Moronika
The community forum of ThreeStooges.net

The Floorwalker (1916) - Charlie Chaplin

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline metaldams



    THE FLOORWALKER is the first of twelve shorts Charlie Chaplin made for Mutual Studios between 1916 - 1917.  Before discussing the short, a little perspective on where Chaplin is at this point.  Charlie Chaplin’s Mutual contract amounted to about $670,000 a year in 1916 money.  This was back then major news as we’re watching, at the time, the highest paid entertainer in the world.  He was 26 years old.  In addition to being extremely wealthy and popular, this is the third studio Chaplin worked for.  His last studio, Essanay, did not give Chaplin the creative control he was looking for.  An example would be “Burlesque on Carmen.”  Chaplin made that as a two reeler.  Essanay released the short as a four reeler with extra footage Chaplin did not even film involving Ben Turpin.  So at Mutual, Chaplin had creative control and took his time - something he would do even more so in later years.  Here though?  Expected to do one short a month, Chaplin finished these twelve shorts in eighteen months.

      All that out of the way, THE FLOORWALKER in and of itself is a fun short.  The basic story is Chaplin is his little tramp character in a department store.  The manager, a.k.a. floorwalker, is played by future Warner Brothers director Lloyd Bacon, who bears a physical resemblance to Chaplin.  Bacon and his assistant manager, played by the legendary heavy Eric Campbell, receive a letter saying they are accused of embezzling money and detectives are going to come to investigate.  Bacon smashes a drawer over Campbell’s head and knocks him out, trying to leave with the money on his own.  Chaplin in the mean time is causing property damage in the store and is also in trouble if his own.  When Chaplin and Bacon meet up, noticing their resemblance and unaware of the trouble the other is in, agree to trade places by switching outfits.  From there, mayhem ensues.

      Comedy wise the first thing I notice is that once Chaplin is on the screen, I can’t take my eyes off him.  All he needs is a few simple props and a still camera and the man works magic.  The opening scene of Chaplin involves his cane, a water fountain, an escalator, and any item for sale that happens to be laying on the table next to him.  He tries shaving products, he bends over and knocks things down with his cane, he dries himself using a dress on a mannequin as a towel - just real simple and funny well timed stuff.

      Legend has it that W.C. Fields once referred to Chaplin as a ballet dancer, one he’d like to kill.  Well, I’d like to think he said that, anyway.  I always think of that when I watch THE FLOORWALKER.  Check out Chaplin when he’s dodging the much larger Eric Campbell at the end, he’s literally moving like a ballerina.  It’s all so well timed and yes, Eric Campbell,  making his Chaplin debut here, is the best heavy Chaplin ever had.  Adding to their chemistry, also check out Campbell choking out Chaplin only to have to intermittently stop when the detective catches them.  Adding to the ballet stuff, check out Chaplin’s movements on that slide ladder in the bizarre but funny foot fetish scene.

      Another well timed bit is a quasi version of the mirror scene without an actual mirror.  Yes, when Chaplin and Bacon meet up, they look at each other and do mirror their movements.  Overall, a pretty good short that begins the phase of Chaplin’s maturity.  Truthfully, it was starting in those late Essanay shorts and further blossoms as the Mutual shorts continue on.  Enjoy the ride.





     
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Dr. Mabuse

Excellent review.  "The Floorwalker" shows a decided improvement upon Chaplin’s previous films.  The rough-edged quality of the Keystone and Essanay shorts have been replaced by a more polished style, especially in terms of set design and cinematography.  There also is a stronger sense of ensemble with the menacing debut of Eric Campbell, who became regarded as the quintessential Chaplin heavy.  The David and Goliath relationship between Chaplin and Campbell is established immediately in their knockabout ballet — sparking an antagonistic yet symbiotic rapport that evolves throughout the Mutual series. A memorable start indeed.

And, yes, Charlie despised Essanay's unethical tactics — especially when the studio passed off the fraudulent two-reeler "Triple Trouble" (1918) as a "new Chaplin comedy." He made certain it never happened again. Mutual didn't touch a frame of Chaplin's golden dozen.


