Why is is rated so low?

I agree, 7.2 is a bit low, but I guess this movie didn't have enough CGI and explosions for the average viewer who just wants to watch something like Avatar and not care about the story gaps, character development etc... they just want to have stereotypes of good bad and evil shoved in their face :P

I gave it a 8/10. It really is a great piece of work and from what I've read up on it after I watched it. It's as accurate as can be without having to actually hear it from Charlie Chaplin himself.

The movie was both touching and showed everything that one who loves the works of Charlie Chaplin would want to see, from both his professional career to his personal life.

7 is too high. Chaplin is a movie about a great entertainer, lead by a great entertainer mimicking him, that is not greatly entertaining. Actually, it's not even greatly coherent. This movie bites off way more than it can chew, giving only the most cursory glance at the life of Charlie Chaplin despite taking well over 2 hours to do it, moving so quickly it's hard to even know what's going on. You get to know virtually none of the characters outside of the lead. The film on the whole simply can't overcome this great fault, despite Downey's excellent performance which is the sole reason to recommend the film. Don't feel like you have to stick up for this movie on Downey's account, or on Chaplin's. Their work stands on its own.

In the time it takes to watch this film, you could probably watch two original Chaplin silents - say, The Kid and Modern Times, or The Gold Rush - and you would come out both more entertained and with a better idea of Chaplin's genius and his influence on film.

I love Charlie Chaplin, which is probably why I gave it a high rating. I like RDJ and I also think it's one of his top roles, too. I also like many members of the ensemble cast, too. I've read nearly all the posts on this thread and numerous points are valid for people either liking it or not liking it.

You have to admit a few facts, as well. Remember that Chaplin was the most popular person in the WORLD for decades. That in itself is a feat not to be sneezed at. His biggest drawbacks were his obsessive want of perfection and his own personal life.

It may not be the most perfect film, and it also cuts out some details, but it would have been tough to condense all of Chaplin's life into a 2½ hour movie.

"It's so hard having a good time. Even smiling makes my face ache." - Dr. Frank-N-Furter

I gave it an 8/10. It's not perfect. It's a little glossy at times. And Robert Downey Jr. really is the best thing about this movie (of course, since the movie itself is really good, that's saying a lot.)

I first watched this movie after it came out on video, around 1993. I liked what I'd already seen of Robert Downey Jr., but I only knew the name of Charlie Chaplin.

After watching this movie, I started watching everything I could find of Charlie Chaplin's. So, at times, like in my case, this movie is a gateway to be able to appreciate a true genius.

A genius actor playing a genius performer.

Kat

Demons I get. People are crazy

I couldn't be happier with the film.

its one of my favorite movies i woul dgive it at least an 8.5-9 rating. its awesome.

I think this movie was BETTER than avatar. How can you replace a great movie with great preformance and a great script(chaplin), with a movie with epic effects(avatar)?

chaplin- 10/10
avatar- 10/10

Many people (seen on this board) gets their pants up abut "chapplin married a 16 year old" and completely ignores everything else because in thier twisted minds its "such a horrible thing" that they must hate everything chaplin from now on. Reminds me of christians.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.