isn't dated when I was replying to those such people?
Anyway when you said that you are baffled by my suggestion that only the proletariat is allowed to think he is funny you either misunderstood or misrepresented me. What I meant was that a lot of his initial success was due to the fact that he represented that class and THAT is when he was largely his most relevant. People can find him funny whenever they were born, I just dont think he is all that relevant today. Or for that matter are his films, which are rarely shown or talked about (other then movie sites like this, and only when looking for them) nor are really any direct aspects of his movies copied or used today. A lot of that has to do with how long ago these movies were made. No one cares about this stuff anymore, hell cable TV considers and calls movies from the 1980s "classics". How many of today's comedians do you think were influenced by Chaplin or even aware of him outside of his memory or at most 2 or 3 movies? I'm sure people like Dave Chappele and Will Ferrel owe their comedy to him. Yeah right.
People can say that "Oh the movies are old but the themes are still here today, like "technology" and "poverty" and "a lonely search for love". But when someone broadens a theme like that it lessens the impact and makes it applicable for almost any film. Take for example how his movies depict poverty. Chaplin himself is the example, there is no one like that today. There aren't these quirky little men on the street corners with panes of glass on their back ready to replace windows (a la' The Kid). Or people who are forced literally to eat their shoes and work in these old industrial factories. His movies say nothing about the racial dynamic involved in poverty today, or anything about the rural poverty in America? Are the people who are poor in this country today tramps living in a big city? There is only likea fringe group of people who actually live on the streets here and let me tell you they sure aren't watching Chaplin movies. People who are poor now deal with things like living pay check to pay check dealing with food stamps, unemployment offices, having their jobs go over seas, and a rising cost and standard of lving. NONE of that can be found in a Chaplin movie. People like Chaplin today would be (in many towns) arrested for vagrancy or forced out of town. Only in the biggest cities do you have a person who is remotely like him, and even then it's different.
Now I know I'm probably not going to convince too many people (at least on this board) that Chaplin is dated and irrelevant but pleasae don't try to tell me using loose thematic ties that it's "hard for someone not to find him relevant". Let me tell you I found it to be quite easy. If you found him to be relevant in some way to your life or in movies then good for you, I won't tell you he isn't. I'm just saying that the notion that most people would find him to speak some eternal truth about the human condition is ridiculous. I'm sitting here trying to think about how anythign Chaplin does in any of his movies relates to my life growing up in a middle class suburb, going to college, and trying to get a job in todays market, and I can't do it. Then I take 10 seconds to read my Foxtrot Calendar on the desk, and laugh because Paige wants to go shopping again and it reminds me of my sister. Chaplin is just too far gone from my generation and I believe people would be more inclined to see his works as glimpses into a time past and a different world. Which in a way is great because movies can let you do that unlike any other medium, even books. In fact I saw a Chaplin film in a history class last year and in the context of the class fit a lot better then if I just happened to rent it out of the blue. Anyway if you think he is funny and like him that's cool, I just think that it's kind of silly for you people to insist he is so relevant.
Zoopansick
[deleted]
You really should read what I wrote again, my attacks are on Chaplin and his movies not on the fans. I said right in my first post "I'm not going to argue as to whether he is funny or not because comedy is subjective". I'm not saying you are stupid for liking his movies. I'm expressing my opinion that I think his movies are dated and I don't think his movies are really that relevant. To call someone arrogant for not liking a movie that you like is arrogant in and of itself, because it supposes that the movies you like are somehow beyond reproach and immune from criticism. Like I've said before it's your business to like or dislike his movies, I'm merely challenging the notion that he and his movies are timeless. If you want to argue with me on that point, great, that is afterall the point of internet forums, and make for much more intersting threads then 5 people in a row saying "yeah I agree this movie is great." But don't come here and call me an arrogant jerk just because I don't like the movie, that's just stupid.
Zoopansick
[deleted]
These movies are dated. Buster Keaton's movies are also dated. Clothes, cars, even situations. And I don't believe any movie is beyond criticism. And humor is subjective.
However, Chaplin was a genius. He had a gift for writing, directing, acting, and physical comedy. He can make you cry and he can make you fall off your chair laughing.
Chaplin's movies are relevant. If nothing else, these movies influence many of today's filmmakers.
Kat
When was the last time you heard these exact words: You are the sunshine of my life?
