Charlot apprendista

"Work" is among the better of Chaplin's early comedies. It has a humorous situation that sets up some good comedy, and a good assortment of material. The story has Charlie as a paper-hanger, going with his supervisor to do a job in a home that already has enough problems. It does squander some screen time on material that isn't very funny, but then there are some very good moments that make up for it. There are also a couple of good subtle gags along with the more obvious physical comedy. It's the kind of setup that in later years Chaplin could have used to make a real classic. Here, it's unrefined, but it's still good entertainment. If you like Chaplin's earlier, less polished comedies, you should find this one worth a look.

This isn't a great short movie by Chaplin standards, though compared to many other slapstick films of the time, it's pretty good. In fact, the operative word for this film is "slapstick", as this movie has a larger than normal for Chaplin amount of pratfalls. Falling, hitting, exploding ovens and buckets of wallpaper paste getting tossed about is pretty much all this film is about from start to finish. This is funny, I guess, but it certainly doesn't look like a film about "the Little Tramp". And, now that I think about it, it looks like an early Chaplin film fused with a Three Stooges short. Kids will probably like it, but devoted fans of Chaplin will probably feel a tad disappointed.

Izzy Wake (Charles Inslee) a paperhanger and his assistant (Charlie Chaplin) slowly make their way to the house of Billy Armstrong and Marta Golden where they are due to hang wall paper. After experiencing difficulty even getting to the house, once they get there things go from bad to worse.

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

By this point in his career, Chaplin had almost fully developed the character of the little tramp, although he had not come close to perfecting the performances or truly refining his personality. But the character that the world soon came to know and love is clearly there by this point. This is one of the more complex stories for Chaplin's earliest work, with several story lines taking place simultaneously and coming together at the end.

The thing about slapstick is that so often it's only funny once, and sometimes even only mildly amusing that one time. The problem is that when you know what's going to happen, you can see the actor setting up for whatever sight gag is coming, even if it's only a slight indication of movement or preparation, but Chaplin was so good at it that in a film like this there are numerous sight gags and stunts that you can rewind and watch two or three times and they're still good. Chaplin had a natural style about him that looks like what we're watching isn't even a performance.

This film, simply titled Work, has plenty of amusing and memorable gags, particularly the wallpapering and the exploding stove. The end of the film is very high energy and even action packed, but it still strikes me as a bit of a descent into chaos. It's the kind of punching and kicking and throwing and falling and swinging and breaking stuff that we see a lot of in the Keystone films but that I feel tend to get boring after a while.

Then again, it's not until about 22 minutes into this 24 minute film that Chaplin first kicks a man over backwards by shoving his foot into the man's chest, so clearly other elements of storytelling are becoming more important to him....

Charlie Chaplin, in what was probably his most anarchic phase, was now basing many of his short comedies around a normal, "straight" setting, into which his little tramp character could blunder, causing mayhem as he went. Work is probably the most carefully constructed and effective in this respect.

The picture begins with a couple of extremely regular shots establishing the house in which most of the action is going to take place, and introducing us to its prim middle-class residents. Everything appears very formal, all composed of straight lines and neat areas of black and white. We then suddenly cut to Charlie chugging down the street with his boss's cart behind him. Everything in this shot has to do with disorder, with wonky telegraph poles, extras cutting across the frame, not to mention the ramshackle contraption the tramp is pulling. When we arrive at the harmonious household, the camera set-ups from the opening shots remain the same, but gradually the tramp's chaos begins to spread. The neatness and formality disappear while the mess and clutter builds up as, one by one, the rooms (and their occupants) are thrown into disarray.

Of course, Chaplin's popularity was not just founded on his comical capers. His satirical streak, here in full swing, would have struck a chord with many in his audience. I have certainly had a fair few employers who take after Chaplin's boss, and it's great fun to see this kind of character lampooned. And as in most of Chaplin's shorts there is a heart amidst the havoc, here in the form of the "sad story" scene. Even then, Chaplin wisely keeps the comedy going and stops the moment from getting too serious and saccharine.

Work is by no means the most hilarious of the Essanays, and certainly not the best developed in storyline, but on its own terms it is a pure work of genius, and positive proof that Charlie Chaplin was not just a funny little man. When it came to film-making, he knew exactly what he was doing.

And last but not least, the all-important statistic – Number of kicks up the arse: 2 (2 against)