Moronika
The community forum of ThreeStooges.net

Easy Street (1917) - Charlie Chaplin

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline metaldams



      We finally get to Charlie Chaplin’s EASY STREET.  This is a review where I may ruffle some feathers, including my own.  You see, even I’m conflicted on how I feel about this one.  There is a part of me that feels like this film goes too far in parts or more accurately, conflicts with my worldview.  So be it.  I guess the fact Chaplin had the courage to do something like this, offend whoever he may, speaks to him as a bold artist.  I’ll give him props for that.  If nothing offends you in this short, it’s probably a work of genius.  If something does offend you, it may just be a work of genius anyway.  There is some wonderful comedy here as well, so let’s get to that first.

      The film starts out with a homeless Chaplin going inside a church, his eyes on the collection box.  He sits with the congregation like a fish out of water, leading to a funny gag where he holds a baby.  The baby’s bottle is upside down, pouring on Chaplin’s lap.  Chaplin, of course, thinks the wetness is coming from the baby itself.  Funny gag.  Chaplin eventually does get the collection box, but seeing the beauty of the pastor daughter, naturally played by Edna, reforms him.  After a big discussion with the pastor, he returns the box to their surprise.

      We then get introduced to two of the most awesome things about this shorts besides Chaplin - Eric Campbell and Easy Street itself.  Eric Campbell plays this gigantic bully on this run down street.  The choreography done when he chases people away is brilliant.  The way almost an entire town of people back away from him in synch and the way Campbell lunges at them?  A thing of beauty.  Actually, a bit like Langdon and his girl in BOOBS IN THE WOOD, just on a much larger scale.  There are also these giant brawls where Campbell is mauling the entire town.  Think Andre the Giant in a battle royal.  The street itself also looks amazing.  My appreciation for art direction usually extends to Universal and Italian horror movies, but this street is a feast for the eyes and is a star if the film in and of itself.  Such great atmosphere which really benefits the film.

      Chaplin and Campbell’s initial confrontation is also a highlight.  Chaplin at this point has become a cop and is assigned to Easy Street after Campbell just single handedly decimated the town people.  Talk about building up a credible threat for the comic!  Campbell plays this well choreographed cat and mouse game with Chaplin.  You feel he can maul him at any moment, but bides his time.  When Chaplin says he’s going to call the cops, the movements with the twirling phone and the timing of it all is another very well choreographed moment.  This leads to my favorite moment in the short, when Chaplin sticks Campbell’s head in the gas lamp and knocks him out.  The townspeople then all come out of hiding and Chaplin does the same well choreographed bullying movements Campbell was just doing a few minutes before.  Brilliant.

      Then comes the scene I don’t like.  A woman steals some food from a sleeping street vendor.  Chaplin, as a cop, catches her and she cries.  His reaction is to steal more food from the street vendor and give it to her.  Now that bothers me because there is no reason why that working man should have his food involuntarily given away.  Now I know the other side is she’s poor and needs the food and…..just shows that Chaplin is opening up a can of worms here that goes way beyond comedy.  Now as for why is it OK when Lloyd does cruel things in his shorts and I let it slide?  There, it’s being played for silly and fun comedy.  Here?  Pure drama.  This also makes the “charity” scene feel a bit hollow to me.  Your take on all this may vary, but I think we can all agree as an artist, like it or not, Chaplin was unquestionably pushing some boundaries here.

      Speaking of pushing boundaries, we also get an attempted rape scene with William Gillespie and Edna Purviyance.  This is after Gillespie shoots up with some heroin.  Rape is a bit too much for a comedy in my eye.  Chaplin does save the day after being tossed into the sewer where the scene is happening.  He just happens to land his backside on the needle, giving him Popeye with spinach superpowers.  He then goes on this fun Keystone like tirade knocking out all the bad guys in one fell swoop.  Then entire town is then reformed, the end.

      EASY STREET is a bizarre film, a brave film, a funny film, an offensive film, an enlightening film - I guess it depends on what you bring to it.  A lot of people consider this among Chaplin’s best.  I can see why because one thing this film never becomes is boring.  A fascinating, one of a kind short.  I look forward to your opinions.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Dr. Mabuse

Charlie Chaplin’s first masterpiece incorporates elements of social criticism that would become evident in his later features. "Easy Street" is an effective depiction of urban poverty with its realistic sets and harshness of tone — established by the dramatic opening scene that finds Charlie in a destitute state.

