Charlie Butts In (1920) User Reviews

3rd rate Charlie.

[planktonrules · 2/10 · 1 December 2022]

According to IMDB, this film is a one reel version of "A Night Out" and it largely consists of alternate takes of various portions of that movie. In other words, it was NOT intended by Charlie Chaplin as a film to be released but was edited together by a 3rd party and released as a 'new' movie. As a result of the editing, the story is choppy and incoherent....and leaves a lot of questions for the viewer. Why is Charlie leading a band? Why is he staggering about...did he get a brain injury or is he drunk? Why is he using toothpaste on his shoes?

The bottom line is that the film really is NOT a Chaplin film. Chaplin was meticulous and took great pride in making and editing his movies..and this one instead consists of outtakes and disparate footage to try to make a film...of sorts.

Charlie's worst film

[kstice-25195 · 3/10 · 29 August 2021]

Charlie Chaplin ranks as one my favorite actors from the 20th century. Shoulder Arms is possibly the best World War I film produced during World War I, The Kid is one of the best '20s films, and The Great Dictator is one of the best '40s films. Unfortunately, Charlie Butts In does not uphold the standards of other Chaplin films. In fact, I'm not quite sure why this film was made as it is just alternative takes of a Chaplin film made a half-decade prior called A Night Out. The only people who should watch this film are people interested in saying that they have seen every single Charlie Chaplin film.

Pros and Cons Summary

+Charlie Chaplin

-The film is just rejected reels from A Night Out (1915)

-The editing often doesn't make sense, characters appear without proper introduction

-No quality jokes

-Chaplin's character is not likeable or memorable in this film.