Offline Umbrella Sam

  • Toastmaster General
  • Knothead
  • *****
    • Talk About Cinema
There is still occasionally somewhat a hint of the roughness from the Keystone days, but for the most part, the comedy has moved on from that. Chaplin must have really had some sort of obsession with stairs, because he makes just as much use out of the escalator here as he does the home staircase in ONE A.M. Not that I’m complaining though, as he really makes so much out of it. I especially love the Chase with Eric Campbell near the end, with both getting progressively more tired, yet always finding an inconvenient time to start up again. Campbell is especially hilarious here; I just love that ridiculously over-the-top beard matched with his equally over-the-top villainy. Strangely, for a man usually so obsessed with story later on, the resolution here does seem unusually too fast-paced. Part of that may be the quality of the surviving prints, but even then, it seems weird how the detective suddenly seems happy to see Chaplin. But, hey, it’s still a short comedy, and an effective one at that. The early mirror scene, Campbell freaking out as Chaplin offers the bag to a customer, and anything involving that escalator are all highlights that are milked for all they’re worth. Overall, a pretty good start to the Mutual series.
“I’ll take a milkshake...with sour milk!” -Shemp (Punchy Cowpunchers, 1950)

My blog: https://talk-about-cinema.blogspot.com


Offline metaldams

I agree the resolution is a bit fast paced.  It actually reminds me of THE GOAT from Buster Keaton.  Both pretty sudden involving destructive elevator gags.

Nice comments from the both of you.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline HomokHarcos

Chaplin's films improved with each studio he moved on to. Keystone was the usual slapstick comedy of the era, Essanay gave him his first true classic, and Mutual he picked up the game even more. Even for the Mutuals I felt like they starting getting better as they went along. As for the Floorwalker, one big praise is the location. I love the store and the elevator was impressive as I didn't know they existed back then. Seeing a woman (Charlotte Mineau) play a detective was also pretty cool considering when this was made. Good gags here including the mirror routine: funny that a mirror wasn't even involved. Chaplin going back and forth hiding behind a box was hilarious. Chaplin smashing a drawer over Campbell's head was fun slapstick violence.

I will admit Edna Purviance never made much of an impression on me despite all of her appearances with Chaplin. Eric Campbell on the other hand is probably my favorite of Chaplin's supporting players, and was the heavy of Chaplin's.


Offline metaldams

Chaplin's films improved with each studio he moved on to. Keystone was the usual slapstick comedy of the era, Essanay gave him his first true classic, and Mutual he picked up the game even more. Even for the Mutuals I felt like they starting getting better as they went along. As for the Floorwalker, one big praise is the location. I love the store and the elevator was impressive as I didn't know they existed back then. Seeing a woman (Charlotte Mineau) play a detective was also pretty cool considering when this was made. Good gags here including the mirror routine: funny that a mirror wasn't even involved. Chaplin going back and forth hiding behind a box was hilarious. Chaplin smashing a drawer over Campbell's head was fun slapstick violence.

I will admit Edna Purviance never made much of an impression on me despite all of her appearances with Chaplin. Eric Campbell on the other hand is probably my favorite of Chaplin's supporting players, and was the heavy of Chaplin's.

Some films, like this one, Edna wasn’t given much to do.  I think she’s very good in THE IMMIGRANT and THE KID and a few others, but by the time Chaplin’s on screen relationships with women were getting deeper, Edna was gone.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Allen Champion

Very glad you're covering the Mutuals!   IMHO the Mutuals are the greatest series of silent two reelers one artist ever turned out (yes, better than Keaton's).    They will always be timeless, relevant, and wonderfully funny.   My "desert island" two-reelers.     [pie]

"What do you know of the blood, sweat and toil of a theatrical production? Of the dedication of the men and the women in the noblest profession of them all?"


