Ketrivie
It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.
Billie Morin
This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows
Yash Wade
Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.
Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de)
"Twenty Minutes of Love" is an American black-and-white silent short film from 1914, so this one is already over a century old, actually 105 years next year, and this one was made by the still pretty young Charlie Chaplin, who not only plays the main character, but also co-directed this one. The cast includes several names that film fans of this era and fans of Chaplin's other works may recognize to some extent. The action is taking place at a park this time where Chaplin causes quite a great deal of havoc to the other visitors, most of it unintentionally or from the heat of the moment though and not really intentionally. Malice is absent you could say, but chaos sure is present as a consequence of Chaplin's actions. Still all in all, he may not be at his best yet at that point as story and acting all in all are far from memorable. Still if you like Chaplin more than I do, then perhaps you will enjoy the watch nonetheless I guess. But I still cannot give it a positive recommendation as the only moment I found hilarious in a positive way was when he accidentally hits that lady near the end and that just isn't enough for this runtime, which by the way was way under 20 minutes in every version I found. I think it has rather to do with more fps than lost scenes. A thumbs-down for this one here as I did not feel the love and felt that premise and location offered the possibility of a far better outcome. Watch something else instead.
Jay Raskin
Because of their improvisational style there are often confusions in Keystone films, but this one has far more than average, both on screen and off.First there is confusion over who is the director. Maddern gets listed on the camera reports, but Maddern was only with Keystone for a month. At least 3 of his 4 other movies were documentaries, and the fourth is unknown. Chaplin, in a letter, a few months later to his brother Sidney, has the words "my own" next to this one in a list of his films. This might mean that he came up with the idea for the film rather than that he directed it. If he really directed it, One would expect him to list it as his first film in his autobiography, but he lists "Caught in the Rain" filmed a few weeks later. Maddern may have just set up the camera and let the actors direct themselves. This may have caused Chaplin to later take credit for it. Since nothing else remains of Maddern's oeuvre, it is impossible to know for sure who deserves credit or blame for this.In the very first shot, Chaplin walks towards the camera, but turns around to shout something at somebody he has just left behind. Who is he talking to? What is he talking about? The film leaves it a dead issue, but one has to suspect that elements of plot, and perhaps important ones were cut out before this first shot.Chaplin sees Edgar Kennedy and Minta Durfee making out on a park bench. Does Chaplin know Durfee? He turns and hugs the tree next to him. Is it because he has known Durfee and lost her or is he just love sick in general? It is impossible to know. If he did know Durfee before, his next action would make more sense. He goes to the park bench and observes Durfee and Kennedy kissing from inches away. He starts to hold Durfee's hand. If Chaplin doesn't know her, this is quite perverse. If he does know her, shouldn't she have more of a reaction. One should probably blame this on bad direction, whoever the director was.A few moments later, Chaplin follows Eva Nelson behind some bushes. He finds a couple sitting near the river. Again Chaplin goes up and looks at them as if he knows them, but the man only responds by knocking Chaplin down. This is another moment where the actor and audience don't seem to know what is going on. It suggests to me that something was cut out.At this point, we get a new beginning with Eva Nelson asking her boyfriend Chester Conklin (without his trademark Walrus mustache) to get her a present. He goes off and pickpockets a watch. Before he can give it to her, Chaplin, doing a Ford Sterling impression from the movie "Between Showers" steals the watch.Some good slapstick between Conklin, Durfee and Chaplin make up a bit for the plot inconsistencies. At least this middle section of the film has a clear plot and actions. Still, one would like to know why Chaplin steals the watch a second time after giving it to Durfee to show his love. Does this prove that he really is a pickpocket after all and the love show for Durfee was just an act? Again we get confused or unclear motivations that the audience can only guess at.The ending is the usual keystone chaos breaks loose type, with Chaplin kicking cops into people and lots of bodies flying into the river.While not without some moments of fun, Chaplin's eleventh film does not resonate and I would put it near the bottom of his Keystone work. The films he did just before and after this one, "Mabel Takes the Wheel" and "Caught in a Cabaret," in contrast go to the top. These Mabel Normand directed films are terrific.
tavm
Just watched the entire thing with original Keystone titles on YouTube. As the first film directed by star Charlie Chaplin, Twenty Minutes of Love hardly seems all that much different from his earlier shorts in that there are plenty of slapstick that seems to be mainly for the opportunity to fill the required time alloted. Still, I laughed plenty at seeing Charlie making fun of one loving couple on a bench before he sees another and makes a play for his girl. This girl wants a gift from this man so this man steals a watch from a sleeping occupant from a nearby bench. That's where the funny stuff really happens. Loved many of Chaplin's facial mannerisms and the whole chaotic free-for-all at the end. So on that note, Twenty Minutes of Love is recommended.
mkilmer
If you want your vision of Chaplin limited to a lovable tramp and you get your belly laughs from pathos, watch something else. If, however, you love slapstick comedy as performed by one of the best, do watch this one.The image is of the tramp who really cannot get the girl. He spots another couple kissing on a park bench, and he has a blast ruining their fun.This is one of Chaplin's "park comedies," filmed in Mack Sennett's park, with pickpockets and cops and couples. These shorts work, as the format allows Chaplin to shine as he weaves through predicaments.I checked the box, as this could be considered a spoiler, though it's not if you've seen these films. Everyone ends up in the pond except Chaplin. He gets the girl, who in this case was played by Minta Durfee, a.k.a. Mrs. Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle.
