5 — Friday, February 20, 2015
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

Nostalgia abounds at 
Chaplin retrospective

By GRACE HAMILTON 

Daily Arts Writer

The rows of The Michigan 

Theater are filled with heads; 
bald heads, wrinkled ones, grey 
ones, coupled ones and many 
invisible ones that do not reach 
the top of the seat. The great big 
golden room is filled with the soft 
conversation and laughter that 
usually precedes highly anticipat-
ed operas and blockbuster films. 
To my left is a pair that looks to 
be in their ’80s and to my right a 
young girl and her parents. There 
are also some of that academic 
looking species sprinkled around 
the aisles, conversing with one 
another.

The gentleman responsible for 

our gathering, in case the descrip-
tion didn’t give it away, is Charlie 
Chaplin. On February 8, four of 
his short films were screened 
at the Michigan Theater as part 
of the theater’s Family-Friend-
ly Film series, with live organ 
accompaniment from Andrew 
Rogers on the theater’s 1927 Bar-
ton organ. The films included 
“The Floorwalker,” “The Immi-
grant,” “The Masquerader” and 
“The Rink,” all made between 
1914 and 1917 as part of Chaplin’s 
contract with Lone Star-Mutual 
(a division of the Mutual Film 
Corporation created solely for 
the purpose of making Chaplin’s 
films). The theater will continue 
to pay homage to Chaplin every 
Monday until April 25th by show-
ing newly restored prints.

Over the course of his career, 

Chaplin starred in over 80 films, 
65 of which premiered during 
the years of 1914 and 1915. He 
rose almost instantly to super-
stardom, mainly through the 
popularity 
of 
his 
on-screen 

persona, 
The 
Tramp, 
who 

appears in these short films as 
well. “The Tramp” is a playful 
and mischievous character with a 
big heart, who often finds himself 
in trouble by trying to disguise 
his lower social status. Chaplin 
spends the last 10 minutes of “The 
Immigrant” scheming to find a 
coin to pay the daunting waiter at 
a small French café with his love 
interest beside him.

Chaplin’s 
childhood 
was 

defined by poverty and hardship. 
His father passed away, and his 
mother struggled with mental ill-
ness. By age 14, Chaplin had left 
school and turned his focus to 

acting. By the time of his work 
with Mutual, he was the highest 
paid movie star in the world and 
praised for his artistry.

His career was filled with 

many controversies, mostly sur-
rounding his strong and often 
vocalized anti-capitalist beliefs. 
After leaving the U.S. for London 
in 1952, he was denied re-entry to 
the country, returning again for 
the first time in 1972 to accept an 
award.

On this Sunday, the theater 

roared with laughter at Chaplin’s 
antics, like the running staircase 
in “The Floorwalker.” The chil-
dren giggled, the old man shook 
in his seat and the bald man in 
front of me threw his head back 
in amusement.

“So, what is it that makes 

someone an icon?” I wondered, 
awed by the ability of a silent film 
from a past era to draw such plea-
sure from this odd crowd.

Clearly, it’s more than just tal-

ent or an interesting look that 
makes someone stick. “Creative 
genius” is a weird phrase that 
people use without really know-
ing what they mean to say, except 
that they know when they see it. I 
use it here in this style.

Chaplin wrote, directed, pro-

duced and starred in nearly all of 
his films. His genius is magnified 
by the lack of speech in his work. 
The audience must rely on move-
ment, gestures and grainy faces 
to understand the story. Chaplin 
silently directs the action of the 
characters around him, the force 
of gravity that keeps the narra-
tive firmly grounded.

Music adds grandeur to the 

films. Rogers sewed transitions 
between the four with the famil-
iar tune of Chaplin’s “Smile,” 
composed in 1936 for his film 
“Modern Times.”

The melodies help provide 

cues to direct the responses of 
the audience — sadness, shock, 
laughter, suspense. The experi-
ence is quite unlike anything 
today.

In a way, the magnificent prog-

ress of film in the last century has 
detracted from its purity as an 
art form; it has become some-
thing else all together. Special 
effects and CGI amaze, yet often 
distract. That’s not a bad thing; 
it’s just different. Returning to 
Chaplin’s work, almost 100 years 
old now, I feel as if I am viewing 
film with fresh eyes.

Chaplin created comedy that 

was dually a form of meaning-
ful social commentary, a deli-
cate balance that is not often 
achieved in the genre today 
with quite the same grace. On 
top of that, his films leave room 
for sadness and sympathy.

