The Face on the Barroom Floor

Charles Chaplin was a genius, a master, a remarkable actor, an outstanding director and a legendary person. I watched all of his movies and read his autobiography and there's no need to say how much I admire this man - he will always be my number one actor and director of all times. Period.

Charlie started out his career very early and by the age of twelve already had an experience many grown-ups would be jealous of. So when the opportunity arose for him to make it big he took it and came to America in the early 1910s when the silent cinema was already blossoming. Charlie signed a contract with Mack Sennett's Keystone who produced farce and slapstick comedies and the rest is history; many of his early movies I dislike on the basis of them being just too silly, one-dimensional, at times unfunny and lacking that real "Chaplin" feel that he got famous for later. Everyone should start someplace and any place is a good start as long as you've got patience and enough talent to carry on.

The earliest of his movies that I consider a masterpiece is "The face on the barroom floor" (1914). Charlie had already a couple of dozen movies under his belt before this one came along; it still was a farce comedy but what differed this one from the rest was the presence of the soul in it. The movie was based on the poem of the same name and told a story of a broken-down person who fell in love but was left for somebody else. The intertitles in the movie are experts from the poem and Charlie brings it to life masterfully with his performance balancing between slapstick and drama the way only he could do it - brilliantly. "The face on the barroom floor" is only 11 minutes long but it showed all of Charlie's potential and talent to the world and has become his first of many successes in the world in cinema.

Am a big fan of Charlie Chaplin, have been for over a decade now. Many films and shorts of his are very good to masterpiece, and like many others consider him a comedy genius and one of film's most important and influential directors.

He did do better than 'The Face on the Barroom Floor', still made very early on in his career where he was still finding his feet and not fully formed what he became famous for. Can understand why the Keystone period suffered from not being as best remembered or highly remembered than his later efforts, but they are mainly decent and important in their own right. 'The Face on the Barroom Floor' is a long way from a career high, but has a lot of nice things about it and is to me one of the better efforts in the 1914 Keystone batch.

'The Face on the Barroom Floor' is not as hilarious, charming or touching as his later work and some other shorts in the same period. The story is flimsy and the production values not as audacious. Occasionally, things feel a little scrappy and confused and the more satirical elements are not quite sharp enough.

For someone who was still relatively new to the film industry and had literally just moved on from their stage background, 'The Face on the Barroom Floor' is not bad at all and there are flashes of his distinctive style, meaning that he was showing signs of evolving.

While not audacious, the film hardly looks ugly, is more than competently directed and is appealingly played. Chaplin looks comfortable for so early on and shows his stage expertise while opening it up that it doesn't become stagy or repetitive shtick. He plays it straight too and it is effective.

Although the humour, charm and emotion was done even better and became more refined later, 'The Face on the Barroom Floor' is humorous, sweet and easy to like. It is one of Chaplin's earliest attempts at pathos, and it doesn't get too sappy, while not inducing sobs some may find themselves misty-eyed. It moves quickly and doesn't feel too long or short.

Overall, pretty decent. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I've seen quite a few Chaplin shorts from early in his career and I've noticed that his early stuff (done for Keystone Studios) is pretty dreadful stuff. Unlike his wonderful full-length films from the 20s and 30s, the films from 1914-1915 are incredibly poorly made--having no script but only vague instructions from the director. In most cases, the films had almost no plot and degenerated to people punching and kicking each other.

This film consists of a lot of barroom scenes as well as scenes where Charlie is an artist. Apparently, he'd been an artist but it all went to pieces when his love left him for another. Oddly, the captions say "two months later" between scenes. After only two months, he sees her and her new beau and they've got a bunch of kids--some looking at least 6 or 8. This and the paint on him that appeared and then disappeared due to bad editing make this an odd and confusing picture. Unfortunately, none of the stuff is particularly interesting.

You can read the poem upon which this film was based. I guess a lot of the satire is lost to our "blind" modern eyes. This is a rare chance to see early Chaplin doing some fairly straight acting.

Well, I've just been told that my comment isn't long enough. Good writing is succinct writing everywhere else.

But I'll plow on with more thoughts. It's interesting to see how much the tragedy in being a run-down bum is felt in this short. The Tramp is such a resourceful character in most shorts that feature him that there is no sense of his being really a loser in life. The poor who identified with his plight also enjoyed his ultimate victories and small defeats of the powerful, I will guess. If we looked at him today, we'd wonder why he couldn't fit into the models of success we hold dear: offices, stores, anything that requires conformation to behaviorial requirements -- must have been all that kicking!

In Face on the Barroom Floor, Chaplin satirizes a poem and does some real acting, the kind that is rarely seen at this time in his career, when the vast majority of his films are still packed full of overblown physical comedy, and evidently staggering drunkenness provides a nice catalyst in this direction. Chaplin does play a pretty convincing drunk, but the kicking and punching and falling over backwards, if not outright boring, is clearly below Chaplin's level of talent, I just think that he had yet to realize it. I don't think it was until the more dramatic films of his later career that he really learned what he could do with his craft and how meaningful his films could be.

That being said, it is still nice to see that the Tramp is evolving from the callous jerk of the first few films and into a more human character, although still one who has a few lessons to learn about how to handle life's little conflicts. This is a clever short film that is a little light on the comedy, being that it is a short comedy, but an interesting look at the slow evolution of Chaplin's acting and the steadily thickening plots.