So two big bits of news. Firstly We've finished the next round of the director showdown Chaplin vs. Anderson. And Secondly I've given up on my rating system. Basically I've discovered that it basically ended up as a longer version of what Laura is doing and I got tired of wasting my time. So enjoy the future of my votes that involve 100% less math.
Charlie Chaplin- The Gold Rush - 1925 - As I had just watched and rated two Buster Keaton classics I felt I had a pretty good grasp on what the movie industry was like before sound. Off the wall crazy stunts, screwball comedy, and very little character development. But Chaplin just threw most of that out the window. Don't get me wrong Gold Rush has zany off the wall stunts and relies on screwball humor at times but this is a full and complete film masterpiece. Chaplin portrays his classic (and as far as I know only) character the nameless tramp. Who wanders around in Alaska during the gold rush of the late 1880s causing havoc and hilarity where ever he goes. The film breaks down into three distinct segments that work pretty much as self contained films in themselves with only a loose overall story. But trust me this doesn't in any way hurt the quality of the film. The first act involves the Tramp on his journey into the wilderness, the second the love story back in rural town, and the third act is the climax that stretches from town to wilderness again.
Basically nearly everything I found missing in the Keaton films is found here. There is a like able character with wants and dreams I can identify with (without strange Southern sympathies) and his buffoonery while on display is always played out in ways that make nearly complete identifiable sense. At no point in the film did I think wow that's something I never would have thought of doing in a million years like I kept thinking during the Keaton films. Instead whenever a bit of jokes started it felt like a humorous thing was revealing a greater truth about life, a character, or the plot. One quick example is when the love interest of the film decides to dance with the tramp in order to make one of the bud guys jealous. Initially the tramp is surprised then as the Tramp starts to dance he is lopsided as earlier in the film he had to eat his own shoe to prevent from starving, then his pants start to fall down because he is so poor his pants don't fit and he has no belt. Eventually he distracts the girl and grabs a nearby rope and ties is around himself to hold up his pants only to discover the rope is a leash to a dog that starts running around dragging him around the dance floor as the whole time he is trying to keep the girl from noticing. Each of these jokes are hilarious, subtly reveal the characters of the Tramp, bad guy, and romantic lead, and connect to moments that came before and later in the plot. This is pure structural genius.
And for classic movie moments Chaplin brings the sequence where he turns into a mirage Rooster, the wind blowing cabin sequence, and of course the dancing potato scene which was apparently soo popular in the Berlin premier that the audience forced the projectionist to stop the film and replay the sequence three times. Chaplin also has a few cinematic moments in the film where I still have no idea how he did them. The opening shot where a crowd of gold rushers are storming up the side of a mountain was simply just set down and shot which must have rivaled the opening sequence of Saving Private Ryan in terms of difficulty. And the climax where the cabin is falling in an avalanche off the side of a mountain I stupefied by.
Wes Anderson -Fantastic Mr. Fox- 2009 - Mr. Fox is clearly a work of true passion for Anderson. I believe I read somewhere that he idolized the Ronald Dahl book growing up and spent the better part of a decade trying to get someone to fund the thing. In it we see Anderson's stable of returning actors, the Wilsons, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman who each turn in performances that would fit easily into any of the Anderson films and have a signature maudlin sense of humor. The story revolves around the a pack of Animals living human-like lives and one of these animals Mr. Fox is a reformed thief who can't leave his old life behind and decides to pull one final score which inevitably spirals out of control into a massive giant winner take all struggle that crosses the life of every animal in the forest and nearby town.
While the plot manages to be simplistic the strength of the film comes in Anderson's ability to infuse each part of the story with his classic sentimental humor. The character's get introduced, connect, and resolve their issues much in the way that a fine wine smells. Unfortunately for me though there isn't much else to say about the film. I doubt in 10 years if there will be any part of this that I remember neither good nor bad. I think the reason for this is throughout the film I keep sensing a lack of heart. And I don't mean lack of passion, like I said earlier its clear that there is a love of this material from Anderson but there it sure does feel after a while like your watching a film made by college hipsters who think that everything they say is just laugh out loud clever but don't really care about what is happening. The characters that are in love don't feel truly in love, the characters that hate each don't feel that they are really that angry. In the end its necessary for the characters to tell you everything because it's hard to really feel any of it. But then again that may be the nature of stop motion animation its pretty hard to convey nuance. One example of this is when Mr. Fox (Clooney) and his son (Shwartzman) after a falling out reconnect. Clooney's character explains that his son's feelings of inadequacy are really his failings as a father and his son discovers that he doesn't need to be the person he thought he needs to be all with a conversation that is near emotionless.
Chaplin - City Lights - 1931 - While The Gold Rush had moments of genius City Lights is probably one of the best comedies ever made. Chaplin again plays the Tramp who this time haplessly falls for a blind girl who do to circumstances beyond his control believes him to be rich. He accepts this and resolves to get her a operation that can cure her blindness. Along the way the Tramp befriends a rich man trying to kill himself who whenever he is sober forgets him completely and keeps trying to have him arrested.
The humor is similar to Gold Rush in that it constantly pushes the plot along while remaining relatable. In terms of classic moments there is a boxing scene that is hilarious and involves timing so perfect that there may not be a better example in cinema. The film continues along until the blind girl regains her sight and in possibly the best ending in film history she looks on the Tramp for the first time and the film simply ends without a resolution to the love story. After an initial shock it soon becomes clear that the film itself was about the Tramps journey to cure the blindness of the woman and that story ends with her being cured whether she loves him or not.
Wes Anderson - Rushmore- 1998 - When I first saw this film in the late 90's I had no clue what to make of it. Looking back on it a second time two things are clear. One this film was marketed terribly and two Anderson new exactly the kind of film he wanted make right from the beginning. This film is basically a love triangle between Schwartzman's character a love stuck teenager who is lives completely in feeling and emotion and Bill Murray's much older businessman who is stuck completely in his head. The character's develope a friendship that is torn apart due to their mutual attraction to the same woman a teacher a Schwartzman's school. There are some hilarious scenes where the characters try to out-duel each other with competing pranks and eventually the love story sorts itself out with each of the characters learning an important life altering truth.
Rushmore is really enjoyable and looking back on it one of Anderson's best achievements is his ability to take a standard story plot and make it feel new without really doing anything structurally different at all. I think the funniest stuff in here comes from Schwartzman's character's school plays which are totally ridiculous and I imagine have some deeper thing to say about the nature of film making. But I think in the end too much of the film again feels like a hipster college kid telling me a long funny joke.
In the end Wes Anderson's films are enjoyable, fun, well-made but Chaplin is simply a film genius. For me Chaplin moves on to face Woody Allen in round two.