In one of Chaplin’s satirical jabs at religion, Charlie is “reformed” by a young mission worker (Edna Purviance), upon which he returns the collection box he has stolen.  Encouraged to do good, Charlie bravely joins a failing police force and receives the dangerous assignment of patrolling Easy Street, a gang battlefield ruled by the towering Bully (Eric Campbell in kabuki-style makeup).  The ingenious tactics Charlie uses to conquer the Bully represent the finest screen moments between Chaplin and Campbell — highlights of an exquisitely paced short. Surrounded by bleak atmosphere, "Easy Street" contrasts sharply with most of Chaplin's later work.


Offline metaldams

Charlie Chaplin’s first masterpiece incorporates elements of social criticism that would become evident in his later features. "Easy Street" is an effective depiction of urban poverty with its realistic sets and harshness of tone — established by the dramatic opening scene that finds Charlie in a destitute state.

In one of Chaplin’s satirical jabs at religion, Charlie is “reformed” by a young mission worker (Edna Purviance), upon which he returns the collection box he has stolen.  Encouraged to do good, Charlie bravely joins a failing police force and receives the dangerous assignment of patrolling Easy Street, a gang battlefield ruled by the towering Bully (Eric Campbell in kabuki-style makeup).  The ingenious tactics Charlie uses to conquer the Bully represent the finest screen moments between Chaplin and Campbell — highlights of an exquisitely paced short. Surrounded by bleak atmosphere, "Easy Street" contrasts sharply with most of Chaplin's later work.

I like the way you put “reformed” in quotes and I should have done the same thing.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Allen Champion

There are no flaws in EASY STREET.

The Tramp's conversion is genuine--its not a "satirical jab at religion."  When he gives away the vendor's food, I have no doubt that he or Edna will eventually pay for it.  Charlie's heart has been changed by love--and love reforms Easy Street.

In the touching final scene, the forgiven and reformed bully, his wife, the townspeople all go to church together.  There is nothing in Charlie's professed political beliefs (not professed till years later) or in the film that gives me the impression that this is any way a satirical or cynical story. 

It's a story of evil overcome by forgiveness and love--a timeless message from a timeless artist.

EASY STREET is the perfect short comedy--just like THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD is the perfect swashbuckler, or ROSEMARY'S BABY is the perfect horror film.   
"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 metaldams

I see nothing indicating Chaplin or Edna would pay for the food, but if that was the intent, a simple gesture should have been done to indicate that.  I never once got that impression.  If anything I see Chaplin looking up to see if the guy is still asleep.

As for the townspeople reformation, it’s “love backed by force.”  Nothing indicating their church going, which I have no personal issue with, is from the heart.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Paul Pain

  • Moronika's resident meteorologist
  • Moderator
  • Bunionhead
  • ******
  • The heartthrob of millions!
After watching EASY STREET, I have no doubt in my mind that it's a masterpiece.  That doesn't make it necessarily ideal though.  We have several huge flaws: (1) the stupidity of the big bully who somehow can magically survive having his brains beaten into his skull from police nightsticks but not from an iron stove being dropped on him, (2) Chaplin's egregious theft when he falls for the woman's (who turns out to be Eric Campbell's wife) crocodile tears, and (3) legit hard core drug use with sexual violence. 

You can give (3) the break of being painfully realistic, but it's not funny.  When Lloyd did this, we had exaggerated reactions followed by him stealing the heroin to jump start his car.  Here, we see a man lose his mind and attempt to r@pe Edna Purviance.

Now, atmosphere is such a large part of the film, to the opening scenes in the mission to Easy Street itself (catch the sign for "Marie Antoinette Way").  Choreography is the second most important part.  Every little action has meaning, and I suspect this was one of those films where Chaplin ordered 3 dozen takes of a single scene before being satisfied.

I see no reason to believe that Chaplin's reform isn't genuine, but at the end I see no reason to believe that the reform of Easy Street is genuine either.  I suspect this short was a partial mockery of the then famous book In His Steps.

Artistic masterpiece, story-telling disaster
#1 fire kibitzer


Offline metaldams

I’ll have to look into “In His Steps,” thanks for the heads up.  There’s another film we will be discussing soon that has a controversial scene supposedly inspired by another story I need to check out.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Dr. Mabuse

The sets in "Easy Street" were designed to evoke the London of Chaplin's childhood. However, there is a brief outdoor shot of Eric chasing Charlie past the Los Angeles City Water Works building (located in the Plaza Historic District) at the 17:24 mark.

