This Board Is About Chaplin...

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

s***@juno.com

2008-10-28 16:33:38 UTC

Who else is tired of coming here and seeing nonsense posts about the
election or advertisements? This board is about Chaplin, nothing else.
Please post non-Chaplin topics elsewhere.

Feuillade

2008-10-28 21:12:56 UTC

Permalink

Post by s***@juno.com
Who else is tired of coming here and seeing nonsense posts about the
election or advertisements? This board is about Chaplin, nothing else.
Please post non-Chaplin topics elsewhere.

I don't know if you've noticed it, but for most of the past few months
this board was a ghost town.

Be glad that people are posting about anything.

Tom Moran

c***@ttu.edu

2008-10-31 17:41:16 UTC

Permalink

There's a standard response to this objection. If you want to talk
about Chaplin, by all means introduce a topic on Chaplin, and don't'
worry about what other people are doing.

Because Chaplin was himself involved in politics, either as a
commentator or as a political football, there's a long history on this
group of drifting into discussions of politics, past and present. Such
discussions could easily be linked to Chaplin, though some of the long-
time posters don't bother to do this, because it's taken for granted.

Does anyone here doubt how the Chaplin of the 20s, 30s, and 40s would
view the current political situation?

Connie K.

s***@juno.com

2008-10-31 19:53:45 UTC

Permalink

There's a standard response to this objection. If you want to talk
about Chaplin, by all means introduce a topic on Chaplin, and don't'
worry about what other people are doing.
Because Chaplin was himself involved in politics, either as a
commentator or as a political football, there's a long history on this
group of drifting into discussions of politics, past and present. Such
discussions could easily be linked to Chaplin, though some of the long-
time posters don't bother to do this, because it's taken for granted.
Does anyone here doubt how the Chaplin of the 20s, 30s, and 40s would
view the current political situation?
Connie K.

Well, many of these topics have nothing to do with Charlie whatsoever.
If there were posts about politics that somehow releated to him, then
thats fine. But it seems like good topics get buried under spam and
other posts that have nothing to do with what this forum is suppose to
be about. Besides, the LAST thing I want to see when I come onto a
Chaplin board is more talk about the election - there are plenty of
other forums for that.

I guess whats frustrating is when I log on to read new posts on
Charlie, all I see are spam and politics. I was hoping there would be
more talk about the Keystone restorations.

c***@ttu.edu

2008-11-01 20:17:16 UTC

Permalink

Post by s***@juno.com

There's a standard response to this objection. If you want to talk
about Chaplin, by all means introduce a topic on Chaplin, and don't'
worry about what other people are doing.
Because Chaplin was himself involved in politics, either as a
commentator or as a political football, there's a long history on this
group of drifting into discussions of politics, past and present. Such
discussions could easily be linked to Chaplin, though some of the long-
time posters don't bother to do this, because it's taken for granted.
Does anyone here doubt how the Chaplin of the 20s, 30s, and 40s would
view the current political situation?
Connie K.

Well, many of these topics have nothing to do with Charlie whatsoever.
If there were posts about politics that somehow releated to him, then
thats fine. But it seems like good topics get buried under spam and
other posts that have nothing to do with what this forum is suppose to
be about. Besides, the LAST thing I want to see when I come onto a
Chaplin board is more talk about the election - there are plenty of
other forums for that.
I guess whats frustrating is when I log on to read new posts on
Charlie, all I see are spam and politics. I was hoping there would be
more talk about the Keystone restorations.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I'm sure there will be more talk about them when they become
available. I've
seen a few of them in 35mm, and the best of them are surprisingly good
considering the material they had to work with. But I can't discuss
them
with other people until they become available on DVD. I can say at
this
point that they will be very much worth buying.

In the meantime there's a new Chaplin biography to talk about, if
enough
people read it and want to discuss it. I haven't had time to read it
yet,
but I should get around to it in a week or so. In the meantime, I'm
still
working on JN's book on the Essanays, which contains lots of specific
insights regarding the development of Chaplin's charcter and narrative
techniques in these films.

