(Apologies for the premature posting last night. This here is the real deal. If the embedded videos give you any trouble, you can watch it directly on YouTube here and here.)
The following video essay is my entry in the comedy countdown. Enjoy!
Joel I will have to check this out this evening when I get home. I will say that Modern Times is my favorite Chaplin and the one I ranked the highest from him, even though the others like The Gold Rush and City Lights are close behind.
Hope you enjoy(ed) it, Jon! Oddly enough, Modern Times was not generally one of my favorite Chaplins – I definitely preferred Gold Rush, City Lights, even The Great Dictator. While fascinated by the themes, I was maybe not as attracted by the episodic plot (as Ferguson notes, MT is kind of a compilation of shorts rather than a feature with a narrative throughline like GR or CL even those these too are fairly episodic). More importantly, it just has never made me laugh as hard or as frequently as the other films. It was all more a case of admiration than enjoyment. After reading these great essays, however, and especially after zeroing in so tightly on the clips as I created this, I feel compelled anew by it and want to watch it again.
I will say, though, that I own it and the reason for purchase – more than anything else – can be boiled down to Chaplin’s co-star. I just find, and have always found, Paulette Goddard utterly bewitching.
Haha yeah she’s hot. I do agree. Another reason why the film is so good. 😉 For me it’s the social satire element that I find takes the film to another level.
This is an excellent way to tackle the film Joel. Well done. Seeing images of scenes that have been burned in my head is a perfect reminder of why I love this film so much & placed it at top spot. There are plenty of memorable gags but also smart commentary on society and struggles of the working man which make the film highly relevant & timeless. For example, the daily grind is shown literally as the tramp passes through the gears in the machine, which also shows him as a mere cog in the gigantic machinery. The song is just perfect as is the final happy walk off near the end. Just a brilliant film…
Sachin, what struck me editing this (which I’m going to ruminate on in a stand-alone comment momentarily) is how the film manages to contain not just so many famous set pieces, but how very different they are from one another: the gibberish-singing, the machine-wheels, the walk into the sunset, the cocaine spasms, the roller-skating and then burglary in the department store, all seem like they could belong to different movies.
I’m curious about this from any viewers, but particularly from you as you placed this #1: what’s your take on the various commentaries I included here? Ferguson, Greene, and Barthes all seem to have very different perspectives on the movie even if they’re all generally keen on it (although one could lose this a bit in Ferguson’s somewhat condescending mid-thirties take on Chaplin’s lingering affection for silent film tropes).
I found the commentaries beneficial especially since you note they offer different perspectives. If I heard the commentaries without knowing which film was being discussed, I would not have guessed they were talking about the same film. In that regard, it highlights that the film offers so much that different interpretations can be had. I approached the film mostly in a social context and didn’t think of any larger political point. So I gained another perspective from some of the commentaries, which has made me curious to revisit the film.
Joel – Just loved this. What better way to show the greatness of MODERN TIMES than to just let us relive those wonderful scenes. Very well chosen and matched narration on key points as well.
Thanks Pat. It was fun figuring out how to illustrate various comments, at once trying to seem relevant without being too on-the-nose. Perhaps I failed at times, but it was an enjoyable challenge and I’m glad it worked for you.
After watching and listening to this, one enters the world of this supreme classic of the cinema more aware and more appreciative of the greatness Chaplin gave the world. The opening and the closings are unforgettable, but as the brilliant discussion demonstrates this is a film that rewards re-viewings and scholarly-wrought assessment. This was a stroke of genius, and surely one of my own favorites posts in the countdown. And what a permanent reference point. One critic opined that MODERN TIMES was the equivalent of Disney meeting Fritz Lang. Chaplin himself credit Rene Clair for some ideas from one of the French master’s best films. In any case, many consider this to be Chaplin’s most brilliant film, and it’s hard to dispute that estimation. The conveyor belt sequence, the food-tasting machine gig, the high society party where Chaplin spews gibberish, and the achingly poignant scenes with Paulette Godard as the waif are ingrained in the mind as is the spirit of the song “Smile” presented here for the first time in instrumental form. (but no less lyrical and tremendously moving) The film shows Chaplin at the peak of his powers, and in theme and presentation it’s the most auspicious and sophisticated statement he’s ever made. Again, Chaplin refused to conform with the talking medium (though some gibberish, sound effects and music are in place) and again his decision resulted in a huge commercial and artistic success.
