Lloyd vs. Chaplin

Can't agree with you there... I've seen a lot of Lloyd shorts that are laugh riots: 'Bumping Into Broadway,' 'Spring Fever,' 'Billy Blazes Esq.,' 'Why Pick on Me?,' 'Captain Kidd's Kids,' 'Number Please,' 'From Hand to Mouth,' etc.

To my mind, the better Lloyd shorts are every bit as funny as the better Chaplin shorts... and there are any number of Lloyd one-reelers that absolutely blow away the best Chaplin one-reelers. Just one guy's opinion, of course.. but I can't even think of a Chaplin one-reeler that would get a modern audience going.

I have seen a few Chaplin one-reelers with an audience, and they go over quite well. I think Chaplin is the most accessible of the older comedians for a number of general reasons. In fact, I think Lloyd is the least accessible, as much as I personally respect and enjoy his work.

Why's that, Jim? I would think something like 'Safety Last' is simple enough for anyone to follow, and Lloyd's more situation-comedy-like films would be more understandable to modern audiences than, say, Keaton (and certainly Langdon!).

I really enjoy Lloyd's twenties-era go-getter persona. But I think in these more cynical times, it dates moreso than the Tramp or the Great Stone Face. Just a subjective judgement call on my part.

Don't forget that Chaplin one-reelers would have been made in 1914-15 and the Lloyd one-reelers that are generally available were made in 1917-19. In terms of film comedy technique that time period is like the leap from the Bronze Age to the Rennaisance. And most of the Lloyds survive in a slightly more pristine state than do the duped and choppy Keystones.

Rob Farr

True, but consider that Rolin was a smaller operation than Keystone had been in 1914, with a smaller studio and presumably fewer resources.

Also, Lloyd was shooting a full reel a week, and starring in all of them, which was a faster pace than Chaplin's had been. And *still* the Lloyds have a far higher batting average than the Chaplin Keystones... at least in my opinion.