[deleted]
I think you're right that some of his overall notions are dated, but the deeper themes are not dated (like being unable to fit in, and feeling alienated with what is going on around you, things like that) and probably never will be (as they are themes that work for some people in pretty much any society through history).
shareI do disagree with one of your points of contention. You claim that Chaplin is of no relevance today. I suppose one example of his relevance would be the movie Life is Beautiful. You may remember it, it won multiple Academy Awards. Benini is often referred to as "The Modern Chaplin." Granted this movie won its awards in 1998, I think it does prove Chaplin still does have SOME relevance, even if not as much as others may claim.
share"A lot of that has to do with how long ago these movies were made. No one cares about this stuff anymore, hell cable TV considers and calls movies from the 1980s "classics". How many of today's comedians do you think were influenced by Chaplin or even aware of him outside of his memory or at most 2 or 3 movies? I'm sure people like Dave Chappele and Will Ferrel owe their comedy to him. Yeah right."-Zoopansick
I doubt very much that comedians such as Chappelle or Ferrell would be influenced by Chaplin as they are very different in their styles. However, ask a physical comedian like Jim Carrey or Rowan Atkinson (and Steve Martin, as a matter of fact) and ask them if they were influenced by Chaplin.
Ask a standup comic who their influences were, and they would most likely say standup comics.
Your comparison here is somewhat irrelevant because you chose two examples of people who would most likely not have been influenced by a physical/slapstick comedian. (Somewhat like stating that Miles Davis is not an inluential musician at all just because he wasn't an influence on, say, Eminem. Two different styles completely.)
Next, your statement about movies from the 80s being called classics-that term is thrown around *very* loosely. It usually means any movie more than 5 years old that people actually still would want to watch. In other words, the movies you'd find in the $2.88 DVD at Wal Mart would probably not be considered "classics". But there are many films of recent years that still are very highly regarded. There's no point in labeling a film a classic because only time will tell what's still being watched and what's been forgotten.
Which proves that Chaplin must still be at least somewhat relevant if we're still discussing a 68 year old movie of his today.
Of course you have a right to like the movie. We all have personal tastes. I never thought I would like Chaplin, but then I saw The Kid. It was funny and touching. I did not really feel drawn to other Chaplin movies. I then ended up watching a good part of Modern Times and was captivated. Dated? Who knows. I just know I enjoyed a movie from a different era. But could Chaplin really only play one part? What about Limelight?
shareP.S. Why on God's green earth do you write on and on and on and on?
shareto Zoopansick
I think there are many,many things you could find in Modern Times that are still valid, you just have to search for them while you watch it if you can't see them without searching.
And maybe the context is dated but the problems that the movie examines are not.
I think you perceive art too literally that's why you miss the message.
Do you think that The Matrix or Star Wars or LOTR are irrelevant to our times, too?
Well, I absolutely love Modern Times, as well as all other Chaplin that I've been able to see, but I would completely agree that his movies are dated. For me, though, that's where a lot of the charm comes from. I've never been able to explain this adequately, but for me, Chaplin's films are dated in a way that make them timeless. I know it sounds like a contradiction, but there's something incredibly beautiful, delicate, and touching about a Chaplin movie, even in the midst of the slapstick, that really gets to me every time.
As for your claim that his subject matter is largely irrelevant to people today, I do have to dispute that. My dad is a factory worker, and is middle-aged, so is removed by several generations from Chaplin's era. Times have certainly changed, and we're more of a working middle-class than the industrial poor that Chaplin portrayed. However, Modern Times, is one of my father's favorite movies, and he always says it gets across EXACTLY how it feels to feel like a cog in some industrial machine, something that stays a constant even if the particulars of context and the exact technology has changed. I also think he still identifies with the core situation of The Tramp, just some guy who wants to get through his life and be able to find some happiness without all of these greater forces incessantly bothering him (the leftist strikers keeping him unemployed being just as bad as the screeching owners). Now, since I'm younger, removed from the direct experiences of an industrial situation, and most likely headed for a middle class white collar job, this movie obviously means different things to me, but I think it's essence is more or less universal.
