Charlie Chaplin Mutual/Essanay

MY biggest "complaint" is the "correct speed" statement.
When theses films were first produced and released there wasn't a "correct" anything about them.They were usually viewed on a hand cranked or variable speed projector and many times cue sheets were included to tell the projectionists when to speed the action up or slow it down for effect.As they got repeatedly shown over and over the cue sheets were often by then non extant and the projectionists were often left to their own devices.You might see
say "ONE A.M." at one theater projected a certain way/speed then be able to go across town to another theater and see it projected in a very different way.
And we know the silent films were shot at variable speeds themselves to enhance action where necessary(again hand cranked cameras!).Some have put an average FPS(frames per second) speed of around 16-18 for these films.This is generally close but to put a silent film at a CONSTANT speed in that range is to do an injustice to it and its' creators and their original intent.It does NOT show us what the film actually may have REALLY looked like in a theater in 1916.It may approximate it in some instances but not come even close in others.As a result I look at some scenes in these movies and I wait for Charlie to say "zoom" out a door as he should do but instead as with the entire film before and after he's in a constant state of "correct speed" and the impact therefore is now gone.
Also remember these films were just fillers or run-ups for the main "big" picture being shown on that occasion.Depending on the "pull"/star power of the filler(in this case Chaplin) this is what would draw the crowds to the movie house even MORE than the main feature.So a two reeler was generally not more than 20 minutes.If the two reeler was not that good he might want to speed it up to get it over with.If it was good he might extend it and/or really "spice up" the spots he thought would enhance the picture and the resultant reaction from the audience.Then it might run a little longer.It depended.But not usually the length we see in this release.
Silents were not a cut and dry affair like they are today.There were many variables in the making AND projecting of them.

One final "fault" I'd like to point out is the restoration process itself.Currently on Kino video there is the newly restored "Metroplis" an outstanding achievement in the restoration of ANY silent film to date.To make a long story short the European company that did the work used a marvellous new process whereby the picture has its' print faults digitally and exactingly(is that a word?) removed frame by loving frame.The result is astounding,especially considering the shape of what the company had to work with there.My point is I was hoping Shepherd and company would use this process or something similar on these films but they didn't.Too bad.
Despite these "trifles" I'd like to recommend this set to anyone and everyone interested in the early cinema and especially to those Chaplin fans out there.

P.S.Regarding the wonderful inclusion of the Eric Campbell special.I find it rather odd that one of the last quotes about Mr.Campbell came not from Chaplin in whose set this is included with and is about but by none other than Stan Laurel.

MY biggest "complaint" is the "correct speed" statement.
When theses films were first produced and released there wasn't a "correct" anything about them.They were usually viewed on a hand cranked or variable speed projector and many times cue sheets were included to tell the projectionists when to speed the action up or slow it down for effect.As they got repeatedly shown over and over the cue sheets were often by then non extant and the projectionists were often left to their own devices.You might see
say "ONE A.M." at one theater projected a certain way/speed then be able to go across town to another theater and see it projected in a very different way.
And we know the silent films were shot at variable speeds themselves to enhance action where necessary(again hand cranked cameras!).Some have put an average FPS(frames per second) speed of around 16-18 for these films.This is generally close but to put a silent film at a CONSTANT speed in that range is to do an injustice to it and its' creators and their original intent.It does NOT show us what the film actually may have REALLY looked like in a theater in 1916.It may approximate it in some instances but not come even close in others.As a result I look at some scenes in these movies and I wait for Charlie to say "zoom" out a door as he should do but instead as with the entire film before and after he's in a constant state of "correct speed" and the impact therefore is now gone.
Also remember these films were just fillers or run-ups for the main "big" picture being shown on that occasion.Depending on the "pull"/star power of the filler(in this case Chaplin) this is what would draw the crowds to the movie house even MORE than the main feature.So a two reeler was generally not more than 20 minutes.If the two reeler was not that good he might want to speed it up to get it over with.If it was good he might extend it and/or really "spice up" the spots he thought would enhance the picture and the resultant reaction from the audience.Then it might run a little longer.It depended.But not usually the length we see in this release.
Silents were not a cut and dry affair like they are today.There were many variables in the making AND projecting of them.

One final "fault" I'd like to point out is the restoration process itself.Currently on Kino video there is the newly restored "Metroplis" an outstanding achievement in the restoration of ANY silent film to date.To make a long story short the European company that did the work used a marvellous new process whereby the picture has its' print faults digitally and exactingly(is that a word?) removed frame by loving frame.The result is astounding,especially considering the shape of what the company had to work with there.My point is I was hoping Shepherd and company would use this process or something similar on these films but they didn't.Too bad.
Despite these "trifles" I'd like to recommend this set to anyone and everyone interested in the early cinema and especially to those Chaplin fans out there.

P.S.Regarding the wonderful inclusion of the Eric Campbell special.I find it rather odd that one of the last quotes about Mr.Campbell came not from Chaplin in whose set this is included with and is about but by none other than Stan Laurel.

I really like the music for the Essanay DVDs: piano improvisations by Eric James and orchestral scores by Robert Israel. The Mutual films on the other hand have "orchestral" music by Michael Mortilla which is actually quite good, except that it is performed on a rather nasty cheesy synthesizer. If only the budget for these releases has stretched to hiring an orchestra to read Mortilla's scores this release would have been perfect.

The addition of the extra DVD about Eric Campbell is nice. It is good to find out about this actor who the world forgot. Charlie Chaplin himself seems to have forgotten him! In Chaplin's autobiography there is a photo of him and Eric playing golf. Chaplin states the picture is from "The Idle Class", a film that not only didn't feature Campbell, it wasn't even made until 3 years after Campbell's death!

I completely agree with the reviewer below who acknowledges David H. Shepard's enormous role in the restoration of these classic films. I sincerely hope that Mr Shepard continues what he has started and restores Chaplin's earliest movies, the Keystone films. These 1914 films are now the only Chaplin films that aren't available in a pristine condition.