Again this was a unique and enthralling way to present MODERN TIMES to the readers. It’s gleefully immersive. Nobody does this kind of thing better than you Joel, and when you go this route it’s always a treat.
Thanks so much for the compliments Sam and I’m glad it was “gleefully immersive” (great phrase!) for you. That “Disney meeting Fritz Lang” quote is a gem.
Ferguson made some interesting observations comparing Clair to Chaplin in their approach, but it got axed along with, actually the majority of Ferguson’s essay which was the longest of the three. By contrast, Barthes’ Mythologies epigram made it largely intact – I’d say at least 2/3 was included. It’s funny, especially in Greg’s juicy delivery which I greatly appreciated, Ferguson seems kind of down on Chaplin & Modern Times even though initially reading his review, I felt it was positive.
I was about to ask if this was your favorite Chaplin, but how could I forget your euphoric love for City Lights lol? I suspect you murdered anyone who tried to get in your way of writing about that for the countdown haha….
Ok, now that I’ve responded to comments individually (and thanks to those who viewed and appreciated this entry – I know videos tend to fall by the wayside a bit but I love making them and find they’re able to say things I can’t say with prose alone) – a few side notes and additional thoughts.
It’s interesting that I ended up voicing Grahame’s essay, which was sheer coincidence – the other volunteers chose whom they wanted to “perform” and I was left with the famous Brit. Yet I probably sympathize with his take the most – Ferguson seems rather too condescending in his take on Chaplin, and while I find Barthes’ take fascinating (his was the first I approached, and in a way I dig that the recording Jeff sent me was somewhat distorted – it captures aesthetically what I different angle Barthes was coming from), its single-mindedness doesn’t quite capture the humanist allure of Charlie’s world.
That said, in both regards, I cherish the contradictions and clashes between the views of these three great essayists. In fact, one of the things I enjoyed most in creating this was witnessing the ways in which these writers framed the movie in fundamentally different ways – so that sometimes I felt they were actually describing different films. A testament, among other things, to the richness of Modern Times’ universe I guess. I tried to illustrate this in my visual juxtapositions, but at times I also sought to subvert the author’s assertions (a few examples: as Ferguson somewhat dismissively describes the crowd-pleasing conclusion I focused on the film’s very real sense of social and economic insecurity and how it actually contrasts this with bourgeois comfort in a way that Hollywood films today seem simply incapable of; I also tried to include Chaplin’s sighting of the police in front of him as he leads the unseen crowd of strikers as a subtle tweak of Barthes’ assertion that the Tramp is totally “blind”).
All in all, it was a great pleasure to me to play with these wonderful texts and interweave them with the movie. An experience that really captured for me what I love not just about movies, but movie-blogging: the ability to discuss, examine, and toy with very different points of view and ways of engaging with a movie.
Thanks Sam, for giving me the opportunity to do so!
I LOVE it because you effectively caught the spirit of the film and its reasons for being seen as a classic all the while giving us a sensory piece that alludes to the times in which it was subject to its orginal criticisms. There is a beautiful literacy to these little, short, documentaries, and I find the effect of them are transportive. I felt like I was in the room with Graham Green, cigarette smoke swathing the space, brandy being ingested, and talking about our impression of a night in a theatre, dressed in a suit and top hat.
I HATE this piece because I didn’t come up with the idea myself….
I shutter to think about the bad imitations that will follow now that this has set the tone at WITD that “anything goes”!
This is an extraordinarily beautiful and, somewhat, haunting piece and, easily, the MOST INVENTIVE and ORIGINAL post WITD has ever seen grace its pages.
I would have liked to hear Allan Fish’s voice too! I have been reading Movie Man Joel Bocko’s writings since the days when he graced the pages of the Boston Enquirer. He has always favored the creative approach. I sent Sam an e mail this morning telling him this remarkable presentation should be considered one of the finest of this soon-to-conclude countdown. I like several others that I would say are in the elite lot (R.D. Finch is really something for one) but this is so much different than anything we have seen or are likely to see. I have loved this film since I first saw it as a teenager. It’s hilarious, it’s enrapturing, It’s poignant.
