|
Related Topics:
| Modern Times on TCM question - Did anyone watch Modern Times on TCM a few weeks ago? Chaplin's song was missing a verse. Is this the version in the new DVDs? Deborah "The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is -Mark Twain
Modern Times DVD: Sharp? - I watched a little bit of on TCM, and thought the was pitched a little high. It didn't sound the same as when I saw it or watched the VHS issue. Is this the way it's supposed to sound? Or is it a mistake? Funny..
Modern Times question - I hope someone can help me here, this has been bugging me for some time... I've been a Chaplin fan for many years now. When I first saw Modern Times, the famous scene in which the tramp is employed as a singing waiter seemed oddly familiar to me. I'm..
Modern Times - WB vs. Image - I finally got my hands on the new MT dvd (borrowed it from the public library - the price was right!), and A-B'd it with the Image disc using my Toshiba player and the Pioneer DVD drive in my computer. The Warner disc was somewhat better in terms of..
How did he skate in Modern Times - Does anyone know how CC did that scene skating so close to the edge in Modern Times. It's really scary to watch. Thanks
|
|
|
Next: Charlie Chaplin: Charlie's date of birth
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jul 13, 2003
Posts: 236
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:19 pm
Post subject: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge!
Archived from groups: alt>movies>chaplin (more info?)
|
|
|
I seem to run across quite a few posts and reviews re: MODERN TIMES that
hesitate to call it a silent film, and often call it a sound film or a
part-talkie. What do you think? Silent or sound? I say SILENT, because
there is no spoken dialogue (the voices reproduced through technological
devices are sound effects, and don't count), there are dialogue and
narrative intertitles, the performances are pantomimed, and the whole style
is just plain silent. It's a silent film with a synchronized
music-and-effects track, like SUNRISE and CITY LIGHTS (among many others of
course), and nobody seems to question the silentness of the latter two. The
only sticking point I can see is the song at the end, but for me, that isn't
enough to turn a silent film into a part-talkie such as THE JAZZ SINGER
(1927) or MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (1929). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Aug 26, 2004
Posts: 43
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:06 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
To me, "Modern Times' is a silent movie, but a silent movie enhanced
with great sounds effects and beautiful music. This film contains
Charlie's best music, in my judgment. Not just "Smile" but the other
incidental muic is superb.
Take the feeding machine scene. The scene goes on for too long, but I
think the sound effects are hilarious. Press the mute button and watch
this scene with no sound effects and everything suffers. The grating
noises when Charlie is being force fed the corn are excellent, and
also the noises when the feeding machine is short circuiting. Another
scene which would be pointless and unfunny without sound is the scene
where the Minister's wife visits Chaplin in jail and their stomachs
are growling. Even the little barking of the dog is amusing.
The highlight of the film is the "Nonsense Song" for me. The
pantomime is brilliant, as always, but the words enhance it a thousand
times. So "Modern Times" is a brilliant silent film, but one enhanced
and made better by incidental sound. I was watching it again last
night and I never get tired of it. The whole segment in the
Department store with Paulette is wonderful, especially the "ballet"
roller skating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 09, 2003
Posts: 7
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:26 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I would call Modern Times a "silent" movie by the arbitrary standard
that it uses intertitles instead of dialog. Silent film moviegoers
expected sound and musical effects from the musician accompanying the
film, so employing sound and music effects on a soundtrack, for me, is
not enough to cross the line.
John Bengtson >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 03, 2003
Posts: 48
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:32 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"WaverBoy" <waverboyNOSPAM RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
> I seem to run across quite a few posts and reviews re: MODERN TIMES that
> hesitate to call it a silent film, and often call it a sound film or a
> part-talkie. What do you think? Silent or sound?
I say SILENT. Every now and then there's an argument over the
definition of a silent film, and some folks say that if a film has any
kind of soundtrack, it can't be a silent.
I understand why they think that way, but it still seems crazy to
me.
But, speaking of MODERN TIMES, I say that Chaplin should've removed
the nonsense song and the boss's "Get back to work!" dialogue.
Shifting from silence to spoken speech, and then back to silence, is a
little bit jarring and interrupts the flow of the film, if only
slightly. The song always seemed like weak material to me, anyway.
--Shush-- >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 30, 2003
Posts: 221
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:15 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"WaverBoy" waverboy.DeleteThis@comcast.net writes:
> I seem to run across quite a few posts
> and reviews re: MODERN TIMES that
> hesitate to call it a silent film, and often
> call it a sound film or a part-talkie. What
> do you think? Silent or sound?
I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's last silent film, and that "City
Lights" and "Modern Times" fit into a different category -- sound films without
dialogue.