I’m relieved to avoid some 

kind of confession that silent 
film is after all, very boring; 
every opportunity to disprove 
criticisms of generation Y’s 
cultural apathy is a lucky one. 
Chaplin’s films are gems at the 
core of a medium that has come 
to dominate modern culture.

Whether it’s this important 

aspect that draws you in, the 
simple promise of a good laugh, 
the organ or even just an inter-
est in the time period itself, 
Chaplin deserves your trip out 
of bed and a standing ovation.

MUTUAL FILM CORPORATION

“So I went to the barber and said ‘Just fuck me up fam.’”

EVENT REVIEW
TV COLUMN

‘Shameless’: the show 

you need to watch
S

poiler Alert: This column 
contains spoilers from the 
fourth and fifth seasons of 

Showtime’s “Shameless.”

There’s a running joke among 

some 
of 
my 

friends 
that 

I’m constantly 
raving 
about 

shows nobody 
watches or has 
even heard of. 
It’s frustrating. 
“Bates Motel” 
really is great. 
DirecTV’s 
“Kingdom” — 
yes, 
the 
one 

with Nick Jonas — was the biggest 
surprise of 2014. And don’t get me 
started on “Hannibal.” My recent 
Anthony Hopkins trilogy binge 
reaffirmed just how inventive and 
spectacular NBC’s imagining of 
the character really is. But of all 
the shows that are so aggravat-
ingly underappreciated, Showtime 
has managed to put three of the 
best together all on the same night.

I can say with confidence: 

Showtime’s current Sunday night 
lineup — “Shameless,” “House 
of Lies” and “Episodes” — is the 
best night of television you aren’t 
watching.

“Shameless” has flown under 

the radar since its debut in Janu-
ary 2011, despite being an increas-
ingly steady performer for the 
network. Though even as it’s 
amassed consistent acclaim and a 
loyal audience, “Shameless” lacks 
one critical ingredient: buzz.

“Game of Thrones” has buzz. 

“Homeland” has buzz. Hell, even 
“The Affair” has some. No matter 
how many people actually watch 
it, it’s talked about. Blogs recap it. 
It trends on Twitter. People argue 
that it was snubbed. That special X 
factor. But like “The Americans” 
or the aforementioned “Bates 
Motel” and “Kingdom” — all wor-
thy series — “Shameless” is still 
struggling for everyone’s attention 
in an immensely crowded mar-
ketplace. And just as “House of 
Lies” and “Episodes” do on Sunday 
nights, the comedies have followed 
“Shameless” ’s quiet lead.

“House of Lies,” the Don Chea-

dle-led series, has been a consis-
tent comedy force for four seasons. 
Along with Cheadle and Kristen 
Bell, his business partner and on-
again-off-again love interest, Ben 
Schwartz and Josh Lawson round 
out one of the strongest half-hour 
ensembles on television. In its 
current season, more so than ever 
before, the chemistry among the 
four lead consultants is palpable. 
While you might know Bell from 

“Veronica Mars” and her scattered 
big-screen efforts, or Schwartz for 
his role as Jean-Ralphio on “Parks 
and Recreation,” all four of the 
principle actors have steadily been 
delivering their best work as key 
ingredients of “Lies” ’s consulting 
quad.

Following “House of Lies” is 

“Episodes,” or the closest we’ll ever 
get to another season of “Friends.” 
In the biting show business sat-
ire, Matt LeBlanc plays a fictional 
version of himself as he makes his 
return to sitcoms in the ill-fated 
“Pucks.” But there’s more to “Epi-
sodes” than its many references to 
NBC’s iconic comedy or Jennifer 
Aniston — though isn’t that really 
all it needs? Unlike “Shameless” 
and “House of Lies,” “Episodes” 
is a straight comedy, with each 
episode delivering laugh-out-loud 
one-liners and gags.

But no matter how good both 

comedies are or have been in the 
past, the story of Showtime’s Sun-
day nights is undoubtedly “Shame-
less,” a show that’s simply too good 
to be ignored. This year, “Shame-
less” did manage to finally make its 
way into the awards conversation 
with its controversial move from 
drama — where the series had 
been submitted for consideration 
for its first three years — to com-
edy, despite its fourth season being 
its darkest and most dramatic yet. 
This coincided with “Orange Is the 
New Black” ’s — another difficult-
to-pin-down dramedy — decision 
to enter the race as a comedy after 
spending some time categorized 
as a drama. In 2015, “Orange” lead 
Taylor Schilling was nominated for 
Lead Actress in a Comedy Series at 
the Golden Globes, despite being 
nominated for the same role in the 
drama category the previous year.

