CloverClover

CC is the legend everyone knows and love, but do people know, that Jackie was also a director too? He made the first two police story movies for instance. All his action and stunts take just as much talent to do,even more in fact. I have to say, CHAN gets my vote because his stuff isn't just comedy, or action. he is also a really good actor, and some of his movies are great cop/robber movies to, not just kung fu. Re-watching his movies, they are full of so many miraculous sequences, I have come to see, Jackie Chan is a living legend, just like Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Alfred Hithccock, people who brought to screen what we have never seen before.

bluetoast

Both would do well in "each other's" respective eras. I'd say that Jackie Chan would have done great as a silent star, with his skill at staging and physicality, and his work ethic, directing, editing, and knowing how to do the jobs of all the crew members. Chaplin would do well today, being a skilled director in the first place, but also with his background in expressiveness, movement, he could succeed as an actor, and I would think actors would love to work with someone with that type of background.

CloverClover

yes it is interesting how chaplin even made color movies like the one with marlon brando, it showed that he could have succeeded and survived in any movie era, especially since slapstick has always and is still funny

JumpCutz

Uh....Charlie Chaplin. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he wins this showdown.

PopcornTreeCt

Jackie Chan, legend?

Solid Snake

I'd say that Chan is pretty legendary.

THOUGH...While I think Chan may be more athletic than Chaplin and could do stuff that CC probably couldn't do..I'd say that CC would be more daring and clever in his abilities than JC. Also....without Chaplin and Keaton (among others) there'd be no Chan. Chan was heavily influenced by them...without them...there's no Jackie Chan.

One day I'd like to believe that we'll get all of Chan's films uncut, undubbed, and correctly subtitled one day. I don't know when the fuck that'll happen.

Supermallet

When Chan makes something as daring as The Great Dictator or as sublime as City Lights than I'll think about comparing him to Chaplin.

The Antipodean

This is like Laurence Olivier vs. Pee-Wee Herman.

TheNightFlier

I'll have to go with Chaplin on this one....

Groucho

Never heard of either, so The Thing wins this matchup.

SkinJob

Um, you're damn right he is.

Ash Ketchum

You should know, of course, that most of Jackie's Hong Kong films were post-dubbed, in both Cantonese and Mandarin--by other actors! I believe the first films I got to hear his actual voice in were the English dubs of his 1990s films like RUMBLE IN THE BRONX, MR. NICE GUY, FIRST STRIKE, etc. I have heard his actual voice in some of his 1990s HK films, but offhand I'm not sure which ones. I'd probably have to dig out my DVD/VHS copies of the PROJECT A and POLICE STORY films and DRUNKEN MASTER II to figure this out.

I'm a huge fan of Jackie, but Chaplin is the father of us all. It was his efforts more than any others (including Griffith, Fairbanks, and Pickford, Chaplin's partners in founding United Artists) that got the motion picture accepted by the culture as a popular art form.

Richard Attenborough's CHAPLIN (1994) starring Robert Downey Jr. was not the best film biopic we could have gotten about the man, but it was the only one completed so far in my lifetime so I'll take it. It has its merits and should be seen by all film buffs.

Mabuse

The more correct analogue to Jackie Chan would be Buster Keaton. Keaton and Chaplin are both greater than Jackie Chan. I hate to break anyone's heart but Chan is not a good actor. He's a great stuntman but mearly a competent actor. I've never seen him display the diversity of emotion that Chaplin could express. In fact Chan is guilty of some of the most overacted and wildly inappropriate acting I've ever seen. Drunken Master 2 (his masterpiece) features many of his greatest stunts and some of his most over the top melodramatic crap acting.

FlickMan

For me, Chaplin is kind of overrated and Buster Keaton is underrated and should have had the status that Chaplin got.

Since I watch JC movies MUCH MORE than CC ones, I go with Jackie

Solid Snake

You know what I meant. You know...in English. The first time I heard of Chan was from a video my dad had...didn't know who he was..but remembered him when RiTB came out. I'm not sure when Chan had his own voice used though...I don't think it was in the first 2 PS films...Fuck...I hate the version we have of DMII here in the states..aka The Legend of Drunken Master.

Perkinsun Dzees

Pretty much. Though in all fairness, Olivier was a pretty good actor, but just not in the same league as Pee Wee.

davidh777

Keaton and the clock scene came to mind for me as well

Solid Snake

See....that humor that doesn't sit well here...may just be HK humor...cuz it gets kind of weird sometimes.

Ash Ketchum

That was Harold Lloyd and the film is SAFETY LAST (1923).


Here's one of Keaton's famous stunts, from STEAMBOAT BILL JR. (1928):

For the film itself, the camera was in front of Keaton and the house. Like this:

Ash Ketchum

Yes, I too prefer seeing his films in Cantonese with subtitles rather than dubbed in English. It just bothers me that they so rarely used the actors' real voices. Poor Brigitte Lin, one of the greatest Asian film stars ever, made only one film, PEACH BLOSSOM LAND, that used her actual voice. I've never had the opportunity to see it either.

It's funny, I've seen a number of old Japanese films within the past year, from the 1930s to the early 1960s, that were all shot sync sound, even outdoors scenes. Yet when I watch stuff from the later '60s to the '80s, they're all post-dubbed. I've seen Hong Kong films from the late '50s and early '60s that were all shot in Cantonese or Mandarin sync sound, yet from the late '60s through to the early '90s they were all post-dubbed.

CloverClover

I think some of you are wrong, maybe you just remember jackie chan movies seeing them on VHS on the small screen, or they are too cheesy and action-y. but in 30 years when people look back on them, and see them on the big screen, blu-ray, they will see. they are like nothing else from this era, and have so many wild stunts and over the top and elaborate set pieces, full of action, humor, coordination, melodrama. I believe they will be as loved as hitchcock movies or chaplin movies. John Woo's HK epics too, but those are already loved for their artistry, and in the criterion collection. Chan belongs there too, especially in their niche label for more campy fare

Supermallet

There's a difference between craft and art. Chan's films aren't on the level of Chaplin's or Keaton's best.

Mabuse

1. The Criterion Collection did release a Chan film on laserdisc
2. People discussing all of Chan's elaborate stunts don't seem to know much about Chaplin, he was not renowened for his dangerous and elaborate stunts. Your thinking of Harold Lloyd and/or Buster Keaton.
3. Chaplin's humor transcended all language. The little tramp was the most popular film star everywhere in the world that showed films. Audiences didn't need to adjust their mindset to "it's American humor" or "English humor" or anything of the sort. His comedy is superior to Chan because it crosses all language barriers with universal ease.

orangecrush

I think the poll results show just how racist this board has become.

davidh777

Argh, you're right! My fail.