Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

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. From his period after Mutual, the "filmette" 'How to Make Movies' is more a Chaplin curio than a must see and to be seen really for historical interest and completest sake for anybody wanting to see everything Chaplin has done. As said a number of times, his post-Keystones efforts showed a noticeable step up in quality though from his Keystone period, where he was still evolving and in the infancy of his long career. The Essanay and Mutual periods were something of Chaplin's adolescence period where his style had been found and starting to settle. After Mutual the style had properly settled and the cinematic genius emerged. Other efforts of his from this period and year had much more of a sense of that than seen in 'How to Make Movies'.'How to Make Movies' is far from bad. It is interesting, like with the footage and rehearsal scene, and informative like with the negatives, though not really what one would think reading the title. A few parts are amusing like with the golf course.It looks quite good and shows a good deal of technical advancement since Chaplin's Keystone period, with it being clear that Chaplin was taking more time and not doing as much in one year. Liked seeing the behind the scenes footage of Chaplin's regular actors, which interested and charmed. On the other hand, do have to agree that 'How to Make Movies' is more informative than funny. Outside of a few amusing moments, there is not much funny here where some of the material feels familiar and the timing isn't sharp enough. Some have said that the pacing is an issue and cannot disagree here either, not everything gripped me.It does drag at times and at other points things feel jumpy structurally, giving the sense of incompleteness or parts intended to be there but weren't.Concluding, not easy to rate or review. For while it was far from bad, there was nothing special or exceptional here. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "How to Make Movies" is a 16-minute live action short film from 1919, so only one more year until this one has its 100th anniversary. Maybe when you read this review, it is already over a century old. This one is written by, directed by and starring Charlie Chaplin and it falls into the category of film about film because the master takes us on a journey through life in the film industry. And as much as the creation process is vital, playing golf is an essential component too. The cast includes the likes of Purviance and Campbell, longtime Chaplin collaborators, so those who not only enjoy Chaplin, but also his supporting cast members may want to check this one out especially. Of course, it is a black-and-white silent film. Sadly, I myself was not too well-entertained here. In the first half it almost felt more informative than funny to be honest to see how people saw the film industry a century ago. Chaplin's routine isn't necessarily bad and this film is not a failure by any means, but I have seen wittier, funnier and better in general by him on many occasions, in terms of both writing and performing. By then, he was an icon already, but there is nothing iconic about this movie we have here. I give it a thumbs-down.

Michael_Elliott How to Make Movies (1918)** 1/2 (out of 4) Charles Chaplin stars in, wrote, produced and directed this short film that doesn't completely live up to the title but it is interesting nonetheless. The film starts off showing Chaplin's studio being built in a time lapse and from here we see Chaplin taking us on what's basically a tour of the studio. This includes a few staged jokes including him catching some laborers sleeping and there's a sequence where a pool is being filled up and of course they get the star wet with the hose. HOW TO MAKE MOVIES isn't really about making movies and there's no doubt that it drags on a little bit but I think fans of Chaplin should enjoy this behind-the-scenes look at his studio. One of the best moments happen when we see Chaplin getting into his Tramp outfit and "turning" himself into the character. Overall this is mainly going to appeal to Chaplin fans who will enjoy seeing this type of stuff. As a "film" its not really impressive as the majority of the jokes don't work and the pacing is just so off where it really seems as if many scenes are missing.

MartinHafer This short was an extra from the Chaplin Collection DVD set from Warner Brothers. Since it is an extra, it lacks the music of the rest of the shorts on the DVD and the clips, though interesting, seem much more like a home movie than anything else. While it is interesting to see Chaplin without his makeup and him laughing it up with the crew, it isn't exactly a movie or a short--just an interesting curio. This "filmette" is of more interest from a historical point of view than anything else. It certainly isn't that entertaining and cannot really be compared to his regular theatrical releases. Plus, the film provides very few laughs as there are only a few mildly amusing segments in the film.