Time Traveller Caught on 1928 Charlie Chaplin Film?

I have been here 5 minutes in ATS terms, made some biiiig cockups with a couple of posts and felt embarrassed about that. So last couple of weeks I have been happy to lurk and learn.
Now this. I have to ask. PLEASE...has no one else seen that the lady/man disappears at the end of each Chaplin sequence? Like, fades away totally? Or have I gone mad? Nobody has mentioned this, maybe it is part of the film and you are all aware of it? I even went to the youtube link and saw the same thing. They did that in the 20's?

This is totally freaky. And I need reassuring bigtime.

ETA: I need to add that I only got to page 11 before this post so if it is explained...sorry.

Oh yeah, a cell phone! Even if this one's a so called time traveler, of what use would a mobile phone be in an age where there are no towers to communicate? Or is this guy carrying a contraption that can transceive voice data through a time portal? Makes for a good sci-fi movie.

It's just that he is clutching the collar of his thick inner coat hiding his face from the camera.

Not many people like their mug shots to be taken!

reply to post by Prove_It_NOW


Please explain how a hearing aid that was "invented" in 1930 is a plausible explanation in this case?

Keep in mind that this was purportedly caught on film in 1928, before the invention.

In all seriousness, any explanation is "plausible" in this case, when the unknowns are limitless at this point.

Everyone here is throwing speculative noodles and hoping one will stick.

I haven't seen any stick yet... But it is fun to watch!

Ahhh, yes, a time traveler that was conscious enough to dress of the time period, but not enough to conceal the futuristic portable Alexander Graham Bell device.

*********attention*************
I have asked the production film maker who found this footage and loaded it on you tube to come to this disucssion.
Please prepare any questions should they not wish to join that I am happy to relay.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


You didn't see my post where I included a link to the hearing aids made in the 1920's from the Hearing Aid Museum site....did you?

reply to post by Prove_It_NOW


the problem is its hard to tell from the film what it is or why she is talking, so although you and others have proposed theories that are more logical in your view, it does not mean it is the correct answer. it is just to hard to tell.

i am willing to go with the most possible answer, but i still can help feeling i don't have the answer, all i have is a theory the same as all the others, all be it more likely.

Hey wait a minute!

Lets take a look at the man before her, why is it that he has his hand in his pocket one minute and as soon as he passes the zebra he is now carrying something? anyone else notice this?

I will say good chance of doctored footage.

OK. no I was wrong, seems more like he is reaching in his pocket for something, great clip otherwise, pretty intriguing.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

Loam posted a device for hearing that looks pretty good that was around before 1928

Zazz - ask him if he is on medication or smokes the reefer.

2nd line.

-m0r

Reply to post by zazzafrazz

i dont know how time travel works but i thought you could only go back as far as the invention of the time machine??? i havent seen the video yet but im going out on a limb and guessing she might be messing with her ear ring?..


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by m0r1arty


LOL mor!

perhaps we'll keep it welcoming and a heathy debate and within t and c

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by Prove_It_NOW

 

the problem is its hard to tell from the film what it is or why she is talking, so although you and others have proposed theories that are more logical in your view, it does not mean it is the correct answer. it is just to hard to tell.

i am willing to go with the most possible answer, but i still can help feeling i don't have the answer, all i have is a theory the same as all the others, all be it more likely.

And what is the 'most possible answer"?

A cell phone? Tell us? Because if it is anything in the bounds of "cell phone" or "special device" than you are being fantastical with NO evidence and have chosen to take the most fantastic answer.

reply to post by annella



Or am I very naive and this is par for the course? Someone?

Reply to post by zazzafrazz




Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by annella


I noticed it too, it seems to be a fade effect right? Never watched any movies this old before, not sure how common that is in old movies like this. When it is almost faded, the person turns and looks at the camera. Looks like a zombie lmao.

reply to post by annella


Welcome to the madness!

I've broken my rule of reading all of a thread here as well, but this sort of thing gets me going, so, anyway...

The "disappearing" of our person of interest (and the "appearing" of the guy immediately after) is a simple crossfade edit, and yes they certainly did do that in that time period. No worries.

What gets me is I don't think a lot of folks have actually watched it, as the discoverer/presenter clearly states that it is not in the film but is in extra footage shot at the film's premiere at the Chinese theater.

So, fear not, it was a fine question. That's what we're here for, eh, what?

Peace,
Pixel

Actually I don't think it's a woman. The probability that this persons gait is a gentleman's is quite high. The shoes are also attributed to mens styles. The person is very concerned with keeping their identity a secret --heavy, thick clothing that hides almost all aspects of the body frame, and hiding their face by "talking on the phone" using their left hand. Seems as though they planned to be on camera --they knew it would be there and rolling at this exact time -the pause in their walk just before going off camera seems a dead give away.

Other than that, shadows match, as well as other measurements pertaining to The Subject and the areas they affect in the scene.

Of course, it all can be rubbish and just Charlie's artistic style of someone walking and talking on the phone that isn't confined to however long the cord is.

reply to post by annella


It seems to me that this is a composite shot. Two different passes or scenes edited into one - even possibly a double exposure. The man entering the frame is transparent at first and then solidifies as well.

Also there is a zebra and an elephant at different moments.

I am pretty sure that a composite shot is the answer.

~Heff