Thanks for the kind words, Frank! I have only recently taken to the explicitly-narrated video essay form, although I have always enjoyed clipping and/or rearranging moments from films. When I was about 15, I made a mixtape (well, not really a “mix” as it was chronological) of movie moments from my VCR to a Hi-8 deck. Something that has become much easier with the advent of digital editing!
Although last year I made that 42nd Street video montage (one of the pieces I’m proudest of) for the musical countdown, it’s probably another countdown entry this Modern Times collage overlaps with the most – the juxtaposition of screen-caps from The Gay Divorcee with Arlene Croce’s text. This is, in a way, a kind of video elaboration on that idea: exploring a critic’s ideas and interpretation in the actual context of the movie. And something I think I may return to in the future.
I liked this a lot. Choice commentaries with the right clips in a easily digestible and tasty whole.
It was good to hear the voice of Bocko! I’d be wary (like Allan) of putting my voice out there. I could only do it with some hyper-posh comedy disguise accent…which wouldn’t go at all. Or the deadpan stylings of Ringo Starr.
Lol. Thanks Stephen, I thought of you too when considering Brits but unfortunately (fortunately in your eyes?) not in time. Hopefully Greene is not rolling in his grave to be “played” by a bloody Yank. 😉
Wonders in the Dark is a blog dedicated to the arts, especially film, theatre and music. An open forum is highly encouraged, as the site proctors are usually ready and able to engage with ongoing conversation.
Wonders in the Dark is a blog dedicated to the arts, especially film, theatre and music. An open forum is highly encouraged, as the site proctors are usually ready and able to engage with ongoing conversation.
How do I access the video essay?
Sorry for the confusion, Jacob. It’s up and running now!
Joel I will have to check this out this evening when I get home. I will say that Modern Times is my favorite Chaplin and the one I ranked the highest from him, even though the others like The Gold Rush and City Lights are close behind.
Hope you enjoy(ed) it, Jon! Oddly enough, Modern Times was not generally one of my favorite Chaplins – I definitely preferred Gold Rush, City Lights, even The Great Dictator. While fascinated by the themes, I was maybe not as attracted by the episodic plot (as Ferguson notes, MT is kind of a compilation of shorts rather than a feature with a narrative throughline like GR or CL even those these too are fairly episodic). More importantly, it just has never made me laugh as hard or as frequently as the other films. It was all more a case of admiration than enjoyment. After reading these great essays, however, and especially after zeroing in so tightly on the clips as I created this, I feel compelled anew by it and want to watch it again.
I will say, though, that I own it and the reason for purchase – more than anything else – can be boiled down to Chaplin’s co-star. I just find, and have always found, Paulette Goddard utterly bewitching.
Haha yeah she’s hot. I do agree. Another reason why the film is so good. 😉 For me it’s the social satire element that I find takes the film to another level.
Interesting way of tackling Modern Times Joel. I enjoyed watching both essays.
Thanks, Maurizio – I’d be interested to hear a bit of your own take on the movie, as you ranked it pretty highly – is it your favorite Chaplin?
This is an excellent way to tackle the film Joel. Well done. Seeing images of scenes that have been burned in my head is a perfect reminder of why I love this film so much & placed it at top spot. There are plenty of memorable gags but also smart commentary on society and struggles of the working man which make the film highly relevant & timeless. For example, the daily grind is shown literally as the tramp passes through the gears in the machine, which also shows him as a mere cog in the gigantic machinery. The song is just perfect as is the final happy walk off near the end. Just a brilliant film…
Sachin, what struck me editing this (which I’m going to ruminate on in a stand-alone comment momentarily) is how the film manages to contain not just so many famous set pieces, but how very different they are from one another: the gibberish-singing, the machine-wheels, the walk into the sunset, the cocaine spasms, the roller-skating and then burglary in the department store, all seem like they could belong to different movies.
