martes, 9 de noviembre de 2010
lunes, 18 de octubre de 2010
We could say that Charlie Chaplin and globalization have nothing in common but not desert. That the same inequality Chaplin's final speech in the movie The Great Dictator 'The airplane and the radio Have Brought Us Closer. The nature of Inventions These cries out for her goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions Throughout the World ". But that is because globalization is the globalization is the system of interaction Among the Countries of the world in order to Develop the global economy. Globalization referees to the integration of economics and Societies all over the world. Globalization Involves Technological, Economic, Political, and cultural exchange made possible largely by Advances in communication, transportation, and Infrastructure. There are two types of integration-negative and positive. Negative integration is the breaking down of Trade Barriers Such as Protective Barriers or Tariffs and quotas. In the previous chapter, trade Protectionism and Its Policies Were discussed.
Charlie Chaplin, considered one of the major stars of the early days of Hollywood, lived an interesting life, both in his films and behind the camera.He is best known as an icon of the silent era, Chaplin was born 16 April 1889 was one of the most creative and influential Personalities of the silenti-film era. He made his own stage debut at age five, filling in when his mother lost her voice in mid-song. Using his mother's show-business contacts, Charlie became a professional entertainer in 1897 when he joined the Eight Lancashire Lads, a clog-dancing act. His character might be better described as the quintessential misfit: shunned by polite society, unlucky in love, jack-of-all-trades but master of none. He was also a survivor, forever leaving past sorrows behind, jauntily shuffling off to new adventures.
A King in New York
With A King in New York Charles Chaplin was the first film-maker to dare to expose, through satire and ridicule, the paranoia and political intolerance which overtook the United States in the Cold War years of the 1940s and 50s.
Chaplin himself had bitter personal experience of the American malaise of that time. The right wing and the Federal Bureau of Investigation had seen him as an ideal target – a foreigner who had never taken American citizenship, and whose work had a natural appeal to the humanists and radical intellectuals, now regarded as enemies of society. By the late 1940s the political and personal attacks on Chaplin became so acute that in 1952 he was happy to be forced into the decision to leave America for ever, and make his home in Europe.
To take up film making again, as an exile, was a challenging undertaking. He was now nearing 70. For almost forty years he had enjoyed the luxury of his own studio and a staff of regular employees, who understood his way of work. Now though he had to work with strangers, in costly and unfriendly rented studios. In the old days he could take all the time he wanted, trying things over and over again until he got them to his satisfaction. Now every minute cost money. Working under such constraints, Chaplin completed shooting A King in New York in what was for him a record time of only twelve weeks. The film shows the strain.The story is set in New York, but Chaplin was obliged to use London locations, which are often less than convincing. He employed one of the cinema’s great cameramen, Georges Périnal, but was generally in too much of a hurry to allow him enough time to light the set properly, so that the photography has often a shabby look. The script would have benefited from a good editor. In his satirical view of America, Chaplin takes on too many targets – wide screen movies, television commercials, cosmetic surgery, social pretension. Chaplin himself insisted that his intention was not to make a political film. His was still as it had always been, he said, only concerned to make people laugh. Yet at the centre of this imperfect film is a fierce and effective comic essay on political intolerance and its ultimate victims