City Lights is considered by most people to be one of the greatest films in the history of cinema. Chaplin resisted making talking films because he had found the perfect medium for his artistic vision. Although he later made talking movies that presented pointed social criticism, they never achieved the popularity of his silent films.
Here are some ideas to consider for your blog. How does Chaplin use the camera? Why does he make choices that are different from Griffith (The Birth of a Nation) or Eisenstein (The Battleship Potemkin). Compare and contrast.
Another idea to examine is discussing some ways Chaplin uses comedy. What areas of the human condition does he explore?

Comments
rpowell12
Sep 8, 2011
Chapman's film is much more advanced than both Griffith and Eisenstein. His film is made of almost all midshots showing the action of the characters instead of the close ups of characters reactions to create emotion like Griffith and Eisenstein. Griffith and Eisenstein's display their themes through metaphors by using camera angle, distance of shots, music, and tempo. Chaplin shows his themes by following the Tramp and showing how he is treated by the community. All of the directors are able to show their themes clearly and it doesnt matter if one character is displaying them or a community of people.
rwilliams12
Sep 8, 2011
"City Lights" is the first of the films we have watched that has included comedy as a main aspect of the story. I think the fact that this film in particular is a silent film made out of desire rather than necessity demonstrates how important Chaplin felt the art of silent films was. As I was watching the film I could not imagine that it would have nearly the same impact on me that it did if it was not a silent film. I felt that the camera work in City Lights more closely resembled that of more modern films. It is comprised almost exclusively of mid-range shots and close ups. This gives us a more a better view of the emotions of individuals than we saw in "The Battleship Potemkin", yet still allows us to see the environment the characters perform in.
bwolfe12
Sep 8, 2011
I enjoyed how the film was able to convey its message through comic relief. These comic scenes are used in a symbolic way. For instance the opening scene utilized funny sounds to depict the rather pompous speeches of the elected officials.
mhill12
Sep 9, 2011
Mitch -- The Film was interesting to me thus far because of the comedy Chaplin uses. For example, he makes the comparison of rich vs poor and how they are viewed in society. The rich man can go out and get drunk whenever he pleases because of the very fact he is rich, but it the poor person does that, society would look down on that individual because of his stance in society. Chaplin makes the viewer see this in a comic way and makes the viewer see how society sees the relationship of the rich vs the poor that had not been seen in films to this date. Also, his way of making it a silent film makes the viewer pay attention to the symbolism as opposed to the dialogue that we find in speaking films. An excellent choice in Chaplin's case because he is able to convey his message in a much more effective way in this silent film.
sromero12
Sep 9, 2011
Charlie Chaplin's use of humor to allow for comedic relief is incredible. This film has so far been a personal favorite of mine. It boggles me that although the film is silent, there is so much humor. I believe that sometimes, comedy is misrepresented and blurred through talking. Chaplin's shot of the poor man on the statue and him piercing his pants is funny, it takes down the tension level between his rich and poor contrast. The music and sounds used in the opening scene are hilarious. The kazoo sounding voices shows the common mans belief about the bourgeoisie speeches.
trumley12
Sep 9, 2011
Tanner- The drunk man has a bi-polar attitude. When he is sober he is blind towards the less fortunate and realizes the rich vs. poor dilemma. When he is drunk he accepts all and seems happier with his life. He even accepts Chaplin and is willing to help him with his problems. The blind woman also faces the challenge of rich vs. poor. She believes that Chaplin is a rich man based off the actions of the society creating a false image of the people.
bwolfe12
Sep 9, 2011
The last scene of City Lights is one of the greatest emotional moments I have seen in the movies; the girl, whose sight has been restored by an operation paid for by the Tramp, now sees him as a bum but smiles anyway, and gives him a rose and some money, and then, touching his hands, recognizes them. This truly emphasizes the underlining idea of the film that, at a base level, all humans are equal. It is really ostracizing society's social classes based on monetary things. I have really enjoyed the way that this silent film has forced us to focus on actions rather than dialogue. Chaplin does well in embracing the idea that actions speak louder than words.
mhill12
Sep 11, 2011
Mitch-- The relationship between the rich and the poor and how society views each individual in the film City Lights Still astounds me. The Relationship Chaplin makes with the rich drunk and the tramp when the rich one is drunk is interesting. When he is drunk, he likes the tramp being around because his drunkeness masks the social barrier of rich and poor. Without being drunk, the rich man does not like the tramp because of his social stature. Chaplin uses this because he wants to illustrate how one needs to move past social barriers and see someone for who they truly are and not get caught up in the social aspects of the world.
