Seriously... saw this in my film history class and wanted to shoot myself. I think I may have chuckled once during the entire movie. That and I wanted to kill someone seeing chaplin do that retarded walk with those shoes that stick up into the air for no apparent reason...
So yeah out of curiosity what does this film have that makes you people like it?
I'm just sorry you have film classes and have to ask that.
shareI'm male and 17 and I think it is great, it was even better on my second viewing. It's not only funny, but it's film-making brilliance! I also love The Great Dictator, both films are masterpieces! As long as these films exist, Carlie Chaplin is and will always be a true artist of cinema!
shareIt's Charlie Chaplin's innocence and sensitivity that makes this movie. Then you add silly, goofy and like you said "retarded"... the equation for a funny film is complete. If you are expecting "Something About Mary" or "White Castle" (which I find very funny as well) sensibility, this may be not for you.
shareI must admit I am rapidly getting tired of both parties on the imdb boards. Party 1 says "THIS MOVIE SUCKS BLAH!". Then Party 2 chimes in and says "WELL YOU MUST BE STUPID BLAH!"
Why don't we step away from that and just share our opinions in a calm way?
I think the movie is very good. It's funny in places. How can you not laugh when he's getting high from the cocaine? How can you not laugh when he's trying to pull every button with his wrench? But I don't think its main intention was to make people laugh. Sure, the comedy and laughter is present, but it is more of a critique of society at the time or at any time in respect to technology, time, hope, and love.
I'm currently 18 years old. Every time I watch the ending, I almost want to cry. It isn't sad; it's pure epic ending. They are walking back on the road of Life (yes cliche i know) to start again. Their dreams aren't shattered. It's dawn, they are trying yet again to try and make success. Without the love of each other, they probably would not have that hope. It's a very powerful ending.
Finally, I think the movie actually goes incredibly fast. Getting into the pacing of a silent movie might take time, but not with this one. Yeah sure you might be thinking in the first five minutes, oh no! Another drawn out silent movie! But it's not. Each scene moves rapidly with the music and acting and choreography. I enjoyed the entire department scene and it's 10 minutes long! I didn't even realize that until I was done watching that scene. The movie is a masterpiece.
good post
shareHow can you NOT like it???
shareWatch it again in another 25 years from now. Based on your post, that should allow for enough time to lapse for something resembling maturity to enter into your life. But, for now, you may return to your video games. The controller is there in front of you, next to the 1/2 eaten pizza that's been there for 2 days and the 17 empty beer cans.
Remember When Movies Didn't Have To Be Politically Correct?
Hahaha I love it when people try to throw out "maturity" arguments while (attempting to) insulting you, as if anyone can possibly take you seriously.
Also I realized that was a loaded question given I'm asking on IMDB Boards -> Modern Times (1936), but for those of you who gave a genuine response, thank you.
For the rest of you let me further try to explain why the movie is atrocious and why you have zero taste in movies, firstly
Wow, Bob! You first asked this question in 2006 and just replied 36 minutes ago in 2010 !!
I watched "Modern Times" for the first time tonight and came to IMDB to learn more about the song "Smile," Paulette Goddard, etc.
It's a pretty clever movie for its day.
It's also a complicated and ambitious film for its day (the story takes a lot of twists and turns thru a myriad of settings).
By the restaurant scene I was starting to tire, but the action kicked in again.
There is a somewhat depressing tone to the film
1936 had to be an interesting year in America (hopefully 2010 doesn't get to be this type of interesting).
You obviously don't like Chap;in;s walk, and are looking for a reason for his shoes. I cannot give you an answer that can satisfy you. Humor is a very personalized thing. You either like something or you don't. Most art has this effect.
I'd be curious to know what films you do find funny.
Any other Chaplin films? any from this era?
The Marx Bros.? WC Fields? Buster Keaton? Billy Wilder? Monty Python? Woody Allen?
