Guldfeber
In 1919 the
four biggest in Hollywood formed their own production and distribution company
United Artists. The four were Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, D.W. Grifith
and Charlie Chaplin. They were the top of the pops and the argument for forming
UA was that they were the most expensive people in Hollywood and in this way
they could keep the profits for themselves.
What happened
to them?
Mary
Pickford totally disappeared. There is not a single entry with her on the 1001
list and I have to admit that I have not seen anything by her myself. Douglas
Fairbanks made some hugely successful silents of which “The Thief of Bagdad” is
the only one to appear on the list. Unfair I think, but a consequence of his
movies not ageing very well. D.W. Griffith will always be remembered, but
mostly for his technical achievements of which much of it was already done before
1919. He features massively on the list, but it can be argued if that is really
deserved.
Charlie
Chaplin on the other hand had not even come close to realizing his potential in
1919. His movies since then are glorious landmarks and are as watchable today
as they were back then. A hard person might say that it is because he made
comedies and they simply age better, but it is a lot more than that. Charlie
Chaplin is true genius on many levels. His movies are not just comedies. They
are romantic, tragic love stories, social comments, technical marvels and
filled with a humanity that speaks to us today far beyond the slapstick.
I have to
say this because after watching three of his movies of the four on the list
(thanks Steve!) I have realized how grossly I had underestimated Chaplin. Not
for a second am I thinking that this or that feature of the movie or story is
sooo dated and would have to be done differently today. My guess is that you
could make a movie along the lines of Chaplin today and it would work just fine.
“The Actor” is not so far off and it cornered the Oscars.
In Gold
Rush Chaplin’s tramp is in Klondike prospecting for gold, a task he is
hopelessly unsuited for. He is as usual pitted against formidable odds but
carry on unfazed, not with Keaton’s deadpan, but with Chaplin’s tragic
optimism. In the wilderness he encounters the dangerous outlaw Black Larsen and
the friendly but forgetful prospector Big Jim. The scene is a lone hut with
basically only that one room. Here we have a number of immortal scenes. The
most famous ones are probably when Chaplin and Big Jim out of hunger cook and
(try to) eat one of Chaplin’s shoes. Black Larsen has left to get supplies but
he is not coming back. The following scene is equally funny. Big Jim is getting
delirious and imagines Chaplin is a big chicken and he cannot wait to sink his
teeth into him. This is perfect slapstick, but on a tragic backdrop that makes
the humor bittersweet and so much more exquisite.
There is a
terrible storm and the house and its content is blown away in what is an
amazing technical achievement. The hut ends up precariously balancing on the
edge of a gorge. When Chaplin and Big Jim go to one side of the hut it tips
into the gorge and when they go back the hut rights itself. It takes them a while
and more slapstick to figure out what is going on and we got a literal
cliffhanger.
Back in
town Chaplin makes a tragic figure among the rowdy toughs of this wildest of
outback towns. He gets a crush on one of the women in the saloon, but she has
only eyes for her boyfriend. New Year ’s Eve he has invited her and her friends
to dinner and dressed up the place complete with small gifts for the guests. But
no-one comes. For them this was not important and they have already forgotten.
Chaplin dreams of having guests and performs the unforgettable potato dance.
Comedy again on a sad backdrop. When the girl finally remembers and come to his
hut it is too late.
The little
tramp is fundamentally a tragic character and hopelessly incompetent at
anything he does. But somehow he wins anyway. Not in the traditional way or by
some stupid blind luck, but because he manages to win hearts. When Big Jim remembers
where he struck gold and uncovers his mother lode he remembers Chaplin and
shares it with him. Likewise he wins the girl. And us.
The version
I saw carried Chaplin’s own voiceover from the early forties. This is of course
a modification from the original, but so are any silent we see with a score, so
I do not mind and actually thinks it adds to the movie and gives it a better
flow because we can be rid of the inter-titles.
I hate to
compare the Chaplin movies with each other because they are all good each with their
qualities. Instead I would say that “The Gold Rush” ranks among to top movies
on the list based on the 121 movies I have seen so far on this quest.
Yes indeed, it's Gold Rush time! Nice introduction. I realized I haven't seen a single Mary Pickford movie either.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I should check out the version with the voiceover. The version I've seen twice now is the original silent edition.
The voiceover version unfortunately does not change the Georgina situation, so I do not know how much it will help you.
DeleteI liked The Gold Rush and laughed at it quite a bit. It's probably my favorite of his pure comedies.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I've ever seen a Mary Pickford film, either. Hmm...that's sort of disappointing.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we ought to find a Mary Pickford film just to see what all the fuss was about?
ReplyDeleteThe scenes in the cabin involving trying to eat anything are quite comical. I'm more a fan of Chaplin's later work, Modern Times, The Great Dictator and Monsieur Verdoux than his early silents. But, you are right, there is a touch of genius in all of them.
ReplyDeleteThe Gold Rush is mostly made up of scenes of situational comedy, which is great, but it is lacking the deeper undercurrent that I find in his later films, so on that I agree.
Delete