They are sound films because Chaplin's soundtrack is an integral part of each
film.
"Modern Times" is actually quite shrewd in its use of words to reacclimate an
audience that hadn't seen silent films in years to get used to the format
again.
So both films are hybrids. Not silent films, but not talkies either.
Tom Moran
"I noticed that George W. Bush's daughters
didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq."
-- Jack Germond >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 26, 2004
Posts: 43
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:15 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 23
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:23 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<< I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's last silent film, and that "City
Lights" and "Modern Times" fit into a different category -- sound films without
dialogue.
They are sound films because Chaplin's soundtrack is an integral part of each
film.
"Modern Times" is actually quite shrewd in its use of words to reacclimate an
audience that hadn't seen silent films in years to get used to the format
again.
So both films are hybrids. Not silent films, but not talkies either.
Tom Moran >>
This is one post in which I agree with EVERYTHING Tom wrote. I was about to add
my two cents, but then found that Tom had already expressed exactly how I view
this as well.....and quite elegantly I might add.
Maybe there is hope for world peace? : >
"My mantra with the editors was, We've got to make a movie where on the way out
of the theater people are going to ask the ushers if they have any torches." -
Michael Moore to Film Comment on the making of his film, FAHRENHEIT 9/11 >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 19, 2003
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:20 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 24 Sep 2004 17:15:10 GMT, feuillade DeleteThis @aol.com (Feuillade) wrote:
>"WaverBoy" waverboy DeleteThis @comcast.net writes:
>
>> I seem to run across quite a few posts
>> and reviews re: MODERN TIMES that
>> hesitate to call it a silent film, and often
>> call it a sound film or a part-talkie. What
>> do you think? Silent or sound?
>
>I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's last silent film, and that "City
>Lights" and "Modern Times" fit into a different category -- sound films without
>dialogue.
>
>They are sound films because Chaplin's soundtrack is an integral part of each
>film.
>
>"Modern Times" is actually quite shrewd in its use of words to reacclimate an
>audience that hadn't seen silent films in years to get used to the format
>again.
>
>So both films are hybrids. Not silent films, but not talkies either.
>
>
>Tom Moran
>
>"I noticed that George W. Bush's daughters
>didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq."
> -- Jack Germond
>
>
I agree. I refer to them as "non-dialog sound films". >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 01, 2003
Posts: 50
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:21 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 886
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:21 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
dzubeg RemoveThis @aol.com (Deborah) wrote:
>feuillade@aol.com (Feuillade) wrote:
>>I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's
>>last silent film, and that "City Lights"
>>and "Modern Times" fit into a different
>>category -- sound films without
>>dialogue.
>I concur.
I don't. SUNRISE has a Movietone score
and, I believe, some sound effects.
DON JUAN had a Vitaphone score
with music and effects. WINGS had
sound and effects. Many late silent
films, made after THE JAZZ SINGER,
did. Historians consider them silent films.
CITY LIGHT and MODERN TIMES
were in that mold.
__________________________________
"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
__William Faulkner >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 01, 2003
Posts: 50
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:23 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
>burbank74@aol.comnadajunk (Burbank74) wrote:
>This is one post in which I agree with EVERYTHING Tom wrote. I was about to
>add
>my two cents, but then found that Tom had already expressed exactly how I
>view
>this as well.....and quite elegantly I might add.
I agree. I wouldn't have said "elegantly" though, maybe "eloquently." Tom can
write eloquently, but I don't know how elegant he is. :-)
Deborah
"The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter."
-Mark Twain >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 122
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:45 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Phil P <> wrote in message news:<n4abl0l1969hnlnqupk45kqb7pfnhbvvr4 DeleteThis @4ax.com>...
> On 24 Sep 2004 17:15:10 GMT, feuillade DeleteThis @aol.com (Feuillade) wrote:
>
> >"WaverBoy" waverboy DeleteThis @comcast.net writes:
> >
> >> I seem to run across quite a few posts
> >> and reviews re: MODERN TIMES that
> >> hesitate to call it a silent film, and often
> >> call it a sound film or a part-talkie. What
> >> do you think? Silent or sound?
> >
> >I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's last silent film, and that "City
> >Lights" and "Modern Times" fit into a different category -- sound films without
> >dialogue.
> >
> >They are sound films because Chaplin's soundtrack is an integral part of each
> >film.
> >
> >"Modern Times" is actually quite shrewd in its use of words to reacclimate an
> >audience that hadn't seen silent films in years to get used to the format
> >again.
> >
> >So both films are hybrids. Not silent films, but not talkies either.