But as with “Orange,” “Shame-

less” ’s category swap did manage 
to work some magic, landing Wil-
liam H. Macy an Emmy nomina-
tion, a Golden Globe nomination 
and a SAG Award win for his 
portrayal as Frank Gallagher. It 
had been a long time coming, not 
solely because Macy has shined in 
the role for years, but because all 
of these Academies and Associa-
tions and Guilds are usually very 
quick to honor Showtime’s lead-
ing actors. Claire Danes, David 
Duchovny, Mary-Louise Parker, 
Don Cheadle, Edie Falco, Matt 
LeBlanc, Toni Collette, Laura 
Linney, Liev Schreiber and Lizzy 
Caplan have all consistently been 
honored for their work on the 
network. But while William H. 
Macy’s name can now be added to 
that list, there is still one person 
who is sorely lacking the recogni-

tion she deserves.

As Fiona Gallagher, the Chica-

go-native in charge of caring for 
her five younger siblings, Emmy 
Rossum has been delivering tele-
vision’s single greatest perfor-
mance. More dimensional and 
complicated than Macy’s Frank, 
Rossum’s nuanced, natural per-
formance stands at the show’s 
core — the battered, beaten, 
tough-as-nails, resilient heart of 
“Shameless.” Whether the series 
is funny or sad or serious (in real-
ity, it’s all of these things), Rossum 
handles her scenes with dedica-
tion and care, masterfully weav-
ing between genres as well as, say, 
Rose Byrne, an actress as great 
in the dark, dramatic television 
series “Damages” as she is in the 
summer blockbuster “Neighbors.”

But Rossum takes it even fur-

ther than Byrne, with the pen-
dulum of emotions swinging 
so quickly in “Shameless,” as if 
Byrne’s character in the Seth 
Rogen romp were meant to face 
off with “Damage” ’s Glenn Close 
at “Neighbor” ’s conclusion. In 
the season four episode, “There’s 
the Rub,” Fiona’s at-that-moment 
blissful exuberance comes crash-
ing down when she discovers her 
toddler-brother 
unconscious, 

having inhaled the remainder 
of her celebratory cocaine. That 
shift in Fiona, exemplified with 
perfection by Rossum, should 
have ended the Emmy conversa-
tion right there. In an ideal world, 
Julianna 
Margulies’s 
second 

statue for “The Good Wife” would 
be on Rossum’s mantel. But this 
isn’t an ideal world, and Rossum’s 
performance went without even a 
nomination for the fourth year in 
a row.

This season, the emotional 

roller coaster of Fiona Gallagher 
hasn’t ceased to roar on — a shot-
gun wedding in one episode, the 
return of former love Jimmy in 
another. Even better, “Shameless” 
’s surrounding action continues to 
shine as well: Frank’s attempts to 
remain sober, Lip’s struggle to bal-
ance his new life at college with his 
old friends on the South Side, Ian’s 
tragic surrendering to his bipolar 
disorder and Kev and V’s fractured 
relationship post-pregnancy. With 
each episode, “Shameless” accom-
plishes so much. It’s dramatic. It’s 
hilarious. It’s unique. But most 
importantly, it’s raw, real and relat-
able. “Shameless” is television at its 
finest. Why aren’t you watching?

Stern is proving that there 

is such a thing as a TV hipster. 

To get a link to his Tumblr, 

email alecs@umich.edu.

ALEC 

STERN

Marian Hill needs to 
have a wider audience

By CATHERINE BAKER

For the Daily

In the midst of an extremely 

busy week, I’ve turned to Mari-
an Hill for solace. After recently 
being introduced to the Phila-
delphian electronic pop duo, 
the seven songs they currently 
have on Spotify have kept me 
company as I walk to class and 
struggle through what should 
be an illegal amount of home-
work. It’s amazing what a good 
saxophone solo can do for the 
soul.

