Chaplin

[deliasherman]

I wanted to love it, I really did.  I like Chaplin (as an artist and a character, anyway--he wouldn't have been at all fun to know personally).  I like most of the historical periods he was active in.  I'm not enthralled with Hollywood celebrity bios, because narcissistic and utterly without sense of proportion, but I can make allowances.  After

Comments

The Vienna Woods' 3rd Symphony

[auroramama]

The touching number in which Chaplin creates the Little Tramp out of memories of his impoverished childhood on a London street was similarly risible. Why do plays (and movies) about artists have to reduce inspiration to a simple (not to mention simplistic) equation?

I don't know, but my first thought was: Artists? I thought that was for scientists! I want to ask, when do they not do it? Off the top of my head: Lovers. Sometimes. Good movies and plays build falling in love in multiple scenes and ideas that don't reduce to a simplistic equation.

I hope, anyway.

Re: The Vienna Woods' 3rd Symphony

[deliasherman]

Scientists, too, certainly. You'd think people who make movies would realize that inspiration doesn't exactly work that way. Everything we hear, read, see, experience feeds into our art or our science or whatever, but it's not a 1to1 correspondence. That's why it's called inspiration. It breathes life into something. Breath is not a living being, though a living being cannot live without it.

Food for thought.

[shsilver]

I had hoped to make it to see Chaplin when I was in New York last weekend, despite being warned off by several people I know. The only reason I didn't see it is because my timing wasn't right. I'm glad to hear that the cast does excellent work with the material, but wish that the material were better.

[deliasherman]

Me, too.

I'm glad I saw it, though. McClure was worth the TDF discount price of admission.