In the fifth chapter of The Cultures of American Film, author Robert Kolker, dives into the Silent Comedy era of film. Before dialogue could be used for actors to give hysterical one liners, producers used an array of movements to make the audience slap their knee. A series of gestures, chases, getting hit, hitting back, falling, and facial expressions, without making a sound, made the audience laugh, making this genre so unique. Silent comedy brought film two historically great actors in Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Chaplin and Keaton thrived in silent comedy, using the mute genre to build their brands and bring joy to their audience. In a world with no words, movement was used to grab the attention of the audience. The creativity used in silent comedy was captivating. For an example, in Keaton’s Seven Chances, Keaton must be married before his 27th birthday at 7:00 pm, in order to receive inheritance from a dead relative. In the film, Keaton goes through tribulation on his mission for marriage is portrayed through a series of chases, comedic rejection gestures and actions, and eventually Keaton marries the girl and receives his inheritance. That is what is interesting about silent comedy, filmmakers used various movements, gestures, and …show more content…
Chaplin established his own persona – the derby hat, moustache, small and tight jacket, baggy pants, and a cane created the look for Chaplin’s character “The Little Tramp” (Kolker 75). Chaplin developed his own brand, a brand that emphasized his sentimental figure and the working-class. The creation of “The Little Tramp” helped shape the fame of Chaplin, and quickly became a “cultural phenomenon.” Chaplin’s persona began to appear off screen – on comic strips, advertisements, and even costumes were created and sold. Chaplin’s own brand helped rise to fame and quickly became one of the most popular figures in
In my seemingly never-ending quest to fill in the glut of blind spots in moviegoing history, I tackled my first Marx Brothers’ film, 1933’s “Duck Soup.” As some of you may have realized, comedy isn’t my favorite genre simply because it frequently fails to make me laugh. Nevertheless, I continue to watch supposedly rib-tickling films in an effort to develop more of a taste for the genre. While I did find “Duck Soup” amusing, I cannot say I found it funny.
Comic Cinema has become more inept to show the visual comedy and instead rely on sound, particularly dialogue. Take the scene from comedy film Old School where Will Ferrell tries to explain to a group of college kids why he cannot drink. (Figure 1.9) In a cinematic standpoint the scene just seems is a simple shot reverse shot of a grown man and a couple of college kids who seem to disapprove of his decisions. The chunk of the humor lies solely in the dialogue and the way the characters in the scene react to the one speaking. Since the introduction of sound and cinema, audiences have been more drawn to the pleasures of the act of hearing and seeing that they need less and less from both instead of a masterpiece of both. Visual comedy will always
(1) Wittgenstein once said, “A typical America film, naive and silly, can for all its silliness and even by means of it— be instructive . . . I have often learnt from a silly American film.” (Wittgenstein 57e). He is pointing out that the humor, and the means of humor, in some films can be a tool of instruction. The ability of film to cause a reaction like laughter is of philosophical interest. While Wittgenstein’s comment is itself playful and dense, it directs our attention to a philosophical aspect of some films. Understood in a wider scope, I believe the comment is a terse philosophy of film. Understood in an even wider scope, we can see it as a terse theory of philosophical method.
In 1939, Charlie Chaplin was a world famous movie star who released a movie that would be very controversial, The Great Dictator. The movie was meant to ridicule Hitler, as at that time he was at the height of his power. At the end of the movie, Chaplin delivers a speech as a Jewish barber mistaken for Chaplin’s Hitler- like dictator. Chaplin uses speech rhetoric to convey Chaplin's message of hope and light. The film did very well in the theaters and was Chaplin's most successful movie. The speech in the film, The Great Dictator, used it's influential place in society with cinema to convey a message of peace, hope, and independence.
Laughter is an interesting topic. Mainly because of the lack of thought that goes with it as to why we laugh. In an article titled Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic by Henri Bergson, the theory behind why things are funny is explored. He mentions many different things in his article pertaining to the comic, however, there are a few that stand out more than others. He talks directly about the fact that things are only funny if they relate to humans. Then he touches on the idea that accidents are funnier than planned events. Finally, he speaks on laughter being directly related to social setting. The 1992 film Noises Off is a perfect demonstration of everything that Bergson writes about. Henri Bergson’s essay on laughter is perfectly supported by the film Noises Off.