Offline Paul Pain

  • Moronika's resident meteorologist
  • Moderator
  • Bunionhead
  • ******
  • The heartthrob of millions!
This was a fantastic short.  Are we sure this wasn't a three-reeler as at 30 minutes that's more in 3-4 reel territory.  This is a fantastic bit of artistry, and it took me a while to figure that this was not a double-role for Charlie Chaplin.  I don't know if the title cards are original, but either way they are well-spaced throughout the short.

It's truly amazing how much action he gets out of such simple sets, and it's interesting to compare even the sets the silent stars used.
#1 fire kibitzer


Offline metaldams

This was a fantastic short.  Are we sure this wasn't a three-reeler as at 30 minutes that's more in 3-4 reel territory.  This is a fantastic bit of artistry, and it took me a while to figure that this was not a double-role for Charlie Chaplin.  I don't know if the title cards are original, but either way they are well-spaced throughout the short.

It's truly amazing how much action he gets out of such simple sets, and it's interesting to compare even the sets the silent stars used.

It’s 2 reels of film.  Silent 2 reelers can run a tad longer because unlike sound films, they’re not always run at 24 frames per second.

By the way, I’m finding prints from the Lobster restorations, which is what I recommend.  If any of you want the blu ray/dvd combo, here’s the set.



https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Chaplins-Mutual-Comedies-Blu-ray/101335/
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Umbrella Sam

  • Toastmaster General
  • Knothead
  • *****
    • Talk About Cinema
It’s 2 reels of film.  Silent 2 reelers can run a tad longer because unlike sound films, they’re not always run at 24 frames per second.

By the way, I’m finding prints from the Lobster restorations, which is what I recommend.  If any of you want the blu ray/dvd combo, here’s the set.



https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Chaplins-Mutual-Comedies-Blu-ray/101335/

Interesting. I never knew there was a difference in classification when it came to silent films, but that makes sense because of the speed manipulation. I’m curious, was this tactic ever used in an attempt to classify something as a short instead of a feature, or vice versa?
“I’ll take a milkshake...with sour milk!” -Shemp (Punchy Cowpunchers, 1950)

My blog: https://talk-about-cinema.blogspot.com


Offline HomokHarcos

The reason silent films were measured in reels was because there was no standard frame rate, so there was no average run time.


Offline metaldams

The reason silent films were measured in reels was because there was no standard frame rate, so there was no average run time.

Exactly.  I know some film makers had preferred frames per second rates for their films, but ultimately, it was the projectionist at the movie theater who had the final say.  I think average was 16 - 20 fps.   They had to make 24 fps standard for talkies because anything else voices started sounding unnatural.

As far as features, don’t quote me on this, but I believe four reels or more was the standard.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Umbrella Sam

  • Toastmaster General
  • Knothead
  • *****
    • Talk About Cinema
I guess my question was kind of odd now that I think about it. I was more wondering about whether adjusting the speed of each reel could be manipulated for theaters to get better pricing options, but came to realize that if they were determining the difference between shorts and features by the reels themselves anyway, then there was no way to get around that. My error.
“I’ll take a milkshake...with sour milk!” -Shemp (Punchy Cowpunchers, 1950)

My blog: https://talk-about-cinema.blogspot.com


Offline HomokHarcos

I guess my question was kind of odd now that I think about it. I was more wondering about whether adjusting the speed of each reel could be manipulated for theaters to get better pricing options, but came to realize that if they were determining the difference between shorts and features by the reels themselves anyway, then there was no way to get around that. My error.
Actually, I think it would be better for the movie projectors to speed up the film so they can have more screenings (thus charge more admissions).


Offline Paul Pain

  • Moronika's resident meteorologist
  • Moderator
  • Bunionhead
  • ******
  • The heartthrob of millions!
Film presentation was itself a bit of an artform in those days because not only did the film get played back at a speed of the operator's choice, but also because of making the music match with reel.

I'm honestly surprised this is a two reeler because if anything it seems to be played back at a normal or accelerated pace.
#1 fire kibitzer


Offline NoahYoung

Definitely my least favorite Chaplin Mutual. No reason other than that I prefer the 11 others.
It is still a good, funny film, however.
Burt Lancaster was too short!
- The Birdman of Alcatraz