TheLittleSongbird Am a big fan of Charlie Chaplin, have been for over a decade now. Many films and shorts of his are very good to masterpiece, and like many others consider him a comedy genius and one of film's most important and influential directors. He did do better than 'Tango Tangle'. Can understand why the Keystone period suffered from not being as best remembered or highly remembered than his later efforts, but they are mainly decent and important in their own right. 'Tango Tangle' is a long way from a career high, but does have historical significance for obvious reasons. 'Tango Tangle' is not as hilarious, charming or touching as his later work and a good deal of other shorts in the same period. The story is flimsy and the production values not as audacious, the humour only amusing and lacking freshness at times and parts a touch scrappy. For someone who was relatively new to the film industry and had literally just moved on from their stage background, 'Tango Tangle' is not bad at all. While not audacious, the film hardly looks ugly, is more than competently directed and is appealingly played. Chaplin looks comfortable for so early on and shows his stage expertise while opening it up that it doesn't become stagy or repetitive shtick. Ford Sterling steals the show. Although the humour, charm and emotion was done even better and became more refined later, 'Tango Tangle' is mildly humorous, sweet and easy to like, though the emotion is not quite there. It moves quickly and doesn't feel too long or short. Overall, far from one of Chaplin's best but not bad at all. 6/10 Bethany Cox

CitizenCaine In his sixth film, Chaplin plays a music hall rival with Fatty Arbuckle and Ford Sterling. The appears to be a real dance in one scene and it would have been great to hear the actual music from the era. Instead, we get the droning soundtrack which stops and starts again several times through the film without any correlation to the scene occurring. Fatty Arbuckle moves well for a 300 pound man, although he was relatively young at the time. Ford Sterling wins out in the end and we somehow wonder whether or not Chaplin was being used properly at the time. In these early films he bounces back and forth between playing heels and troublemakers, as in this film, and a rough version of the tramp. The film is full of stock exaggerated character mannerisms for the period. ** of 4 stars.

Michael DeZubiria In Chaplin's first handful of short comedies, there is a very clear pattern of experimentation going on as he discovers where his real talent lies and while the personality of the beloved Tramp evolves and makes itself known. In Tango Tangles, or Charlie's Recreation, we see a bit of a digression as not only does Chaplin's character revert back into the 'obnoxious drunk' half of his on screen persona, but is also overshadowed by the clearly talented and, in this film at least, almost equally large screen presence of Ford Serling.Serling has been credited by some users as deserving at least some credit for inspiring some aspects of Chaplin's character, which I can accept, because the motions and overblown mannerisms are similar to some of Chaplin's later work, although I think it's important to point out that if Chaplin did learn from Serling, he most certainly saw his technique and improved it, maybe even perfected it.At the beginning of the film, it is clear that Serling has an intense presence, but as the film goes on, the infancy of screen acting also becomes apparent. It seems here that actors did not know where to stop when flinging themselves about in the outrageously overblown antics that must have been common in slapstick comedy for the stage. They slap each other in the face and then stumble about in a bizarre state of semi-consciousness, wobbling on their feet while their arms swing limply, eyes bulging and head bouncing from side to side like a superball in a box, before eventually falling over backwards and flinging their legs up over their head far enough so that their toes touch the ground behind them.Not that this is all bad comedy, just a sign of how different the things were that made people laugh in 1914 compared to today, as well as a curious look at the development of slapstick comedy for the screen.As far Chaplin's performance, it is also clear that the Tramp was still in the future, as he appears in this film without a mustache and therefore looking entirely like someone else. As I mentioned, he once again plays a belligerent drunk, stumbling around and callously punching and pushing people and throwing things at them as he staggers about the set, also in a bizarre state of semi-consciousness. Fatty Arbuckle also puts the majority of his talents on hold to star in this short, as he, Chaplin, and Serling all compete viciously for the affections of the hat girl, with what probably used to be hilarious results. By now, the film is one of the lesser of Chaplin's very early films, but remains an interesting milestone on his way to making his own far superior films.

MartinHafer This is a film from Chaplin's first year in films. During this VERY hectic year, he churned out film after film after film for Keystone Studios and the quality of the films are, in general, quite poor. That's because the character of "the Little Tramp" was far from perfected and the films really had no script--just the barest of story ideas. While some Chaplin lovers might think this is sacrilege, all these movies I have seen are pretty lousy. Yes, there are some cute slapstick moments but barely any plot--absolutely NOTHING like the Chaplin we all came to love in his full-length films of the 20s and 30s.As stated above, Charlie does not sport his usual mustache. The movie is about jealousy and consists of lots of people pushing and punching each other--that's pretty much it!