Connie K.

s***@juno.com

2008-11-02 18:10:47 UTC

Permalink

Post by c***@ttu.edu

Post by s***@juno.com

There's a standard response to this objection. If you want to talk
about Chaplin, by all means introduce a topic on Chaplin, and don't'
worry about what other people are doing.
Because Chaplin was himself involved in politics, either as a
commentator or as a political football, there's a long history on this
group of drifting into discussions of politics, past and present. Such
discussions could easily be linked to Chaplin, though some of the long-
time posters don't bother to do this, because it's taken for granted.
Does anyone here doubt how the Chaplin of the 20s, 30s, and 40s would
view the current political situation?
Connie K.

Well, many of these topics have nothing to do with Charlie whatsoever.
If there were posts about politics that somehow releated to him, then
thats fine. But it seems like good topics get buried under spam and
other posts that have nothing to do with what this forum is suppose to
be about. Besides, the LAST thing I want to see when I come onto a
Chaplin board is more talk about the election - there are plenty of
other forums for that.
I guess whats frustrating is when I log on to read new posts on
Charlie, all I see are spam and politics. I was hoping there would be
more talk about the Keystone restorations.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I'm sure there will be more talk about them when they become
available. I've
seen a few of them in 35mm, and the best of them are surprisingly good
considering the material they had to work with. But I can't discuss
them
with other people until they become available on DVD. I can say at
this
point that they will be very much worth buying.
In the meantime there's a new Chaplin biography to talk about, if
enough
people read it and want to discuss it. I haven't had time to read it
yet,
but I should get around to it in a week or so. In the meantime, I'm
still
working on JN's book on the Essanays, which contains lots of specific
insights regarding the development of Chaplin's charcter and narrative
techniques in these films.
Connie K.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Ah, interesting. Which Keystones did you see? Was there any footage
you handn't seen before? Was the running speed correct for this type
of film? I will be thrilled to see A FILM JOHNNY in it's complete
form. The only version I've ever seen is missing the first part (where
Charlie goes to the movies).

Brent Reid

2008-11-05 10:17:07 UTC

Permalink

Ok all, an OT posting:

I’ve seen half a dozen of the restored Keystones now & they are, of
course, more complete & better-looking than they’ve been in years. The
running speed chosen seems fine for these films, too.
Some, on average, do look better than others & some are more complete
than others.
When they’re finally released on DVD, I guess folk shouldn’t expect
miracles; as a whole, they’re never going to approach the visual
quality or completeness of CC’s Essanays, for instance.
What they will be though, is eminently watchable & capable of being
enjoyed for the inherently funny films they are – & without the
annoying ‘canned’ soundtracks we’re used to.

Though it’s been posted before, current progress on the restorations
can be found here:
http://chaplin.bfi.org.uk/restoring/restored-films.html
…which is part of the BFI’s (not-so) ‘mini’ Chaplin site – one of the
best online CC resources around.
Re A Film Johnnie (dealt with in depth here: http://chaplin.bfi.org.uk/restoring/casestudy/),
it’s been restored to about 80% of its original length which, once
again, brings up an old issue…

Firstly though, full kudos, respect & eternal gratitude to everyone
involved in the Keystones restoration which, as we all know by now, is
being carried out using 35mm sources only. Why oh why though, couldn’t
some way have been found to include so-called ‘substandard’ footage
from other sources – 8 & 16mm, etc?
Even if said footage were only to appear on (some?) DVD issues, at
least it would be a way of bringing all these films to almost their
complete original lengths.
I say this because brilliant though the restorations are, I’ve already
noticed, in the cinema, several instances of missing scenes or jump
cuts within scenes, where I’ve seen the missing footage on PD DVDs.

I know there are complicated issues around this subject, mostly
relating to cost & the admittedly limited financial return these films
have the potential to genearate. Limited as compared to the latest
blockbuster, that is.
Surely though, on a quality basis, which is one argument posited by
the restorers, the best condition 8/16/etc. mm footage is in better
condition than the worst of the 35mm stuff that’s been used?

The other event of recent months that’s led me to start thinking about
this all over again is the unearthing of the 16mm neg of Metropolis.
Though in poor condition, it’s currently being restored & used to make
a complete (finally – hooray!) version of the film, due for worldwide
release on all media.
No one’s questioning the wisdom of using that footage, despite its
origin gauge & overall quality…