CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › City Lights (1931)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

City Lights (1931)

post #1 of 3
Thread Starter 

This was out of my comfort zone, but I quite enjoyed it. I'm not overly familiar with silent film, but I appreciated all the physical comedy, stunts, and genuine sentiment. The Tramp is a provocative character, as he is easy to root for but has his faults (he's clumsy, gullible, and kind of bossy with the butler when he gets the opportunity).

 

It's amazing how influential this movie has been on cinema, as I recognized the boxing match and the whistle-hiccup scene instantaneously as they've both been copied so many times.

 

What's also fascinating about the Tramp is that he's, well, very effeminate. I see a lot of Bugs Bunny in him (meaning Bugs was influenced by Chaplin), but I can't help but wonder: why were trickster characters of the 1930s/'40s always hitting on men and/or wearing drag (as Bugs was partial to do)? Wouldn't this have been discouraged at the time? Or was the idea of a man acting like a woman funny from the absurdity, and lacked a sexual component?

 

Funny that the flower girl is never even given a name.

 

Watching Buster Keaton's The General very soon, hopefully I'm prepared.

post #2 of 3

I think the joke was more that The Tramp was totally lacking in social graces, until he gets money, and then he's totally lacking in happiness. 

 

The last shot of this might be the happiest, most soul-touching moment in the history of cinema. His smile is just so endearing.

post #3 of 3

I was surprised by how much more effective I found the romance compared to the comedy in this, since Chaplin was first and foremost considered a comedic genius. A lot of the jokes felt rather cheap, lame, and unfunny to me like his various pratfalls (i.e. water being poured down his pants). What really enthralled me was the music, which was consistently great from start to finish (making me respect Chaplin even more as an artist, since he wrote all of it) and the love story. It was a very predictable and obvious love story, but the acting really sold it and made it work, as did its simple words. I agree that the smile at the end was amazingly lovely.

 

I'm a sucker for the sentimental stuff. I admire Buster Keaton's physical prowess in his movies, but I prefer the more lovable Chaplin. He's trying really hard to be lovable, but I don't mind. It's been said that Keaton took a more mature approach by never seeming to try so hard to be loved in his movies like Chaplin with the constant emoting. Since Chaplin was the first silent comedian I ever saw, I assumed most of them were like him, so I was caught off guard by Keaton's lack of emoting (hence the nickname, "The Great Stone Face"). Some people may prefer him for that reason, but again, being a softie, I can't help but favour Chaplin's smiling deer-in-headlights persona. The action and stunts in "The General" are still damn fine entertainment, though.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › City Lights (1931)