NitrateVille.com

If you had to pick ONE PERSON as the greatest figure (actor, actress, writer, director, mogul, etc.), who would you pick?

My pick: Charlie Chaplin

George Rowe

Depending upon exactly what you mean by "greatest", I'd say most people would probably pick ole' Charlie. Not only did he create an incomparable body of work of lasting popularity starring one of the most recognizable and most beloved characters in the world, and become the biggest and highest-paid star in the world for a time, and help found United Artists, and end up with total control over all his projects after 1917, and scandalously impregnate and marry and divorce teenage girls to the delight of newspaper headlines everywhere, and get kicked out of the country for bullsh*t political reasons to the delight of newspaper headlines everywhere, he's certainly the only silent film figure that still stands a reasonable chance of being recognized on sight or mention. Except for perhaps Louise Brooks, though she could hardly be called the greatest figure of the silent era.

I think I'd have to go with Charlie. Sorry, Mr. Griffith.

John Aasen

Bob

There isn't one single greatest figure. Impossible IMO.

It can't be done, not for any film era. Maybe by the decade, and just perhaps by the genre, but you're asking an impossibly broad question. If Chaplin, why not Garbo?

There probably isn't ONE greatest figure above absolutely everyone else, but that won't stop me from voting for....

....Mary Pickford.

Others were possibly better actors. A handful were film stars before she was. But her popularity, the way she "clicked" with audiences of the time, led her to heights of fame (and press coverage) that set the precedent for almost all movie personalities who immediately followed her. She was one of the arbiters of Hollywood society well into the 30s and, along with Fairbanks, sort of a de facto ambassador from the film colony to the rest of the world.

None of the above would have much meaning if Pickford didn't have the talent to back her popularity up, and she had a profusion of it. I think she could have flourished in whatever genre she chose for herself: within her repertoire was slapstick comedy, society drama, action, romance, farce and a persona that was sufficiently complex to encompass many of them in the same film.

She could play girls and women of any social class: pampered young people like Stellas Maris, Gwendolyn and Cedric on one hand and rough-and-tumble Unity Blake, Amarilly Jenkins, Mavis Hawn and Annie Rooney on the other--along with middle class Maggie Johnson and street singer Rosita.

None of her characters are quite alike, and its a credit to her talent that each one is so memorable. Her pantomime skill is so advanced that at times she doesn't even need to use her face: when we're introduced to her in My Best Girl she's struggling to carry a load of pots and pans and we see her only from the waist down. The movement of her feet and the grace with which she demonstrates her deep (but comic) frustration conveys more information about Pickford and her character than 10 minutes of dialogue in other films.

Unlike Chaplin, Pickford didn't quite remain an instantly-recognisable icon. Most adults over a certain age were at least aware that she was once popular and had played little girls, but later generations didn't always understand the full shadings of her talent and how powerful her position (financial and sentimental) really had been. Many of her films are comic, but they also contain dramatic elements that can require a bit of work and patience to really "get", particularly since the kind of roles she played convey and try to elicit emotions that later supposed tastemakers have often disparaged.

In that way, Pickford is very much like silent films themselves.

-Harold

Loni Nest.

http://gimlihospital.wordpress.com/index.php?s=Loni

Einar the Lonely wrote:Loni Nest.

http://gimlihospital.wordpress.com/index.php?s=Loni

Absolutely! I'll second that one without hesitation. A seminal figure, if ever there was one.

Annette Kellerman's!

Arndt wrote:

Einar the Lonely wrote:Loni Nest.

http://gimlihospital.wordpress.com/index.php?s=Loni

Absolutely! I'll second that one without hesitation. A seminal figure, if ever there was one.

Who dares to deny this, especially after the recent discovery of her lost films in Togo...

I’ll make my choice between Harold Lloyd and Buster Keaton. Everyone seems to know Keaton’s famous scene in Steamboat Bill Jr. and everyone seems to know Lloyd’s “hanging on a clock” –scene in Safety Last! But because Mr. Lloyd is more easily to recognize, I will choose him as a greatest figure of the silents.

I'd cal Lloyd an icon of the era, if not the greatest figure. Even when his films were almost unavailable people knew who he was.

Lloyd was certainly an icon, but one among many.

The word 'icon' may be the stumper...

However, I'd pick two: first, Charles Chaplin, and right there with him Adolphe Zukor...

This foolish question does not even deserve an answer.

I could respond to your rudeness, but you're not worth the effort.

Snitz Edwards

Jimmy Aubrey

Too many great actors, directors, moguls etc. It's all subjective but the one with the highest remaining profile is Chaplin. In the public eye he is the most recognisable icon. Not sure if it is a good thing as it makes the public perception of the silent era look lightweight and mostly dominated by silly odd looking comedians. Not true of course but his impact has overshadowed everyone else.

I too would say Chaplin because he's so emblematic of the silent film era, regardless of the legacies of everyone else. A truly universal symbol. Greatness is a more nebulous thing to make comparisons with, but Chaplin I think has the corner on instant silent era recognition and resonance, with Mary Pickford an immediate second.

Definitely Charlie Chaplin , to the non-silent film buff he's a recognizable comodity such as the name Enrico Caruso to opera or Houdini to magic.

I think that easy recognition isn't necessarily the point. If that were true then Mickey Mouse would be the greatest animated cartoon character- and that point could be hotly debated.

(Even the Disney studio eventually realized that while Mickey was their best known character they could get more laughs out of Donald Duck going into a rage)

FrankFay wrote:I think that easy recognition isn't necessarily the point. If that were true then Mickey Mouse would be the greatest animated cartoon character- and that point could be hotly debated.

(Even the Disney studio eventually realized that while Mickey was their best known character they could get more laughs out of Donald Duck going into a rage)

Charlie has much more than easy recognition to qualify him, as has been stated.

Hello? Nita Naldi!

Yes- if only for Sally Lung in The Ten Commandments. As our Dr Giraud put it:

"Great entrance- greater exit"

Charles Chaplin then Murnau

Murnau? Why not Stroheim?

If you're going to be judging male figures, c'mon .... Charley's was okay, but nobody matched George O'Brien's.

George Arliss said it was Charlie Chaplin (in his first volume of autobiography) and that's good enough for me!