Michael Billington, a famous film and theatre critic, claimed that “theatre allowes its audiences to enjoy the pleasures of language, which is an endless verbal pleasure” whereas he described the lanuage of film as “banal”and unoriginal. He also believes that theatre is more responsive to the ti...
Imagine it – all the rules you were raised to follow, all the beliefs and norms, everything conventional, shattered. Now imagine It – Clara Bow, the It Girl. The epitome of the avant-garde woman, the archetype of the flapper, was America’s new, young movie actress of the 1920’s. Modern women of the day took heed to Bow’s fresh style and, in turn, yielded danger to the conventional America. Yet Bow’s contagious and popular attitude came with its weaknesses - dealing with fame and the motion picture industry in the 1920’s. Despite this ultimate downfall, Clara’s flair reformed the youth and motion pictures of her time.
Brownlow, Kevin 1994, ‘Preface’, in Paolo, C, Burning Passions: an introduction to the study of silent film, British Film Institute, London: BFI, pp. 1-3.
With the discovery of techniques such as continuous editing, multiple camera angles, montage editing, and more, silent filmmaking developed from simple minute-long films to some of the most beautiful, awe-inspiring films that have ever been created—in only a few decades. In Visions of Light, someone alluded that if the invention of sound had come along a mere ten years later, visual storytelling would be years ahead of what it is today. This statement rings true. When looking at the immense amount of progress that was made during the silent era of films, one must consider where the art of film has been, where it is, and where it is
Amongst the numerous great silent film directors, the three that are commonly mentioned surrounding that discussion are Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd, and Charlie Chaplin. Having seeing a greater amount of Charlie Chaplin’s magnificent work than the others, Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd most certainly still got my consideration. In spite of every one of the three delivering awesome pieces of visual artwork, they shared some comparable attributes, however they each had unique differences which contributed to their each distinct style of silent film production. From seeing films produced by all three of these directors, it is evident that comedy works magnificently well with the silent movie format.
Language or the way in which words are used is one of the most important components of a comedy. Through an intelligent use of word play and the ability to add
For my video paper I chose to do a Pixar movie called Finding Nemo. Although Pixar movies are more aimed for the younger generations, it is becoming more popular for these movies to be introduced in the classrooms. In our DeVito text it shows and explains all the different forms of communication that can be related back to Finding Nemo. Along with other Pixar movies, they all portray many different aspects of communication. Nonverbal communication is presented in the movie by using gestures/movement. Although cartoon characters are not actually real people in the movie, they are created by real people who have experienced nonverbal communication in their lives.
When a critic examines the silent films of Charles Chaplin a question that arises is whether the comedy he portrayed is a mockery of political and current issues, or a means to bring laughter to viewers. Silent films generated different emotions and thoughts since a spectator was simply watching actions rather than hearing an explanation through words. Information was cleverly construed this way and however the critic analyzed the information presented was an individual responsibility. In fact, Charles Chaplin once said, "..it is not the reality that matters in a film but what the imagination can make of if," to a young critic.[1]
The nature of comedy has always left it somewhat resistant to critical analysis, and to some extent the same can be said for comedic actors. The class-clowns of Hollywood like Will Ferrell are often times constructed as being nothing more than amusing, so they seem like a simple case study.... ... middle of paper ... ...
One of the most famous types of television comedy is the sketch comedy style. Greg M. Smith, in his article “Red Skelton, The Crack-up, and the Quick- change” explains how the move of vaudeville acts to television created the template for all sketch comedies. A small number of performers, often only one or two, “depended on interchangeable acts that could be juggled into different configurations for a show, the sketch necessarily is narratively compartmentalized. Plot elements from one sketch do not carry over to the next, necessitating that the performer slip from one role to another as he/she moves from sketch to sketch.” (n pag) Today’s sketch comedies continue to run independent multiple short sketches per episode. Although they may now have recurring characters, frequently still, only a single-time character is played. Just as there is a prevalence of one actor playing multiple roles per episode, so also are the situations, locations, and interactions often differentiated completely from one scene or show to the next. Some or all of these elements can be found in such shows as Monty Python's Flying Circus, Saturday Night Live, The Whi...