Name: 4.卓別林，第二部分(2007年) (4. Chaplin, Part II (2007))
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T06:37:17.000Z
Duration: 1 h 2 min 20 s
Description: 【看影片學英語】數萬部 YouTube 影片，搭配英漢字典即點即查，輕鬆掌握單字發音與用法，長久累積看電影不必再看字幕。

基礎被動語態

The following content is provided under a Creative

Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare

continue to offer high quality educational resources for free.

To make a donation or view additional materials

from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare

DAVID THORBURN: This lecture tonight is our last chance

to pay attention to this process I've been calling the Fred Ott

And forgive me for appearing slightly repetitious

of our appreciation of these early weeks,

to recognize that films like The General, or Modern Times,

or the film we're going to see next week, The Last Laugh,

Murnau's remarkable silent film from Germany,

to recognize that these astonishing, complex narratives

and grew out of something so primitive in such a

And the viewing you're going to see tonight

is your last opportunity to, in a concrete way,

something of that evolution for yourself.

Because the two Chaplain shorts that you're

going to see, while they are, as I indicated this afternoon, not

from the earliest stages of Chaplin's work,

they're three or four years advanced beyond that.

He's already mastered his medium in certain ways.

And I hope you'll look at them for their own intrinsic value.

as you think about those short films, remarkable as they are,

how much more demanding and rewarding in many ways

And I think the same thing could be said about all

There's an astonishing distance between even the best

shorts or between most of the best shorts and the features.

a kind of elegance and purity, as well as

don't have quite the reach or the resonance

of a film like Modern Times or The Gold Rush.

One way we can perhaps clarify some of what I've been saying,

to poor Buster Keaton, who I think in many ways is

an equally remarkable artist and in a technical sense

an even more interesting director than Chaplain himself,

is to begin with a comparison of the two.

Not so much because the comparison will really

illuminate weaknesses in one or the other,

of the essential qualities in each of these director's

And I hope that you'll sort of think back

to the Keaton material you saw last week as I'm

One way to think about the differences between Chaplin

to talk about the way they deal with objects and the role

In Keaton's case, we might say that the basic objects

of interest are usually massive and gigantic things,

whole houses, locomotives, as in The General,

And Keaton was interested in intricate systems

and in the intricacy with which these systems operated.

And he liked to pose his Buster character

against these massive systems, to see whether Buster could

survive them and to show us certain aspects,

both of Buster's resourcefulness and power

to muddle through, but also his comic inadequacy

And a number of the most dramatic and famous bits

from The General could be said to crystallize this principle.

That cosmic joke, that vision of experience,

affectionate mockery of human nature, that's

embedded in the cannon sequence at the very beginning

But as Keaton first fails to fire the cannon,

and it looks as if he's going to be shot.

字幕列表影片播放

4.卓別林，第二部分(2007年) (4. Chaplin, Part II (2007))

vulnerable

sort

massive

recognize