review by David Valkenet
The Gold Rush 1925
Watched Aug 15, 2012
David Valkenet’s review:
I can definitely understand why silent films, and comedies in particular wouldn't play well to a modern audience. The conventional acting style associated with this era of filmmaking is inherently theatrical. In modern films we value 'subtlety' and 'naturalism' over theatricality, and those who don't adhere to these conventions are seen as low-brow or lesser comedies.
This is why I feel that Buster Keaton holds up far better and is more accessible to a modern audience than Charlie Chaplin (it doesn't help that I watched Keaton's The Cameraman mere days before watching this). That being said Chaplin seems more interested in crafting characters and exploring relationships than huge laughs and stunts.
I have seen a few Chaplin films, from his bigger to some lesser known films and I am usually impressed at how well he makes me care about the characters and story. Unfortunately, The Gold Rush did not manage to make me care about the characters as some of Chaplin's other films such as The Kid or City Lights. Which leaves me with the laughs and the technical aspects. Luckily there are enough arresting images to carry me through the film, as the laughs weren't as solid as I would have liked.
The visual effects are no doubt impressive, I just wish they would have been in service of funnier or more interesting material.
However, it does feels good to finally cross The Gold Rush off my List of Shame and I am curious to see if my opinion of it grows over time and with a rewatch.
Which version did you watch the 1925 or the 1942?
I think the 1925 version. What are the differences?
the 1942 is a sound version, the 1925 is not, I enjoy more the 1942 version actually.
I'am glad you enjoy the film, I bet in repeat viewings you will love it even more :)
I had no idea there were two versions. I watched the silent version, so I'm very interested to see how the 1942 version differs. I'll be rewatching soon.
Are you a fan of The Kid?
Yes I have, but a long time ago, I need to re-watch it, but what I remember I enjoy it quite a bit.
It's lovely. Coogan really sells it, even if perhaps he's used a little manipulatively. That's my favorite Chaplin because it balances the characters with comedy seamlessly.
Which is your favorite?
David, have you seen any Harold Lloyd? Of all the silent comedians I think he has actually aged better than his more famous peers.
I have seen a couple features and a handful of shorts and agree that he holds up very well. I find he delivers more laughs than Chaplin but still less than Keaton who reamins my favorite. I think from what I have seen Lloyd still mugs to the camera quite a bit which can be distracting (although at times charming). I do need to check out some more Lloyd and I have a box set lying around here somewhere. What do you recommend?
Lloyd fits somewhere between the pathos of Chaplin and the out and out physical comedy of Keaton for me.
As for recommendations, this top 10 is pretty good, although I don't necessarily agree with the order.
I would agree, but that does mean he isn't quite as sentimental as Chaplin or as funny as Keaton. Though the balance works well more often than not, at times it kind of falls flat. And not in a funny way.
I've seen half of those and the others are in the box set so I'll have to check them out. What would be your number 1 (if it's Safety Last then what would be your number 2)?
I think Safety Last is his most rounded and complete film but Never Weaken and Girl Shy are both excellent too.
I'll have to watch Never Weaken next. I've seen and enjoyed the other two immensely, especially Safety Last - which is phenomenal.
I actually watched this earlier this year in a theater with a live orchestra. The theater had received a fresh cleaned up print and celebrated the Criterion release by screening it. Chaplin's films are great fun with an audience.
That sounds great. We had something like that in Melbourne recently for Psycho, but tickets were like over 100 dollars.
I saw Modern Times and The General back to back but without a live orchestra. I agree that seeing it with an audience is a great way to go, and really adds to the fun of the films.