अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंCharlie works for a painter hired to wallpaper a house. The owner can't get breakfast. The kitchen gas stove explodes. The wife's secret lover arrives. Looks like a rough day for all at the ... सभी पढ़ेंCharlie works for a painter hired to wallpaper a house. The owner can't get breakfast. The kitchen gas stove explodes. The wife's secret lover arrives. Looks like a rough day for all at the corner of Easy Street and Hardluck Ave.Charlie works for a painter hired to wallpaper a house. The owner can't get breakfast. The kitchen gas stove explodes. The wife's secret lover arrives. Looks like a rough day for all at the corner of Easy Street and Hardluck Ave.
- The Husband
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- The Wife
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- Izzy A. Wake - Paperhanger
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- The Plasterbearer
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- Maid
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- The Secret Lover
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This film made me laugh, a lot, but overall it was messy – much like the on screen action. I didn't really get any sense of who any of the characters were and to be honest apart from inhabiting the house at the centre of the story, Billy Armstrong and Marta Golden's characters weren't really necessary. They and Leo White were only really used during the films frenetic ending which is somewhere between a chase and a farce. That being said, there is still much to like about this Chaplin Essanay effort.
I liked the clever camera angle that Chaplin used to give the sense that he was pulling his bosses cart up a steep hill. It looked pretty good and added a bit of humour to a scene which was stagnating a bit. The cart pulling scene contained some good moments but dragged on too long for my liking. Chaplin wiping sweat from his forehead then ringing out an obviously pre soaked handkerchief was a highlight. When the action turns to the house there are many great moments. As you can imagine, Chaplin plus wallpaper paste creates some hilarious business. The film on the whole made me snigger in several places rather than laugh throughout and as I said previously the plot felt somewhat forgotten and was confusing. A confusing plot isn't something you want from a film that is under thirty minutes in length.
The romantic plot also took a bit of a back seat here and didn't really come to the fore until close to the end. Chaplin and Edna Purviance's Maid had a couple of cute scenes though. Overall this short is much more slapstick driven than plot driven and while funny in part, is slightly disappointing.
www.attheback.blogspot.com
From his Essanay period after leaving Keystone, 'Work' is not one of his very best or even among the best of this particular period. It shows a noticeable step up in quality though from his Keystone period, where he was still evolving and in the infancy of his long career, from 1914, The Essanay period is something of Chaplin's adolescence period where his style had been found and starting to settle. Something that can be seen in the more than worthwhile 'Work'.
'Work' is not one of his all-time funniest or most memorable, other efforts also have more pathos and a balance of that and the comedy. The story is still a little flimsy, there are times where it struggles to sustain the short length, and could have had more variety and less more of the same repeition.
On the other hand, 'Work' looks pretty good, not incredible but it was obvious that Chaplin was taking more time with his work (even when deadlines were still tight) and not churning out as many countless shorts in the same year of very variable success like he did with Keystone. Appreciate the importance of his Keystone period and there is some good stuff he did there, but the more mature and careful quality seen here and later on is obvious.
While not one of his funniest or original, 'Work' is still very entertaining with some clever, entertaining and well-timed slapstick. It moves quickly and there is no dullness in sight.
Chaplin directs more than competently, if not quite cinematic genius standard yet. He also, as usual, gives an amusing and expressive performance and at clear ease with the physicality of the role. The supporting cast acquit themselves well, particularly Billy Armstrong.
In conclusion, pretty good. 7/10 Bethany Cox
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThis film was one of several Chaplin comedies scheduled to be shown at the New-York Historical Society in September of 2001. In the wake of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, however, this film and one other, Dough and Dynamite, were pulled from the program, because each one ends with Charlie emerging from the rubble of a destroyed building.
- भाव
Title Card: The Ford family lived in a two-passenger form-fitting home at the corner of Easy Street and Hardluck Ave.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनFootage shot for this film was later used in Triple Trouble (1918), a patchwork film compiled by Essanay after Chaplin had left the studio.
- कनेक्शनEdited into Nitrato d'argento (1996)
टॉप पसंद
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Charlie the Decorator
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि29 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.33 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
