Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Daily Dose of Doozy #4: Amusing Attractions: Harold Lloyd


Recommended Posts

I didn't know much about Lloyd so I guess now it's the time I admit it! For one thing the luna park as the set for the comedy is the perfect place to start and shot! Many peculiar things can happen inside it and that is taking us back to the circus and the like! I like the fact that he looked like an everyday guy that was messing into trouble! Another great pioneer to study and learn from!

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Do you agree or disagree with Schickel's assessment of Lloyd as more "real" or "freer" of "exaggeration and stylization" than Chaplin or Keaton? Why or why not? Chaplin and Keaton, while physical comedy geniuses, acked the natural physical comedy of Lloyd. Lloyd's performance didn't seem contrived or choreographed...just the kind of physical mishaps that could happen to anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In watching this clip, what contributions do you see that Lloyd added to the history of slapstick comedy?

The crab added the totally unexpected to the scene. They used crabs in other movies--it grabs onto someone's nose. They also used fish that squirted people in the face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harold Lloyd made a great choice in choosing an amusement park for his film as there are people and the crowd could mean the chance to create hilarious comic situations. Here, we could see the lobster who is inside Lloyd's pocket and it uses its claws to pinch each and every person at the games and eventually pinches Mr Lloyd in the end of the spinning wheel game. I agree with Schickel's assessment of Mr Lloyd as he was an epitome of a middle class man. When Chaplin was the tramp and Keaton was the Acrobat, Lloyd was more in between these two wonderful comedians and he adopted the image of the Boy Next Door. I think that Harold Lloyd made contribution to the Silent Film Era as he did the comic routines based on day to day rituals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

​Is Lloyd more"real" or "freer" of "exaggeration and stylization" than Chaplin or Keaton? Why or why not?

 

When we look at all three of these clips, it is easy to see the possible of the incidents.   Well, mostly what seems possible .   Could one actually be hit by a mallet without serious damage, drive through New York City without paying attention, carry a lobster in one's pocket without knowing, trick many folks into giving up their seats without repercussion.   Of course not, but the payoff in the gags diffuse the unlikeness into seeming more real.

       Chaplin is a tramp, Keaton is a stone-face, but Lloyd is the young-man-go-getter. He is much easier to identify with, thus the audience is more likely to. Which is a part of his appeal to the audience of the 1920s.  You probably wouldn't want to know a tramp, you aren't likely to know a skilled acrobat, but Lloyd was the boy next door. You could believe young people having fun at Coney Island, being star-struck by Babe Ruth, trying to get a seat for their girlfriend.  So the gags are based on something the audience can identify with - thus "real".

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. In what ways does Lloyd use the settings, amusements, and attractions of Coney Island in pursuit of creating original slapstick gags? Be specific.

 

Lloyd takes the carnival rides and uses them as an accent to himself as being a physical prop. In other words the merry go round is the setting but it's the crab in his pocket pinching people's bottom that serves as catalyst for people to jump up and not hold on. Also when he eats too much you think he's going to be sick but no, Lloyd only tests his lungs on another carnival game.

 

 

2. Do you agree or disagree with Schickel's assessment of Lloyd as more "real" or "freer" of "exaggeration and stylization" than Chaplin or Keaton? Why or why not?

 

I agree because Lloyd used a whole cast of characters to make a gag worked whereas Chaplin it was protagonist/antagonist and Keaton it was man vs. house or machine.

 

 

3. In watching this clip, what contributions do you see that Lloyd added to the history of slapstick comedy

 

Lloyd introduced more of a setting and added exciting places like a bustling amusement park as the setup for where he was going with his gags. Anyone could be pinched in Lloyd's world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...