I’m curious about this from any viewers, but particularly from you as you placed this #1: what’s your take on the various commentaries I included here? Ferguson, Greene, and Barthes all seem to have very different perspectives on the movie even if they’re all generally keen on it (although one could lose this a bit in Ferguson’s somewhat condescending mid-thirties take on Chaplin’s lingering affection for silent film tropes).
I found the commentaries beneficial especially since you note they offer different perspectives. If I heard the commentaries without knowing which film was being discussed, I would not have guessed they were talking about the same film. In that regard, it highlights that the film offers so much that different interpretations can be had. I approached the film mostly in a social context and didn’t think of any larger political point. So I gained another perspective from some of the commentaries, which has made me curious to revisit the film.
Thanks guys. I’ll return with more in-depth responses as soon as I’m able.
Joel – Just loved this. What better way to show the greatness of MODERN TIMES than to just let us relive those wonderful scenes. Very well chosen and matched narration on key points as well.
Thanks Pat. It was fun figuring out how to illustrate various comments, at once trying to seem relevant without being too on-the-nose. Perhaps I failed at times, but it was an enjoyable challenge and I’m glad it worked for you.
After watching and listening to this, one enters the world of this supreme classic of the cinema more aware and more appreciative of the greatness Chaplin gave the world. The opening and the closings are unforgettable, but as the brilliant discussion demonstrates this is a film that rewards re-viewings and scholarly-wrought assessment. This was a stroke of genius, and surely one of my own favorites posts in the countdown. And what a permanent reference point. One critic opined that MODERN TIMES was the equivalent of Disney meeting Fritz Lang. Chaplin himself credit Rene Clair for some ideas from one of the French master’s best films. In any case, many consider this to be Chaplin’s most brilliant film, and it’s hard to dispute that estimation. The conveyor belt sequence, the food-tasting machine gig, the high society party where Chaplin spews gibberish, and the achingly poignant scenes with Paulette Godard as the waif are ingrained in the mind as is the spirit of the song “Smile” presented here for the first time in instrumental form. (but no less lyrical and tremendously moving) The film shows Chaplin at the peak of his powers, and in theme and presentation it’s the most auspicious and sophisticated statement he’s ever made. Again, Chaplin refused to conform with the talking medium (though some gibberish, sound effects and music are in place) and again his decision resulted in a huge commercial and artistic success.
Again this was a unique and enthralling way to present MODERN TIMES to the readers. It’s gleefully immersive. Nobody does this kind of thing better than you Joel, and when you go this route it’s always a treat.
Thanks so much for the compliments Sam and I’m glad it was “gleefully immersive” (great phrase!) for you. That “Disney meeting Fritz Lang” quote is a gem.
Ferguson made some interesting observations comparing Clair to Chaplin in their approach, but it got axed along with, actually the majority of Ferguson’s essay which was the longest of the three. By contrast, Barthes’ Mythologies epigram made it largely intact – I’d say at least 2/3 was included. It’s funny, especially in Greg’s juicy delivery which I greatly appreciated, Ferguson seems kind of down on Chaplin & Modern Times even though initially reading his review, I felt it was positive.
I was about to ask if this was your favorite Chaplin, but how could I forget your euphoric love for City Lights lol? I suspect you murdered anyone who tried to get in your way of writing about that for the countdown haha….
Ok, now that I’ve responded to comments individually (and thanks to those who viewed and appreciated this entry – I know videos tend to fall by the wayside a bit but I love making them and find they’re able to say things I can’t say with prose alone) – a few side notes and additional thoughts.
It’s interesting that I ended up voicing Grahame’s essay, which was sheer coincidence – the other volunteers chose whom they wanted to “perform” and I was left with the famous Brit. Yet I probably sympathize with his take the most – Ferguson seems rather too condescending in his take on Chaplin, and while I find Barthes’ take fascinating (his was the first I approached, and in a way I dig that the recording Jeff sent me was somewhat distorted – it captures aesthetically what I different angle Barthes was coming from), its single-mindedness doesn’t quite capture the humanist allure of Charlie’s world.