I do find the comedy quite dated at times. I find City Lights too heavy on the slap stick and to be honest I tend to fast forward through parts (the ending is worth it). But I prefer Modern Times as it is consistetly better and doesnt rely as much on falling over every couple of seconds. That's not to criticise, you have to realise people used to go nuts over a cream pie in the face back in those days. Its a different generation with a different sense of humour to ours. Even so. I adore Chaplin. He wasnt just an old fashioned slap-stick actor, he could portray great emotion and humanity with just a subtle movement. His film could make you laugh and cry. I literally cry when I watch City Lights and the speech in The Great Dictator is so beautiful. He really was a sweet man with a good heart. Some people dont realise Modern Times was actually released about a decade after 'talkies' took over silent films. But people still paid money to see it and loved it and he was still the most famous person on Earth despite the fact he was still making largely non-dialogue film.
Chaplin could take a subject like the great depression or facism and make it funny, poke fun at it and thereby stripping it of its ammunition. He helped millions of people get through tough times.
Modern Times is interesting because you learn a lot about his views on economics. He was skeptical of the rise of machinery and thought it may make the working man obselete one day. This movie was released when production lines were relitively new and people found them dehumanising and their futures uncertain. Jobs that previously required skilled artisans where now reduced to single actions to be performed over and over. It was (and is, in my opinion) a degrading existence, but anyone who criticsed it was accused of being communist (which Chaplin was by the FBI)... That's my two cents...
I find slapstick comedy on the whole dated -- or shall I say juvenile -- because I got loads of it as a kid watching Looney Tunes and such, obviously very Chaplin influenced, but only more extreme (seeing how animation allows crazier stuff), so now I feel like I've grown out of this -- physical -- kind of humour, honestly, and would much prefer something that has wit.
shareDifferent levels and approaches I guess. I mean, I love Chaplin, and really like Keaton and Lloyd, but can't seem to get into Marx Bro, L&H, etc. Can't do Stooges at all.
I know there are various opinions, and I compared widely varying styles. I do Chaplin had great wit and appeal to personal emotion and experiences.
bob_k_23 wrote:
"For the rest of you let me further try to explain why the movie is atrocious and why you have zero taste in movies, firstly"
-----------------------------------------------
Yes? Yes? 4 months later and you're still trying to come up with your first reason as to why this film stinks? Lol. Idiot.
Ok - I'm not going to (intentionally) insult you, but I think that those who don't like this movie at all usually fall into one of two categories: 1) they are fans of this genre but not of Charlie Chaplin, or 2) they don't like any movie that's black and white and *gasp!* SILENT. Something their great-grandpa grew up watching couldn't possibly be any good today.
Generally the people in category (1) tend to be older than the people in category (2). Most of today's movies are NOTHING like movies of 2-3 generations ago. Of course, neither is this country anything like it was 2-3 generations ago, either.
You did, however, leave out one very important phrase in your review that, had you included it, might have made your own review sound more mature and less "insulting", and that is, "in my opinion". Taste doesn't equal fact.
Fact: you don't like the movie. Taste: you think it's "atrocious". Fine by me. Fact: *I* love the movie. Taste: I think it's a beautiful classic that has a timeless, relevant message shown within the gamut of emotion. But now, is that fine with you? I would hope so but if not, that's still fine with me, anyway.
"Now, bring me that horizon." --Captain Jack Sparrow
Because it has something that many of todays "comedies" lack ... a human spirit, grace, warmth and genuine humour ... when you have developed a bit of understanding and have wrenched yourself away for a while from the fast-paced soul-less entertainments that I suspect you prefer, you may find something deeply humane in Chaplin's masterpieces ... they haven't stayed in the top film lists of all time for over 75 years for no reason ... and the first half hour of this film still makes me gag with laughter.
But you ARE Blanche ... and I AM.
Saw it in conjunction with Buster Keaton's epic The General this past weekend.
Mind ya, I'd seen the Keaton flick previously & I still managed to chuckle on this 2nd viewing. I think the most I did during Modern Times was maybe smile. Well that & lust after Goddard (rowr!), who I kept wondering if she reminded me more of Kate Beckinsale or Katy Perry!
Otherwise, the film just didn't do much for me.
I agree about Paulette's character. I also really like The General, but...
The combination of comedy, personal struggles to fit in, to find a role in life, relationships, social comment(abundant), make MT, for me, a top 5 movie of all time. Well, I understand there are tons of great movies and opinions. I love the Circus.