> >
> >
> >Tom Moran
> >
> >"I noticed that George W. Bush's daughters
> >didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq."
> > -- Jack Germond
> >
> >
> I agree. I refer to them as "non-dialog sound films".
"Hybrid" is a good word because a hybrid is a vigorous product of
different
parents. _Modern Times_, like _The Jazz Singer_, combines silent and
sound film techniques, but _Jazz Singer_, which is generally regarded
as a*sound* film,
does it awkwardly and somewhat arbitrarily, as might be expected of an
early experiment. _Modern Times_ is a cohesive fusion of the two, and
in my opinion a triumphant masterpiece--gibberish included.
Connie K. >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 175
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:17 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
>From: G-HELPS DeleteThis @webtv.net (George Shelps)
> dzubeg DeleteThis @aol.com (Deborah) wrote:
>
>>feuillade@aol.com (Feuillade) wrote:
>
>>>I believe that "The Circus" is Chaplin's
>>>last silent film, and that "City Lights"
>>>and "Modern Times" fit into a different
>>>category -- sound films without
>>>dialogue.
>
>>I concur.
>
>I don't. SUNRISE has a Movietone score
>and, I believe, some sound effects.
>DON JUAN had a Vitaphone score
>with music and effects. WINGS had
>sound and effects. Many late silent
>films, made after THE JAZZ SINGER,
>did. Historians consider them silent films.
>
>CITY LIGHT and MODERN TIMES
>were in that mold.
>
Both WINGS and SUNRISE can (and have) played just fine without their original
recorded scores. Neither CITY LIGHTS or MODERN TIMES can.
Richard Carnahan
"A year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in
Baghdad that is named after President Bush."
Richard Perle
AEI Keynote speech
September 22, 2003 >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 886
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:55 pm
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
rfcsac627n RemoveThis @aol.com (RFCSAC627N)
wrote:
>>I don't. SUNRISE has a Movietone score
>>and, I believe, some sound effects.
>>DON JUAN had a Vitaphone score
>>with music and effects. WINGS had
>>sound and effects. Many late silent
>>films, made after THE JAZZ SINGER,
>>did. Historians consider them silent
>>films. CITY LIGHT and MODERN
>>TIMES were in that mold.
> Both WINGS and SUNRISE can (and
>have) played just fine without their
>original recorded scores. Neither CITY
>LIGHTS or MODERN TIMES can.
All these films need some music
to play at their optimum.
CITY LIGHTS is subtitled, "a comedy
romance in pantomime."
That makes it a silent, for pantomime
is the acting genre of the silent era.
> "A year from now, I'll be very
>surprised if there is not some grand
>square in Baghdad that is named after
>President Bush."
>Richard Perle
>AEI Keynote speech
>September 22, 2003
Someday one will be, Dickie.
__________________________________
"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
__William Faulkner >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 175
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:40 am
Post subject: Re: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
>From: G-HELPS.DeleteThis@webtv.net (George Shelps)
>Date: 9/26/2004 5:55 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <27406-4157650F-20.DeleteThis@storefull-3313.bay.webtv.net>
>
>
>rfcsac627n@aol.com (RFCSAC627N)
>wrote:
>
>>>I don't. SUNRISE has a Movietone score
>>>and, I believe, some sound effects.
>>>DON JUAN had a Vitaphone score
>>>with music and effects. WINGS had
>>>sound and effects. Many late silent
>>>films, made after THE JAZZ SINGER,
>>>did. Historians consider them silent
>>>films. CITY LIGHT and MODERN
>>>TIMES were in that mold.
>
>>=A0=A0=A0=A0Both WINGS and SUNRISE can (and
>>have) played just fine without their
>>original recorded scores. Neither CITY
>>LIGHTS or MODERN TIMES can.
>=A0
>All these films need some music
>to play at their optimum.
>
Of course they do. That wasn't my point.
>CITY LIGHTS is subtitled, "a comedy
>romance in pantomime."
>
>That makes it a silent, for pantomime
>is the acting genre of the silent era.
>
The opening scene in CITY LIGHTS makes fun of the often-primative soundtracks
of those early talkies, and the scene where Charlie swallows the whistle is not
the same without sound. And MODERN TIMES is fully incumbent on sound.
>
>>=A0=A0=A0=A0"A year from now, I'll be very
>>surprised if there is not some grand
>>square in Baghdad that is named after
>>President Bush."
>
>>Richard Perle
>>AEI Keynote speech
>>September 22, 2003
>
>Someday one will be, Dickie.
>
No doubt right after they find those durn WMDs.
Richard Carnahan >> Stay informed about: MODERN TIMES (1936): Silent or sound? You be the judge! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