That said, in both regards, I cherish the contradictions and clashes between the views of these three great essayists. In fact, one of the things I enjoyed most in creating this was witnessing the ways in which these writers framed the movie in fundamentally different ways – so that sometimes I felt they were actually describing different films. A testament, among other things, to the richness of Modern Times’ universe I guess. I tried to illustrate this in my visual juxtapositions, but at times I also sought to subvert the author’s assertions (a few examples: as Ferguson somewhat dismissively describes the crowd-pleasing conclusion I focused on the film’s very real sense of social and economic insecurity and how it actually contrasts this with bourgeois comfort in a way that Hollywood films today seem simply incapable of; I also tried to include Chaplin’s sighting of the police in front of him as he leads the unseen crowd of strikers as a subtle tweak of Barthes’ assertion that the Tramp is totally “blind”).
All in all, it was a great pleasure to me to play with these wonderful texts and interweave them with the movie. An experience that really captured for me what I love not just about movies, but movie-blogging: the ability to discuss, examine, and toy with very different points of view and ways of engaging with a movie.
Thanks Sam, for giving me the opportunity to do so!
JOEL…
I don’t know what to say about this piece.
I LOVE it and HATE it at the same time.
I LOVE it because you effectively caught the spirit of the film and its reasons for being seen as a classic all the while giving us a sensory piece that alludes to the times in which it was subject to its orginal criticisms. There is a beautiful literacy to these little, short, documentaries, and I find the effect of them are transportive. I felt like I was in the room with Graham Green, cigarette smoke swathing the space, brandy being ingested, and talking about our impression of a night in a theatre, dressed in a suit and top hat.
I HATE this piece because I didn’t come up with the idea myself….
I shutter to think about the bad imitations that will follow now that this has set the tone at WITD that “anything goes”!
This is an extraordinarily beautiful and, somewhat, haunting piece and, easily, the MOST INVENTIVE and ORIGINAL post WITD has ever seen grace its pages.
BRAVO!!!!
Wow, thanks so much for the praise, Dennis! I was holding out for Allan Fish to voice Greene with caustic British aplomb, but no dice unfortunately. 😉
DAN!!!!! That’s WAY too bad! ALLAN FISH would have been perfect for Graham Greene!!!!!!
Ah, a missed opportunity!
By the way, if you ever decide to do another one of these, please know I do a bitching version of John Huston!!!!! LOL!!!!
I would have liked to hear Allan Fish’s voice too! I have been reading Movie Man Joel Bocko’s writings since the days when he graced the pages of the Boston Enquirer. He has always favored the creative approach. I sent Sam an e mail this morning telling him this remarkable presentation should be considered one of the finest of this soon-to-conclude countdown. I like several others that I would say are in the elite lot (R.D. Finch is really something for one) but this is so much different than anything we have seen or are likely to see. I have loved this film since I first saw it as a teenager. It’s hilarious, it’s enrapturing, It’s poignant.
Oh and yes, it’s a work of genius.
Thanks for the kind words, Frank! I have only recently taken to the explicitly-narrated video essay form, although I have always enjoyed clipping and/or rearranging moments from films. When I was about 15, I made a mixtape (well, not really a “mix” as it was chronological) of movie moments from my VCR to a Hi-8 deck. Something that has become much easier with the advent of digital editing!
Although last year I made that 42nd Street video montage (one of the pieces I’m proudest of) for the musical countdown, it’s probably another countdown entry this Modern Times collage overlaps with the most – the juxtaposition of screen-caps from The Gay Divorcee with Arlene Croce’s text. This is, in a way, a kind of video elaboration on that idea: exploring a critic’s ideas and interpretation in the actual context of the movie. And something I think I may return to in the future.
MovieMan,
I liked this a lot. Choice commentaries with the right clips in a easily digestible and tasty whole.
It was good to hear the voice of Bocko! I’d be wary (like Allan) of putting my voice out there. I could only do it with some hyper-posh comedy disguise accent…which wouldn’t go at all. Or the deadpan stylings of Ringo Starr.
Lol. Thanks Stephen, I thought of you too when considering Brits but unfortunately (fortunately in your eyes?) not in time. Hopefully Greene is not rolling in his grave to be “played” by a bloody Yank. 😉