« Last Edit: May 19, 2022, 05:27:26 PM by Dr. Mabuse »


Offline HomokHarcos

This was the first ever Chaplin film I saw, in 10th grade history class my teacher put this on. The most memorable part of the movie was the actually street itself, ieven if it's supposed to be a very tough neighborhood you'd never go to. It is what I think of for 1910s street settings.

Each year Chaplin had been getting better than the one before, and I feel that continues in 1917 with the Mutuals being better than those that came out in 1916. Easy Street is the best Chaplin film so far, it's actually almost an action comedy in the vein of Popeye, as you've mentioned. Eric Campbell is the big bad bully that Chaplin has to take down. This is easily my favorite ever Eric Campbell role, the fight scene with Chaplin being a highlight. Who knew that heroin gives you superpowers? Just like cocaine. I actually wouldn't be surprised if Chaplin tried some hardcore drugs in real life. When Chaplin tripped near the the end in front of Edna Purviance, it looks like he actually took a hard wrack.

I also have to wonder, how many of those people would end up being "reformed" by going overseas to fight in World War I? I mean they have shown they like to fight, it sounds like the government would offer them war service in exchange.


Offline metaldams

Have no clue about Chaplin’s drug intake - none that I know of, at least.  I do know, speaking of WWI, there was controversy he didn’t go.  I think the world is better off he didn’t.

Cool high school story.  My second grade teacher dressed up as Chaplin for Halloween and showed us a scene from THE GOLD RUSH, which was my first Chaplin experience.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Tony Bensley

This was the first ever Chaplin film I saw, in 10th grade history class my teacher put this on. The most memorable part of the movie was the actually street itself, ieven if it's supposed to be a very tough neighborhood you'd never go to. It is what I think of for 1910s street settings.

Each year Chaplin had been getting better than the one before, and I feel that continues in 1917 with the Mutuals being better than those that came out in 1916. Easy Street is the best Chaplin film so far, it's actually almost an action comedy in the vein of Popeye, as you've mentioned. Eric Campbell is the big bad bully that Chaplin has to take down. This is easily my favorite ever Eric Campbell role, the fight scene with Chaplin being a highlight. Who knew that heroin gives you superpowers? Just like cocaine. I actually wouldn't be surprised if Chaplin tried some hardcore drugs in real life. When Chaplin tripped near the the end in front of Edna Purviance, it looks like he actually took a hard wrack.

I also have to wonder, how many of those people would end up being "reformed" by going overseas to fight in World War I? I mean they have shown they like to fight, it sounds like the government would offer them war service in exchange.
EASY STREET (1917), was also my Charlie Chaplin initiation, and it too was in a classroom setting; Grade 5 or 6, as I recall. The teacher made mention about the streetlights being gaslit, rather than electric. This was in the mid 1970s when Chaplin was still living.

That above print sure looks rather nice. Will try and watch it all, a bit later!

CHEERS! :)


Offline metaldams

EASY STREET (1917), was also my Charlie Chaplin initiation, and it too was in a classroom setting; Grade 5 or 6, as I recall. The teacher made mention about the streetlights being gaslit, rather than electric. This was in the mid 1970s when Chaplin was still living.

That above print sure looks rather nice. Will try and watch it all, a bit later!

CHEERS! :)

That print is from the latest restoration.  All these restorations are available in a set released from Flicker Alley.  Well worth it.

https://www.flickeralley.com/classic-movies-2/#!/Chaplins-Mutual-Comedies/p/41384439

I missed being alive when Chaplin was by about a year.  364 days, to be exact.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline Umbrella Sam