"You don't think someone dug up Mom's body just to steal Mr. Fuzzy, do you?!"
ok. From the pov of a middle aged man who first saw Modern Times with my grandmother in 1955 when I was 8 in a theatre that had a floor that sloped UP to the screen, I have to say that anyone who considers it dated would probably say the same thing about Shakespeare, and has not stopped to consider that, while we in the US may have progressed past the poverty and social dysfunction portrayed in the film, much of the rest of the world has not, and we may not in fact continue without falling back into it. The Tramp's heroism is timeless, and imnsho the model for any number of characters, including Neo.
On another point, someone above said s/he didn't like the final musical number. I'll be polite. I disagree. I work at a bingo night at my local place of worship, selling raffle tickets. There isn't a night that goes by that I don't find myself humming that song, and thinking of that marvelous moment when the Tramp throws out his hands and his cuffs go flying...
[deleted]
[deleted]
I have to disagree that it's overrated and I would very much disagree that it is dated. Modern Times is a film very much about it's time, the harsh climate of the great depression. Nothing feels worn out here, it looks to me like a time capsule of it's era.
shareI not only love Modern Times, it's my absolute favorite Chaplin film (though the only other ones I've seen are The Gold Rush, City Lights and The Great Dictator). I think it's his funniest and also his most touching film. I find the scene of him roller skating blindfolded one of the most moving scenes in any movie. I don't see how the film is dated either. It's not as if people don't work crappy monotonous jobs anymore. Anyhow, there's something very human about this film that transcends whatever social message or historical details that may no longer apply today.
shareOverrated? The movie is regularly screened for computer science students here on the University of Technology in Vienna (Austria). That is where I first saw it. I had a lecture (Informatics and Society) where the movie was discussed, especially because of it´s timeless social relevance. My professor suggested that it is even more relevant today than it was back then because technology in our time plays much bigger role in everyday life than it did in the 1920s. Not to mention it´s cinematic significance. The other movie discussed in this matter is Metropolis by Fritz Lang. But it doesn´t come close to Modern Times in the terms of social relevance.
I love Chaplin!!!
But I thought "Modern Times", was ok. I do like it, and own it. And I definately think that it is as relevant today as it was back then. C'mon, Charlie really predicted the future didn't he?
I mean look how dependent we are on technology,when it goes we go!
Even if some people can't relate to the tramp, I beleive that it captures the fundamental ideal, in the back of every one's mind. That we connect with the tramp on some level, we feel down trodden, pushed around, life sucks.
But to see Charlie make so much of those situations, and always "Buck up!". Makes us think, "Hell, lifes not so bad!" That movie really reflected it's time, and that does make it timeless. Other movies are, because of the movies that inspired before it, if you really appreciate film you can see beyond the slapstick comedy, to its true statement.
That being said, I laughed my butt off when Charlie tweaked the buttons on that womens skirt with the wrenches! :)
[deleted]
[deleted]
"His character (yeah the one he plays in pretty much all his movies because he couldn't do anything else)..."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044837/reference
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032553/reference
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039631/reference
"His character (yeah the one he plays in pretty much all his movies because he couldn't do anything else)..."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044837/reference
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032553/reference
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039631/reference
I first watched "Modern Times" just last year. Before that I only seen "The Gold Rush"; so I knew I was in for a ride! I wasn't dissapointed!
This film is FANTASTIC!! I can not see how some one wouldn't love the song he sings, or the roller skating scene! Unbelievable! This film is nearly 70 years old, but I have been more engrossed in this film than the trash that has recently been forced upon us by Hollywood today!
Great film; just one of the many Chaplin gems that has been given us.
"Keep Ted Turner and his goddamned Crayolas away from my movie."--Welles
I'm not sure if this is relevent but i felt the Direction in the film was brilliant, never a dull part of the film and it's constantly engrossing.
It's funny at times (like the heavily mentioned factory scene, and the food machine scene).
I think a lot of humor is dated as most silent comedies are, Chaplin is less hilarious and more often charming. There wasn't a part of the film that i didn't like watching is basically what i'm getting at (of course, the waiters song has a specific line that makes me cringe, but of course, that was then and this is now).
oh, and that flag waving turning into leading the march. That was brilliant as well.
share[deleted]
This is my favorite Chaplin movie, because it's not only hilarious, but it's actually a good movie even by non-comedic standards! Think about it, it's about a society that attempts to be utopian but instead is dystopian. I think it's based off of Upton Sinclair's book, "The Jungle," but thematically it is also very similar to Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World," Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451," and George Orwell's "1984."
But of course, it's still one of the funniest movies ever.