rpowell12
Sep 11, 2011
Chapman is very caught up in the conflict between economic classes. The tramp is often disrespected just because he is of a lower class. Throughout the movie he only gets respect from a blind woman and a drunk man. The blind woman just assumes that he is rich because he gets out of cars and is always buying flowers from her. The drunk man is also to drunk to realize that the Tramp is of lower class but when he is sober he treats him the same way as the rest of the wealthy class.
mlippe12
Sep 11, 2011
Unlike Eisenstein and Griffiths, Chaplin did not use many long shots. Instead, he favored mid-shots. Similarly to Eisenstein, he fancied illustrating the separation of class, but instead of showing the conflict that flowered as a result, he demonstrated the stereotypes that fabricated as a result. Additionally, Chaplin played with the primary theme of blindness, and how it isn't necessarily a bad trait. For example, the blind woman grew to love Chaplin's character through his personality. He wasn't exactly the most handsome of men, and he was quite the societal outcast, but she wasn't able to see that. When she gained sight, she was able to love him for who he truly was; not for what society labeled him.
In the flim, slapstick comedy was commonly used, which helps keep the plot light and happy. The slapstick was successful through Chaplin's frequent use of mid-shots, because we were able to see the chaotic antics happening around the character.
In Chaplin's film, Modern Times, Smile is a song used in the instrumental score. Lyrics were later added: "Smile though your heart is aching, smile even though it's breaking". In almost every close up in City Lights, Chaplin had a boyish, childish, and even bashful grin on his face. Many times in film, characters become rugged after living life on the streets, but contrarily, the Tramp is innocent and slightly naive.
rwilliams12
Sep 11, 2011
I thoroughly enjoyed the ways in which Chaplin incorporated Comedy throughout "City Lights". The boxing match scene along with the scenes leading up to it were particularly memorable for me, throughout them I legitimately was unsure about how the outcome would be. I also really liked the end of the film. The way in which the (formerly) blind girl was awoken by Chaplin and was able to see past his appearance to see his true self contrasts the superficiality shown by the rich in this film.
trumley12
Sep 12, 2011
I was shocked by the last scene where the woman who received her eyesight accepted the tramp even though he was not what she was expecting. I originally thought that she was going to reject him since she was blinded by her new sight, but when she accepted the tramp it was clear that she has broken the themes of blindness and rich vs. poor. I also liked the boxing scene how the bell represented peace and battle by a single ring, and how the ref represented the barrier between the classes. So far this has been my favorite movies so far.
sromero12
Sep 12, 2011
I believe that Chaplin truly expounded on the theme of rich vs. poor in the latter part of the film. He highlights the rich mans blindness to social and economic barriers while drunk, in a way becoming blind like the woman and he finds it okay to associate with the tramp while drunk but while sober, he abstains from associating with her in fear of ruining his reputation. He is almost more blind than the blind woman herself.
Once again, his humor is always appreciated. It lightens the mood and plays off the harsh realization of the conflicting ideals of the rich and the poor and the bourgeoisie mindsets. The scene when he is in the living room with the drunk man and the drunk man gives him money is quite amusing. When the people sneak up behind and keep attempting to knock out the drunk man, I know most of us couldn't help but laugh. Like Mattie mentioned, the slapstick comedy was definitely his knack, and it was congruent with the rest of the type of film he made.
ccoman12
Sep 12, 2011
In the film City Lights, Chaplin introduces the element of comedy and uses it in a symbolic way. In every scene, the tramp is faced with a situation where he has to avoid danger. I think it’s funny because the tramp is dirty and unkempt, while the life around him is clean and filled with nice things. He obviously wants a better life, but is too different from the nice aspect of life to go after it. The tramp is always insulting different important people throughout the city openly by using slapstick style comedy. It was especially important in showing the contrast between the slapstick comedy and the police when Chaplin gets himself stuck on the sword of the statue in front of the soldiers while they are saluting. This shows symbolism for the demeaning of justice. I also thought it was funny how the tramp is always getting hurt by the blind girl, and it’s always an accident. To me, this represents the blindness in society to the upcoming era of social movement. The humor that is present in the film is the first time that slapstick is introduced, which means people aren’t used to it. I thought it was interesting how he used mid-shots for most of the film, while Eisenstein preferred long shots to show the separation of class. The mid-shots help to show lots of movement within the characters. griffith used multiple camera angles to show dominance of some over others, while Chaplin uses very little camera movement. I think this is because Chaplin uses more acting and sound effects to portray emotions. The stillness of the camera allows the viewing audience to focus more on the story and characters rather than the editing style. The scene that was most interesting to me was when he sees the sign for curing the blind, and hopes to get enough money to cure the girl. The theme of blindness and social separation come together when he loses his job. The sound effects that are used help to amplify the comedic relief of the tense scenes.