  • Toastmaster General
  • Knothead
  • *****
    • Talk About Cinema
I can see the criticisms here. When you really think deeply about it, it does seem like there are some socially-confused messages in it, and there are uncomfortable moments, especially near the end with Edna and William Gillespie. I will admit that it does sour my experience somewhat. But metaldams puts it perfectly for me; it offends me, but I still consider it a work of genius. For one thing, the opening is very well set up; Chaplin sitting alone, listening to the music, and finally deciding he’s ready to reform. I agree on the BOOBS IN THE WOOD connection, I got that vibe too watching the townspeople, although in this case they only seem to fear Chaplin when he’s facing them; behind his back, they’re ready to strike at any moment whereas in BOOBS IN THE WOOD, everyone seems genuinely scared to be remotely near him. You really have to appreciate the way Chaplin frames the camera; while I agree that the ending reformation scene is essentially “love backed by force” when you think about it, the way Chaplin sets it up from a cinematography perspective makes that not so readily apparent at first. The long shot of a cleaned up Easy Street, everyone seemingly happy, acknowledging Chaplin and just overall being more clean compared to the long shots earlier...it really is very effective and at first glance does seem like it kind of has a genuine feeling to it. And the action scenes from Chaplin are also very well done; I love the moment where Chaplin exits the building briefly and is running around town; very intense and made more intense when he returns and has to avoid Campbell alone. The action from Chaplin is really well staged in this film.

Paul Pain puts it well: artistic masterpiece, storytelling disaster. Really the best way to describe it in my opinion.
“I’ll take a milkshake...with sour milk!” -Shemp (Punchy Cowpunchers, 1950)

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


Offline metaldams

I agree on the BOOBS IN THE WOOD connection, I got that vibe too watching the townspeople, although in this case they only seem to fear Chaplin when he’s facing them; behind his back, they’re ready to strike at any moment whereas in BOOBS IN THE WOOD, everyone seems genuinely scared to be remotely near him.

When I was comparing this to BOOBS IN THE WOOD, I was thinking more the well choreographed physical movements between Langdon and his girl when they were playing the cat and mouse game in the woods and comparing that to the well choreographed movements between Chaplin/Campbell and the townspeople.  Bringing up Langdon’s relationship with the townspeople and comparing it to Chaplin’s with the townspeople is something I didn’t of, and surprisingly so - because it’s a good comparison.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline NoahYoung

I rank this one just below THE CURE, THE IMMIGRANT, and THE ADVENTURER.

Regarding the Flicker Alley Mutual Restorations, there was quite a bit of controversy and fighting on forums between David Shepard (R.I.P.) and others regarding the projection speed used, which many felt was way to slow. In fact, none other than Skretvedt, in his amazon review, complained about that very thing. My solution -- use VLC media player, which is free, and set the speed to whatever you think looks best. Not an fps adjustment, but a decimal speedup or slowdown. For example, 1.04 will speed it up by 4%, but the length of the video will not change -- the clock will just tick faster. You can also set it to correct the pitch of the sound to compensate for the speed change.

The ironic thing is that many of us older folks first saw these Chaplin films on standard 8mm projectors that didn't project faster than 18 fps anyway.

Burt Lancaster was too short!
- The Birdman of Alcatraz


Offline metaldams

I rank this one just below THE CURE, THE IMMIGRANT, and THE ADVENTURER.

Regarding the Flicker Alley Mutual Restorations, there was quite a bit of controversy and fighting on forums between David Shepard (R.I.P.) and others regarding the projection speed used, which many felt was way to slow. In fact, none other than Skretvedt, in his amazon review, complained about that very thing. My solution -- use VLC media player, which is free, and set the speed to whatever you think looks best. Not an fps adjustment, but a decimal speedup or slowdown. For example, 1.04 will speed it up by 4%, but the length of the video will not change -- the clock will just tick faster. You can also set it to correct the pitch of the sound to compensate for the speed change.

The ironic thing is that many of us older folks first saw these Chaplin films on standard 8mm projectors that didn't project faster than 18 fps anyway.

Yeah, I’ve heard the speed argument with all these Lobster sets, not just the Mutuals.  I’d have to run a back to back comparison to see if I were notice any enjoyment difference.  What I do know is I’m not a Van Buren score guy and like these scores, but that’s just a matter of taste.

What I do know is that some of these shorts in the Lobster restoration have footage I haven’t seen elsewhere, especially ONE A.M.
- Doug Sarnecky


Offline metaldams


Offline NoahYoung

Yes, I think we talked about Ben Model and speeds before. He kinda contradicts himself, though. In other articles and videos, he shows how a faster speed makes a scene funny -- the scene in  A DOG'S LIFE with Chaplin and the employment agency. In the article you just posted, he says showing them slower doesn't affect the laughs.

Many years ago, I somehow got on his regular/physical mail list for "The Silent Clowns Series" in Manhattan. About once a year, I get a pamphlet with a screening schedule, or a letter asking for a donation!  >:D
Burt Lancaster was too short!
- The Birdman of Alcatraz