Since the pair has not been 

introduced to Wikipedia yet, 
I’ve had to glean what little 
information I have from their 
Facebook page, which has just 
under 14,000 likes. Jeremy 
Lloyd and Samantha Gongol 
first came in contact with each 
other at a middle school talent 
show where Lloyd heard Gon-
gol sing for the first time. After 
drifting apart, the pair reunited 
in Lloyd’s bedroom studio many 
years later and formed Marian 
Hill. Lloyd and Gongol’s first 
EP, Play, was released in early 
2014 and contained five songs, 
each of which use different 
aspects of electronic pop and 

sultry lyrics to create a sound 
unique to Marian Hill.

Their more recent releases, 

“Lips” and “Got It,” continue 
the development of carefully 
constructed beats and overlay-
ing harmonies introduced in 
Play, but the minimalist lyrical 
style leaves plenty of room for 
variations in rhythm. In today’s 
Top 40, I struggle with finding 
new and interesting lyrics — 
there are only so many times I 
can listen to a sad song about a 
one night stand or an anthem 
about partying on a weeknight. 
I understand these ideas are 
recycled due to their relevance 
to the audience, but isn’t there 
anything more interesting to 
write about than the club going 
up on a Tuesday? Why not make 
it a Wednesday and shake things 
up a little?

I am not asserting that Mar-

ian Hill isn’t a newfound lyrical 
genius that writes about every 
aspect of the human experi-
ence. My fantasies of new and 
untouched topics are a pipe 
dream because, let’s face it, 
nearly every emotion under the 
sun has been sung, played or 
rapped. Lloyd and Gongol sim-
ply take these same ideas that 

many other songwriters use — 
love, commitment, heartbreak 
— and simplify them down to 
their very bones, combining raw 
emotions with haunting vocals 
and interesting blends of clas-
sic instruments and electronic 
pulses. The point isn’t that they 
magically come up with new 
topics to sing about; the point 
is that they sing about these 
common topics with a new spin 
that many pop icons often lack. 
Though I am not a fan of pure 
electronic music, I appreciate 
their more synthetic tracks sim-
ply because of the individuality 
coursing through each piece. 
Even the popular saxophone 
solo finds a place in “Got It,” yet 
still retains its own contempo-
rary twist.

Marian 
Hill 
may 
never 

become a household name, but 
I wouldn’t write them off just 
yet. As I’ve written this, their 
Facebook page gleaned another 
1,000 likes and their next EP is 
set to release on Feb. 17. While 
Marian Hill is still in its early 
stages of development, I look 
forward to seeing what the duo 
has in store and eagerly await 
the day they have their own 
Wikipedia page.

MUSIC NOTEBOOK

NYFW: Oscar de la 
Renta’s brand lives on

By CAROLINE FILIPS

Daily Arts Writer

Oscar de la Renta once said, 

“the great thing about fashion 
is that it always looks forward.” 
It’s true — designers of esteemed 
fashion houses and editors of 
high-brow fashion magazines 
foresee and create our sartorial 
future. In the midst of winter, 
top designers showcase next 
fall’s collections, and the Septem-
ber issues of high-brow fashion 
magazines are planned years in 
advance. De la Renta looked for-
ward, too. He forecasted both 
fashion’s future and the fate of 
his eponymous empire. Merely a 
week before he lost his eight-year 

battle with intermittent lympho-
ma, de la Renta appointed Peter 
Copping as his successor. Though 
maintaining de la Renta’s signa-
ture elegant femininity posed 
an undeniably daunting task, it’s 
clear Copping’s debut collection 
exceeded expectations.

All of the industry’s most 

scrutinizing eyes were given 
the benefit of the doubt as 
Copping delivered a quintes-
sentially Oscar collection with 
appropriate 
and 
innovative 

personal touches. Copping paid 
homage to the late tastemaker 
with fairytale frocks, dirndl 
skirts and lettuce hems, yet 
added an edgier, gothic flair 
with a black fringed ’70s shift 

dress and ball gowns consist-
ing of unconventional, sheer 
bodices with textured overlays. 
In typical de la Renta attention 
to detail, subliminal romantic 
touches of ornate embellish-
ment and unlined lace beneath 
coat and suit dresses added a 
sophisticated polish to many 
looks. Immaculate eveningwear 
stole the show, particularly a 
strapless, ombré magenta mini 
dress with textured rosettes 
and a fitted, floor-length gown 
of jeweled applique atop cobalt 
faille. As the finale concluded, 
the show’s audience and live-
streamers alike were relieved 
knowing Copping successfully 
wrote the new chapter of ODLR.

OSCAR DE LA RENTA

“Lose yourself in my well-kempt beard.”

STYLE RECAP

